After the defeat

The first civilian government (with BB as PM) after an extended period of military rule saw BB handing over a list of incognito Sikh leaders who were supporting the Sikh movement over to Rajiv Gandhi. With one action, BB compromised the support for the Sikh movement comprehensively.

These are evolving times for Pakistan. Matters are very much in flux regarding the system of government and the spheres of governance. However, it is no secret that there is an uncomfortable relationship between the military and civilian spheres. When you have years of inept military rule complemented with years of equally inept, if not grossly corrupt civilian rule, the spheres of governance won`t develop without growing pains.

It is clear that the recent conflict was not a combined strategy. The civilian government was lagging far behind the initial military tactical gains. If they had their act together perhaps the outcome would have been different.

Unfortunately, nothing succeeds like success. A risk was definitely taken which did not succeed. I wouldn`t go as far to say that the entire effort was in vain. Much needed domestic consensus regarding Kashmir has been triggered in Pakistan, which is good. The world recognizes that the LoC cannot possibly be settled as a permanent boundary with all the loopholes in it. I don`t believe it was the initial objective, but nonetheless, Kashmir HAS been internationalized.

A good article. There is always a tension between self-determination and pluralism. Over the years, I had reluctantly being losing my faith in Indian pluralism (Babri Masjid, anti-Sikh riots) and had begun accepting Kashmiri self-determination as the winning principle. Post the Kargil episode, my faith in Indian pluralism has been revitalized by the million real and symbolic displays of Indian unity among the pluralism. At the same time, the perfidy of the invasion has tarnished Kashmiri self-determination as the work of people who believe the word ``community`` begins and ends with Muslims. The pluralism of the Indian army pitted against the monoreligious zeal of the fighters has redeemed my faith in India. It has reinforced the belief that India can work on a political solution that allows Kashmiris dignity and a sense of being free while being part of India. For me personally, this conflict has redeemed my faith that in this particular battle between pluralism and self-determination, pluralism should be the winning principle. Long live the principles of freedom of faith and true faith being discovered by each individual. As a once disillusioned Indian, I feel the mainstream moving back to the India I grew up in where the principles of citizenship were not tied to religion. And the ugliness of two-nation theory have been reinforced.

Uncle:

What in your mind is the Sikh movement? Some basics on the Sikhs and Indian Punjab: In Punjab, Sikhs are a small majority (of the order of 50-60%). Of this, a small fraction want independence. No Hindu Punjabi wants independence from India - they account for approx 40% of Punjab. Do the math and see if it makes sense for Punjab to separate from India. For every 2 Sikhs in Punjab, there is one 1 Sikh outside Punjab. People like you do not understand pluralism. Since you succeeded in creating a monoreligious state you are convinced that is the only way to go. Take your poisonous thoughts and apply them closer to your home. Let us live our lives in peace. Kargil has demonstrated that a big part of the Kashmir problem is nothing but a search for validation of Pakistan`s noxious and insecure identity.

Ibn Sina, the world renowned `healer` indeed! It may interest you to know, `Ibn Sina,` you half informed `healer` (so that before the next time you decide to write you`ll check on all the facts first), that the reason for the Nawaz Sharif visit was only revealed in the N.Y Times and the Washington Post because of its sensitive nature. India had begun to arm its nuclear weapons (they don`t want to publicise this since they are `peace lovers`) , and Pakistan had Incontrovertible proof of this which it shared with the Americans. Nawaz Sharif picked up the phone and called Clinton. Under the circumstances, Clinton could hardly say no. Nawaz then boarded the plane for Washington.

Now clearly, the U.S is not there to pull our chestnuts out of the fire, and why indeed should it? However, as far as nuclear preparations, and preparations for the contingency of a full blown war were concerned, Pakistan should have been prepared to go the whole 9 yards, if an inch. Nawaz Sharif`s principle characteristics which can be guaged from his career as politically active industrial magnate from the early days of Zia are the following; A Canny and shrewd ability to Survive any crisis self-made or otherwise and, (b) A Fascist tendency to arrogate all power to himself.

Now assuming a war, possibly nuclear were to occur, just what would be left for Nawaz Sharif to preside over? Would he be around after it? Clearly Sharif made his calculations and decided national pride should get the short shrift, his industrial empire (Sharif Group) could not withstand a nuclear attack (although Pakistan can), nor could his political `career` (damn him). So, Sharif blinked. And thus was the Kargil Crisis lost. Now Khruschev was ousted from power within a few years of the Cuban missile crisis, don`t expect Sharif to be around after the next election. He`s finally done it to himself this time. But his temporary survival is just that, temporary. He`s gone and ticked off a lot more people this time than he has in previous self-created crises.

Omar

Truth : Your idealist approach

Frankly, i think you dwell in the clouds, Truth. You ignore both Communal realities and facts as it suits you. Indian analyses and approaches to the Kashmir problem are compounded by their inability to seperate the muslims in India itself (those who CHOSE India as their home voluntarily in 1947) from those in Kashmir (who never have). The analogy is clear. Comparing the two and saying India should retain its illegal control over Kashmir is like saying, well, we`ve occupied Afghanistan for over 50 years now. Muslims live there plus a few minorities. We have Muslims in India. Letting Afghanistan have self-determination will endanger our `pluralist` society in India. Lets keep occupying Afghanistan. They are sure to become INDIAN (hah! With 5% turnouts in rigged elections and a clear vacum of political legitimacy, keep dreaming this stupid dream simply because THE TRUTH is you don`t want to let go of territory you have no moral claim to, *thus your angst, since you Indians at heart really all know this * but have occupied by mere force alone and are desperate to legitimise --- but its like the old saying, `once concieved out of wedlock, ALWAYS a ba#tard, so too Kashmir is India`s illigitimate ba#tard, it can NEVER be deemed to be at one/a par, with its legitimate son and daughter states because the Kashmiris never wanted to be part of India, and given free choice would not vote to remain part of it, hence your angst and moral dilemma), in another 50 years or so. This is the typical Indian approach to the Kashmir problem in a nutshell. I don`t think we need to hold `talks` just to hear this crap. Intellectuel or otherwise. STUPID, DUMB, VILE, and characteristic of a nation of horse thieves who have made it their pasttime to live in poverty (who cares about the teeming masses) and seek great power status in the world on the backs of a confrontational military approach to political problems in their region of the world. India in short is and always will remain a miserable country with a lack of visionaries who want real peace on the basis of justice, democratic principles or greatness of heart (for these are a country [not a nation] of small men, with small black hearts).

Omar

Continued from last post (read that first please):

To get back to Kashmir, before some Indian puts his foot in his mouth by stating India gives Kashmir `special` autonomy, rights etc, and goes to lengths to show how it treats Kashmiris so well, in order to refute allegations of forcible occupation, and the plain fact that the deaths of Indian soliders were celebrated in Srinagar, let me just say that ofcourse India tries to treat Kashmir institutionally `better` than the rest of the states in the Indian Union. You see, these states had a real father growing up, as a part of India, Kashmir was the illigitimate ba#tard annexed by force. Obviously, deprived of free choice in its childhood, and treated badly, like Territory for Occupation, not as a people deserving the right to decide their own destiny, India felt guilty. It tries to `make up` for this to them, but nothing it does will wipe away the shame of the conception in ba#tadry which were the exact circumstances of Kashmir`s `entry` into the Union of India. Kashmiris never had a choice, because Indians know exactly what would happen if they were ever given that choice. You see, i`m not impressed by so called Indian `moderates` talking, because it gets Kashmiris no-where. Oh, they`re so clever, they`ll even put the cart before the horse. Trying to approach the issue from various angles, fundamentalism Vs. Secular Pluralism etc while all the while ignoring the simple fact that A) Kashmiris don`t and never have wanted to be a part of India nor have ever chosen to be part of India, and B) India`s occupation of the valley is completely immoral (Kindly refer to my little history lesson on the real TRUTH will repost after this). Paki `moderates` simply want to barter away Kashmiris rights and live happily ever after arm in arm with the pagans, just ignoring the Kashmiri issue will make it go away.

Such `moderate` company i find utterly useless, even if it avoids communal bloodshed, for this is only avoided by avoiding the real issue. Poor Indian `moderates`, morally on weak ground, grasping for straws, wanting peace, yet unwilling to pay the price of peace or come to terms with it, and yet swept up in the `patriotic upswing` of `defending the motherland`s illgotten gains`, and in the end more comfortable paying the price of war, than the price of peace. I truly pity such wretched specimens, for they hardly qualify as men who can stand by their convictions, they stand nowhere. Whining for peace, yet content to join the masses in their blind patriotism, while knowing the difference between moral and immoral Indian state acts. Pagans who detest Pakistan, hate muslims and want to drink our blood, well at least these men stand by their convictions. They`re not half hearted. At least to them nonethless, i can accord the respect of one enemy to another, opposed though we maybe. But these SPINELESS self-declared so-called PEACENICKS, who don`t want to pay the hard price of peace, yet never tire of avowing they want peace, i have zero respect for. Yeah, i want Santa Claus to bring me a new BMW this christmas. I REALLY WANT IT. Does that mean its gonna happen? Well, maybe i know a few elves at the North Pole. Do U Truth? So cut the b.s, and say what you really mean to say. India will keep occupying Kashmir with as much brute force as necessary, as it has for over 50 years, the force being used against foreign aggressors and Indian born Kashmiris alike, FOR AS LONG AS NECESSARY, because Kashmir is a point of pride for India, we don`t want to hand it (over territory conquered by war) over to Pakistan on a silver platter after having invested so much in our regional military confrontation for so long. In other words there are no men of the stature of Mahatma Ghandhi in Indian politics today, who can afford to take such a huge political risk as giving the Kashmiris the right to self-determination. Never mind that Pakistan was/is constantly lectured on this as far as the East Pakistan issue was/is concerned by these same Indians. Might makes right. India stands on this proposition alone in its Kashmir policy. THIS IS THE TRUTH. All the rest is garbage propaganda sprouted by half wit `peacenicks` on the payroll of RAW.

OMAR

Re: Omar1974

``Empty vessels make the most noise``

The responses to a honest analysis of the kargil situation, has once again, as usual decended to personality explanations. Sheriff is a bully, he wnts to save bussiness interests etc. Again a kind of belief that changing the person would help, may be with Imran Khan.

Pakistanis have to wake up and realise the changed environment, and also what islam projects in real terms, not in scriptural terms in the modern world. If this realisation were ever to dawn on the pakistanis, may be the kargil and the kashmir would be solved.

Firstly by maintaining that the pak army is not involved, it is only the mujahideen, projects a freightening prospects. There is a mauroding band of islamic fundamentalists, armed with stinger missiles to take on the army of a neighbouring country, a situation no non-muslim country wants to support.

A consequence of the above position is the question, who is in control in pakistan. Is it worth talking to Mianji. This again leads to the position that supporting the pakistani position is futile, supporting a govt which maintains that it has no control of what is going on is absurd.

There is no need to sink into the gutter politics and come up with personal motivations for the katgil debacle. The problem can be traced to the fundamental processec in pakistan, the hatred that the system builds up against india and how it clouds clear thinking in every aspect of pakistani life.

To the Pathetic so called Indian moderates

You never tire of claiming India is a Secular Pluralist utopia, but the sad fact is that it is not, it is far from it. The only way India can ever be any kind of civilized society is when the ever widening chasm between the haves and the nots is bridged. The basic reason why it cannot be bridged is because India is more interested in continuing its morally bankrupt confrontation with Pakistan over Kashmir, rather than allocating those scarce resources to alleiviating poverty, and its people (poor included) are too stupid to understand the economic and social fruits they are being denied simply because the Indian govt continues to deny the right of Kashmiris to choose between Indian and Paki citizenship and they, morbidly and patriotically

support this bankrupt policy of occupation by force, rape, torture, murder, paramilitaries, and state sponsored terrorists.

Omar

re: Ibne Sina

An insightful article on the topic of post-Kargil.

Why was it over so soon. Well for starters, Nawaz Sharif got cold feet, because he is afterall a bully and when you call a bully`s bluff, he will fold within an eye blink!

Secondly, it is over, because the world told Pakistani leaders that they would not be able to buy expansive watches, because all IMF loans would be cut: what Nawaz and his wife were doing; while he was begging Clinton for help, his wife was shopping in Washington, D.C.

The real reason was that China said no, because China is becoming increasingly concerned about the levels of Talibanization in Pakistan and also, China does not want the Islamic fervor to affect its own Muslim populations and China seems to like India as a buffer keeping the Talibans from Pakistan away. Furthermore, since China wants to emerge as a ``responsible`` regional power in Asia, it could not be seen by the west as encouraging this ``adventurism``.

Saudi Arabia, another of Pakistan`s friends, does not like the prospect of the religious polarization in Pakistan either and it was at Saudi Arabia`s ``suggestion`` that the Council of Islamic States`s statement on Kargil was so luke warm in its support of Pakistan.

Pakistan thought it could play musical chairs in this matter, but found itself with no chairs to sit, because its friends never showed up with the chairs in the first place!

THE HARSH AND BITTER TRUTH

To all Peacenicks (Indians & Pakis) and the ever present, `Kashmir should join Pakistan` supporters. I think those who dream of peace between India and Pakistan will get peace all right, the peace of a grave under the pall of a big black mushroom cloud hanging over the subcontinent. Why should Pakistan expect to get in peace what it could not by war? This is being unreasonable of us Pakis entirely, the Indians are right from their point of view as far as this goes. The price of Kashmir is bloodshed. The thirst for blood of those beautiful mountains and valleys (our national Paki-Mirage in the desert) is insatiable. Stop these unrealistic expectations of getting Kashmir. Either put up or shut up. Which means either get ready to deal a nuclear blow and finish off our enemies for good, and prepare to sustain casualties in the tens of millions, and destruction of all major cities at a minimum, or stop talking about Kashmir. These are the harsh choices. I`m ready to advocate use of the bomb NOW, rather than accept humiliation or the status quo any longer. You better get ready to prepare to either a) meet your maker, or b) eat national humble pie and crow, like Mian sahib is ever so willing for the sake of his personal political hide. In other words prepare to live the lives of hijras if Kashmir is not freed by this generation.

I for one, am ready to face both personal death as well as the death of everyone i have ever met/known in life (afterall, when the nation calls ... :), in exchange for MAD (mutually assured destruction). These are the choices. Either Pakistan backs down, or we launch a full scale nuclear war. Starting a war, and backing down for fear of being nuked is just plain dumb. However, since we`ve waited this long, i reccomend waiting until Pakistan is able to test and build a sufficient number of hydrogen bombs (20 megaton plus city busters). After all there`s nothing more embarasssing that SURVIVORS after you`ve nuked a city. Gotta do a proper job of it if we`re gonna do it. Whether India builds these or not is only a question of redunduncey for them, after all, how many major cities do we have anyhow, but India has a billion people. We need to build not just 10-20 weapons, but at least about 100 hydrogen bombs to make a significant impact. This make take upto 20 years, but i`m sure we can do it. I say 300 million dead in the first strike, is significant. Large numbers will die later in unmatched agony. The ones who die immediately will be the lucky ones. Hiroshima and Nagasaki will look like picking daisies on a Sunday picnic on a quiet afternoon out in the country after the next Indo-Pak nuclear exchange.

Ladies and Gentlemen, those ARE the stakes. So, you really wanna play? Lemme deal you into this little game of ours. Everytime you lose a hand, you lose a close loved one. JUst think about that carefully. Are you in? Lets play, shall we? I`m in. I`m even prepared to deal. I`ve seen Indians are big gamblers at the casinos in Atlantic city etc. They`re welcome to join this game, in fact, i insist they join us, like it or not. This time Ghauri won`t leave any survivors.

You fools get the picture of what we`re facing yet? Or ya still wanna go on occupying Kashmir on Indian side/Asking for liberation of Kashmir on Paki side?. Both sides better get ready to pay the ultimate cost now of foolhardy policies. Cause baby, this AIN`T going away. And disliking my bluntness, ain`t gonna make it go away. YEAH,BABY,YEAH. Lets get it on.



Omar

Conspiracy Theory?

Now, I know very little (o.k, next to nothing) about the situation in Pakistan, but it seems to me that some of Nawaz Sharif`s biggest problems are powerful ``Islamic`` movements, a powerful millitary that won`t necessarily do whatever he wants them to, and an alarming number of armed hoodlums in Pakistani territory from Afghanistan and a bunch of other places.

So, is it possible that by setting up a little millitary misadventure, he has managed to: make the ``Islamics`` look reckless and dangerous, humiliated the army leadership in the eyes of both the people and their own troops, and managed to get the Indian army to do the dirty work of eliminating a few hundred (if not more) armed hoodlums who would otherwise be creating trouble in Pakistan proper.

All this sets the stage for Nawaz Sharif to further usurp power (possibly even declaring some form of emergency rule) and consolidate control. This explains why the fighting did not stop immediately after he issued the statement with Clinton: he wanted to let the Indian army eliminate a few hundred more of his troublemakers.

As far as why he backed down when he did, the likely answer is the IMF loan (as opposed to any

developments on the Indian side: why would India change anything when it was already winning?) which he did not want to lose. After all, rupees aren`t very good for stuffing into Swiss Bank Accounts...

For peace it is said that men are willing to go the extra yard. Indians also never tire of telling us, `more people to people contacts`, more trade. Well, how`d ya like to start meeting me and trading insults? :) Will that satisfy the prerequisites for peace in Kashmir? I volunteer!

On a serious note, i think Pakistan at some point has to make India a serious peace offer it just can`t afford to refuse. Quite simply this, Freedom for Kashmir, including a plebescite to decide the future of all Kashmir and consequently peace between India and Pakistan for a thousand years, or immediate nuclear war, starting in a few minutes. It would take more balls than mian sahib has to bring reality of certain death home to the Indians. Are the Indians as prepared to meet Hanuman their fabled monkey-god, as the Pakis are to meet their Allah? (As for reincarnation, I assure you, if it exists you won`t want to be reborn into what is left of post-nuclear India --- most likely you`ll be deformed at birth, and die an agonizing death from radiation poisioning.) As yes, now where was I? Yes, I was talking about allowing Kashmiris the right to decide their own fate. rather mundane stuff compared to where your emphatic NO! led us a few moments ago, don`t you think? Won`t you reconsider? Every Paki is not as yeller as mian sahib`s infamous cabs (take the valient Sher Khan, a shining example to us all of what manhood, true valour and love of country demands). Some of us have no intention of backing down when the occasion presents itself in the future. Take heed my fellow humans across the border. We are prepared for our owns deaths and yours. Are u prepared for your own swift extermination off the face of the earth? I ask not in jest but am deadly earnest and serious. It could happen. Is denying Kashmir the mere right to choose its own fate really even worth this possibility? Why r u so intransigent? This is no joke. Nor is this a laughing matter. This is the point we have reached today. There is no turning back to the good old days of conventional slaughter. Now its nukes baby. Yeah, baby, yeah!

Think about it, and then think again. You still want this? Keep repeating your standard lines on Kashmir till you`re blue in the face, we now expect little different, we`re reconciled to it, and to nuclear destruction of both our countries, keep wondering when people who think like me (quite a few actually) will come to control Pakistan`s growing nuclear arsenel and what they will do with it. Remember deterence only works on the mentality of a person who sees they have something to lose in this world, not on the mentality of a person who doesn`t care about anything in this world beyond country, honor, revenge. It may interest non-muslims to learn that aside from a reunion with wives promised in heaven, even parents and children are but strangers on the day of judgement for muslims. Think about what that means to the truly religious, let alone the secular like myself, in terms of an all out nuclear war. The world after all, is a temorary abode, for a few days, the afterlife is the promise of infinity. What do we have to lose (assuming we are real believers)in a nuclear war ? Our lives? What are they worth anyhow to us? Our loved ones? Shall we see them on the day of judgement? No? Then what do they matter after all? But our enemies(so the least a man can do is settle scores while here in this temporary world, afterall, it must end one day, why not choose which exact day! What a privilige to work as the hand of G-D himself in heralding the day of judgement by ending the world, eh! :), well, we all know their (our enemies) guaranteed promised fate in the hereafter.:)

sleep tight.

Dont confuse Kashmir with Kargil.

Kashmir, with all the arguments etc for both sides is a complex mixture of moral, military and religious issues.

Kargil was a shameful example of military adventurism. When Pakistan signed the Lahore agreement, it agreed to discuss all issues including Kashmir with India on the table.

To treacherously try to change ground realities by military action is despicable. India has now realised how foolish it is to trust Pakistan, even if conciliatary noises are coming from there.

As far as the mutilation of the bodies of Indian soldiers are concerned, it is horrible and deplorable. Pakistanis are not even human - the Pakistani army seems to be mentally sick and depraved. Please dont call yourselves Muslims. The prophet (PBUH) would never approve of such actions.

Let`s rationalize this aspect of peace process.

Now, as per the Pakistan`s own govt., it is the mujhideens who crossed the LOC, the govt. says it has no control over mujahideens, and the corollary of this is that the mujahideens are more powerful than the Pakistani army. If you think of it, the Pak Army has never occupied the Indian territory this long, nay! So, what purpose will be served in negotiating with the ones that were never involved in this mess? The Indians should rather negotiate with the mujahideens, for they do not want these intruders to intrude again. Any settlement with the Pakistan govt. or army will not stop the mujahideens to repeat the intrusion. The Pak army and the govt., by their own assertion, are weaker than the mujahideens and unable to control them. Just ponder and think.

Re: OMAR1974

I am no longer amused by your postings, I am scared. You talk of nuclear weapons and nuclear wars as if kids talk of their 2 rupee toys. Do you have any idea what you are talking about?

You said that Nawaz Sharif hurried to Washington because the Indians had started to arm their nuclear missiles. Let us think about this. This outcome was so predictable, why did the Pakistanis not consider this possibility BEFORE starting this adventurism? Any idiot on the street could have predicted that this could happen, so why wasn`t it taken into consideration??

Now, you may say that Pakistan gambled that India won`t do so and then backed down. I say that this probably points to something else.

Let`s consider the scenario that Pakistan gambled and backed down because it did not want to have a nuclear war. In that case, the whole rationale for developing nuclear weapons goes to pot, for if Pakistan cannot count on them in situations of conflict to defuse the situation, then it is a waste of time and money. Didn`t the military say that now that they have nuclear weapons they would not ever have to risk a conventional war?

But maybe there`s something else. If India had started to put nuclear warheads on its missiles, then the question arises why didn`t Pakistan do the same and threaten them right back??

Probably because Pakistan does not have nuclear warheads that can be mounted on missiles. Not yet at least. It may be that the whole story of missile launches etc. was just a big media stunt to create an impression of Pakistani mastery of nuclear warheads. Maybe in reality Pakistan does not have this capabililty.

Now realistically speaking, despite all the centuries of accumulated hatred, I think it is definitely time to move on for Pakistan and India. People with extremist views like you cause India and Pakistan to continue to descend into an abyss of mutual animosity.

If push comes to shove, and there is an outright war, I do not think that Pakistan can win. Wars are fought on logistics in the long run, and previous wars have shown that Pakistan cannot fight a sustained war. Therefore, there is no point to this brainless animosity and constant escalation of stakes.

Pakistan has bigger fish to fry than trying to compete with India ... it has to shift its focus to being an independent state which is an economic powerhouse.