President Pervez Musharaff’s Views

this wont do. our efforts to reach some sort of reasonable understanding only causes us to go around in circles. these people will not be satisfied even if we give them our first born. i say time has come to emulate our elders. time has come create pakistan in cyberspace as well. any takers?

On a separate note, a wise move by Musharraf:

``Israel welcomes Musharraf`s consideration of establishing ties (Updated at 2000 PST)

HELD JERUSALEM: Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom Monday welcomed suggestions by Pakistan`s President Musharraf that his country should consider establishing diplomatic relations with Israel, saying such a move would be of mutual benefit, a foreign news agency reported.

Shalom said Israel, which has ties with a handful of Muslim countries, was constantly seeking to establish relations all over the world.

Israel regards favorably the possibility of setting up relations with an important Muslim and Asian state,` he told reporters after a session of parliament`s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee.

President Pervez Musharraf on Sunday urged his countrymen for serious debate over recognizing Israel, citing moves by Arab states toward repairing relations.`` (www.jang.com.pk)

Pakistan should recognize Israel, while simultaneously demanding that Israel give a viable independent state to the Palestinians.

Following are some interesting solutions to the Kashmir issue. They require India to, at least, give up partially on its atut-ang stance:

Some solutions are presented by The Kashmir Study Group, led by the CEO of the large American furniture chain Ethan Allan, who is a Kashmiri. This group contains a lot of distinguished American South Asian experts.

http://www.kashmirstudygroup.com/

These are presented in a simpler form at BBC:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/south_asia/03/kashmir_future/html/default.stm

Some combination of 5, 6, and 7 is the only solution that will work, and will be acceptable to everyone. Probably, a little bit of 7 and all of 6. And it fits into the voting patterns of Kashmir also. The Valley is very anti-India. For all practical purposes, India has lost the Valley. I doubt any Indian would want to visit it now openly, unless he is part of the security forces. Jammu is relatively pro-India. And Ladakh is around 50/50 pro and anti India.

The borders fit well also. So Pakistan should keep its Kashmir, since it is by far the most peaceful part of Pakistan, and all us Kashmiris are quite happy with Pakistan. A vote in Pakistan`s Kashmir will overwhelmingly be pro-Pakistan. My family runs part of it as govt. servants, so I know. Pakistan could hold a vote there, if India or UN wants.

India`s Kashmir is easily the most violent part in India, and maybe in the world. It has the highest soldiers/per sq. ft ratio in the world. So much so, that now the economy of the Valley, after the loss is tourism, is dependent on the money that Indian soldiers spend there. The total number of civilians being killed there, is significantly higher than the number being killed in Palestine, Iraq, Kurdistan, Chechnya, and other such areas where freedom struggles are going on. If it were, ``Pakistani terrorists`` doing all the civilian killings, then one would expect the local population to be extremely anti-Pakistan and very pro-India. However, the local population is very anti-India and quite pro-Pakistan and definitely pro-independence. Thus the actual situation is quite different from what the Indian media describes.

So Indians must accept that something is wrong in Indian Kashmir. And they must realize that a big portion of it (thought not all) is the fault of India (and while Pakistanis would like to think they have the power to cause all kinds of troubles in India, whenever they can, it is not actually the case. If Pakistanis had caused the trouble in Kashmir, what is stop them from causing them all over India? Obviously the problems are being caused by Indian policies and the local reaction, and only being assisted by Pakistan). Thus the status quo needs a change. The solution is not to strengthen the status quo, LOC, even more.

Based on this, Jammu should remain with India, since that is where the people will vote, with a small number of border Jammu areas joining the Valley. Ladakh should be partially divided, with the areas bordering the Valley separating from India, and the remaining becoming a part of India.

The Valley plus portion of Ladakh, plus small portion of Jammu, should become independent Kashmir, under the control of the UN, or some similar organization. Once this independent Kashmir gets it feet stable, it should be allowed to vote whether it wants to remain free, join Pakistan or join India.

The whole Kashmir Valley is only 80 miles by 25 miles. It is a tiny area, and yet India is unwilling to even consider giving it independence. The whole budget of this area will probably be smaller than what India is paying its 500k to 700k soldiers in Kashmir. I think Pakistanis will happily accept this kind of an independent Kashmir solution. This is the general point of view in Pakistan, nowadays. They want to solve the problem, they don`t want to get Kashmir from India. They want the Kashmiris to get their wishes. One can see that on this site, and on the Pakistani streets, and in the statements of Pakistani officials. There is no Pakistani version of atut-ang.

Unfortunately, our Indian colleagues, perhaps too influenced by the India media`s one-sided stories on terrorism, or too willing to accept anything the Indian govt. throws at them, are completely unwilling to change the status quo. Most of them, I doubt even know where the LOC runs. If someone drew the LOC on a map, making the Valley a part of Pakistan, I doubt any one of them would realize it. Hardly any Indian visits Kashmir. Very few have any ties with it, now. Yet, they are caught up in maintaining the status quo, regardless of how much violence it leads to. What difference would it make to an Indian, sitting in Karnataka, or Gujrat etc., if the LOC was five degrees in one direction or the other (creating a small independent Kashmir Valley), if he has never even been to the LOC (or to even the Valley of Kashmir)? I fail to understand such a rigid stance.

If, however, India is confident that Kashmiris want to join India, it should not be fearful of asking the Kashmiris, openly, without any influence from the Indian govt. apparatus. If India thinks LOC should be the border, then it should just ask the Kashmiris their opinion. It they agree, fine. If not, then a different solution is needed.

In my opinion, an argument based on LOC as the border, will be very impractical, since it will not end the freedom struggle in Kashmir. The whole struggle is based on the fact that the Kashmiris don`t want a border that draws them into the same map as India, like the LOC does. Forcing this solution down everyone`s throat isn`t automatically going to solve the problem, since this is the problem to begin with. It will just solidify the problem even more.

India stance on this issue makes an incorrect assumption that the Pakistani Kashmiris also want independence (or want to be with India), and thus India is giving an even deal to everyone, by letting Pakistan keep its part of Kashmir. When the actual situation is that Pakistani Kashmiris overwhelmingly want to be with Pakistan, with a minority that wants independence. I have yet to meet a Kashmiri Pakistani, who wants to be with India. What would they gain by doing so? The Indian Kashmiris, specifically in the Valley, overwhelmingly want to be separate from India. They may prefer independence or joining Pakistan (this is why Kashmir is now one of the few reamining spots in the world, where Human Rights organizations and the international press are banned. They are not banned in Palestine and other areas of violence).

Musharraf could be an angel or the devil - doesn`t really matter. Ditto for Vajpayee and Advani. Pakistanis dislike Advani and Vajpayee. Indians dislike Musharraf. Some people in Pakistan dislike Musharraf also. And some people in India dislike Advani and Vajpayee also. I personally dislike Advani. And I think when it comes to Kashmir, Musharraf and Vajpayee do actually want to solve the problem on a middle ground. Musharraf can present his desire to talk to India, openly, since he does not have to rely on votes. Vajpayee has to cater to his RSS constituency, hence he cannot state his desires for peace with Pakistan, openly. But I think, between the two of them, they could solve the problem.

Musharraf is actually correct when he says that LOC as the border will not work, since that is what all the fighting has been about to begin with. If it were acceptable to everyone, there wouldn`t be a problem, to begi with. He should, however, be more cautious and diplomatic when he makes his statements and presents his logic. A better reply would have been to request the Indian govt. to get the Kashmiri`s point of view on this solution. On the other side, Indian leaders need to do the same. They should start preparing India for an end to the very impractical and violent atut-ang theory.

In the long run these three individuals are immaterial, however. What is more important is a principled, non-violent and practical approach to solving the Kashmir problem. At the very least, accepting that a problem exists.

Luckily, over years, Pakistan has accepted it will not get the remaining Kashmir, through force. Its stance now is that the solution should be according to the wishes of the Kashmiris. India still hasn`t caught on to the fact that it cannot keep Kashmir, through force. Hence, it is unwilling to even accept that the Kashmiris don`t want to stay with India. This is a state of denial. Somehow or the other, Indians at least need to at least challenge their govt.`s propogand on this issue, and try to get the views of the Kashmiris themselves.

There is an interesting X factor here. Pakistan has not placed any pre-conditions to talks with India. While India has always placed quite a few. The reason is that India`s economy has recently been stronger, and India had better relations with the USA. Now Pakistan is best friends with the USA. And Pakistan`s economy has stabilized, and is picking up. If the current financial team continues for another five years, it will reach 6% or higher. At that point, Pakistan`s position will be quite strong also. I fear that at that point, Pakistan will also start placing pre-conditions to talks. Since with a stable economy in Pakistan, Kashmir will be hurting India far more than it will hurt Pakistan.

It is difficult enough to solve such a problem when one side is placing pre-conditions. It will be impossible to solve it, if both sides are placing pre-conditions. India would have been wise to get Kashmir resolved, right when Musharraf had carried out the coup (I had mentioned it back then, that Pakistan is at its weakest, and thus India could negotiate from a strong position). If India wanted to pile up its troops on the border, it should have done so, then. Pakistan was a pariah, economically almost failed, etc. India could have gotten a hell of a deal. Yet India stuck to its rigid stance, to its own loss. It will not get that kind of a deal now. But the longer it waits, the more robust Pakistan`s position will become. And at a certain point, Pakistan will also, start saying, we will only accept a solution which is according to our wishes (much like India is doing now). That will not be good for anyone.

Ref Field-Marshal-Turned-Economic-Analyst #12

[The reason is that India`s economy has recently been stronger, and India had better relations with the USA. Now Pakistan is best friends with the USA. And Pakistan`s economy has stabilized, and is picking up. If the current financial team continues for another five years, it will reach 6% or higher. At that point, Pakistan`s position will be quite strong also..... Since with a stable economy in Pakistan, Kashmir will be hurting India far more than it will hurt Pakistan.]

Yesterday, the news-ticker at the bottom of CNN or Fox News (don`t recall which one) reported that India has joined the IMF as a DONOR nation as opposed to having been a recipient of IMF funds all along.

Dream on.

re: Soma Kumar

++
Does he seriously expect that India would be magnanimous enough or is in a position, even if it is, to cede the whole of Kashmir to Pakistan? Is such a stance conducive to the holding of any kind of meaningful negotiations? Am I missing something here?
++

I believe Musharraf is accurately representing Pakistani public opinion when he says that the present line of control cannot be accepted as international border. However, rejecting the status quo does not mean that Pakistan wants all of Kashmir. It is common knowledge that the epicenter of Kashmir Movement is the Kashmir Valley (and not Ladakh and Jammu). When Musharraf talks about a readjustment of LoC, he means inclusion of Kashmir Valley in Pakistan, leaving Ladakh and Jammu in India. I don`t think Musharraf expects India to cede whole of Jammu & Kashmir.

harimau,

......... don`t be ridiculous! ....... india, a donor nation - how silly can you get! ........ india ranks 124 out of 173 countries on the human development index scale and as far as i know there are millions of indians sleeping on the streets of calcutta or trying to catch a rat for dinner ............ all right, pakistan ranks 138 and a lot of pakis haven`t heard of dental hygiene and are sharing tents with their pet sheep, but let`s not get carried away and start giving away money to norway and sweden .........i think there are plenty of folks in india who need the money more than the starving scandinavians ........... this is almost as silly as pakistan giving ``aid`` to bangladesh.........

Hotair #12

[quote]
I doubt any Indian would want to visit it now openly, unless he is part of the security forces.
[end-quote]

As usual, our friend HotAir (oops, I meant Romair) quickly and firmly inserts his foot in his mouth. FYI, over 60,000 indians will visit Kashmir valley this year. I cannot find the correct link right now, but when I do so, I will post it.

It is a substantial recovery from the 1999-2001 period though not as much as before 1989. Getting tourist flows up to pre-1989 is one of Mufti Sayeed`s main goals.


Soma:

you are wasting your time on Musharraf. You might as well go to Bal Thackeray and ask him for advice on Hindu-Muslim relations. This guy is a loser, unfortunately he is going to kill a lot of people before he is eliminated/retired/sent into exile. He is completely following the standard Paki dictator formula. You can review the life-histories of other Paki dictators to understand his ultimate fate.

Only fools think that Kashmir is the only dispute between India and Pakistan. There are wide-slew of disputes from history, primarily having to do with Pakistan`s self-appointed role as a custodian of Islam in South Asia and Indian resistance to this nonsensical notion.

Without positives to take us forward, we will remain mired in these disputes. Sensible indians and pakistanis need to focus on strong positives that will help take us forward. Recently, the indians made progress on ``positives`` with the Chinese. Doesn`t mean we dont have big disputes with them, but them first we try to get more positive stuff going.

But military people are unlikely to understand stuff like this. Musharraf is trained as a commando, shooting from the hip and making sudden raids is more his thing. Beyond that he is big 0 strategic thinker. Even LK Advani comes off as a reasonable person in comparison.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Soma here is something for you and all the chowk gangs to read and mull over....

ans yes, dear Romair - I guess you have heard of the pakis in the US arrested for being terrorist`r`us even before the esteemed mush-e-ruff left the soil of the US of A. And now here something for you to chew on.....soon that one-step-from-pakistan=game of any terrorist activity will become apparent to all the world.....


http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-katz-devon063003.asp

title:A Global Network

quote 1:

The indictment of the eleven individuals never mentions al Qaeda, however al Qaeda and Lashkar-e-Taiba are very much connected financially, ideologically, and militarily. On September 12, 2001, Lashkar-e-Taiba claimed responsibility for the September 11 attacks, releasing a statement maintaining, ``The attacks on the World Trade Centre and other places were not an act of terrorism but an Islamic duty.`` Though al Qaeda soon became and was the official perpetrator of the September 11 attacks, Lashkar-e-Taiba`s claim of responsibility was not far from the truth.

Quote 2
Lashkar-e-Taiba tends to keep a low profile amongst Americans, but it is one of the most organized and best funded terrorist groups and remains a breeding ground for al Qaeda and other terrorist groups. The terrorist group has trained thousands of mujahedeen, sending them to areas as diverse as Afghanistan, Kashmir, Bosnia, Chechnya, Kosovo, and the Philippines.

Quote3:

Lashkar-e-Taiba is the military wing of the religious group, Markaz Dawa Waal Irshad, which had among its founders Abdullah Azzam, Osama bin Laden`s mentor and original founder of al Qaeda. Azzam, assassinated in 1989 by unknown assailants, traveled the globe spreading his Jihadist ideology, seducing many disaffected men to participate in jihad, for no more than the sake of jihad. Azzam`s most famous quote is no doubt the most telling about his ideology: ``Jihad and the rifle alone: no negotiations, no conferences, and no dialogues.``


(me: see that conection already being made...ooops ROMAIR there it goes.....how long before its cutains for the military of pakistan

all the indications so far are that Pakistan IS ALWAYS JUST STEP AWAY FROM ANY TERRORIST ACTIVITY - BE IT THE ACTUAL GUYS WHO DO IT, THE FINANCIERS, THE TRAINERS, THE CAMPS, THE ORGANISORS etc. The charade is over.

It was this message that the US of A and Bush gave mush-e-ruff in Camp David hence the constipated look on the illegal dictator`s face. As they say the `game`s up`.)

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

pmisra #17

{{As usual, our friend HotAir (oops, I meant Romair) quickly and firmly inserts his foot in his mouth. FYI, over 60,000 indians will visit Kashmir valley this year. I cannot find the correct link right now, but when I do so, I will post it.}}

Apparently tourism officials are expecting 200,000 visitors theis year. Rsridhar first posted the following article from The Wall Street Journal on Bina Shah’s Karachi board. [A certain Pakistani savant, in his typically pompous delusional style, saw this article as pointing to thaw between India and Pakistan as the cause for improvement in the situation in the valley.]

URL for this article [needs WSJ subscription]:
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,BT_CO_20030611_007207,00.html

``FEER(6/19)Kashmiris And Tourists Share New Sense Of Optimism

DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
(From The Far Eastern Economic Review)
By Joanna Slater

FOR 25 YEARS, Ghulam Mohammed has ferried passengers across the calm surface of Dal Lake in the city of Srinagar. On a recent evening, he stands near his shikara, a kind of Kashmiri gondola, and looks out from the shore. In front of him, the lake is full of similar boats, all propelled along by boatmen with heart-shaped paddles.

``Last year it was not like this,`` Mohammed remarks. ``This time we have nice business.``

Until 1989, the beauty and mountain air of this part of Kashmir ensured that men like Mohammed made a good living out of a stream of visitors from India and elsewhere. Then came the violence, as Pakistan-based militants began a 14-year battle to wrest the region from India`s grip.

That fight continues, but this summer there`s a hint of change. Amid improving relations between New Delhi and Islamabad, and with much of the rest of India in the grip of a deadly heatwave, Kashmir is once again attracting visitors -- people like Preeti and Neeta Oswal.

Wearing jeans and sunglasses, the sisters look like any other hip Indian students. But their choice of holiday destination is anything but typical: ``Our aunt and uncle said, `Couldn`t you find any other place to go?``` laughs Preeti, 21. ``But we had heard a lot about Kashmir. When we arrived, we thought `Wow, we`ve come into a new world`.`` In many ways it is: The sisters saw their first snowfall, rode in a cable car and slept in a houseboat. Tourism officials predict the state could receive 200,000 visitors this year, the highest level in four years.

Along with the tourists, something else has drifted in on the mountain air -- a sense of cautious optimism, even if it has more to do with an improvement in locals` daily lives than with any broader hopes for peace. The much-detested India-backed ruling party was kicked out in largely free state elections late last year. There are also fewer outbreaks of violence within Srinagar, though some say it`s just shifted to less visible locations.

Even the weather seems to be cooperating. Scant rain and snow in recent years had dried out the landscape around Srinagar, ``as if the valley itself were crying,`` says one local leader. No longer: wild flowers are in bloom and horses are grazing alongside a stream inside the city.

Strolling on a sunny Sunday afternoon, Faisal Shah says he stayed out with friends until 10:30 the previous night near the city`s main market, something the 20-year-old medical student had never done before. For years, fear of militant strikes and security sweeps by Indian forces led businesses to close at sundown. But these days, says Shah, ``people are becoming a bit more confident.``

Down the street at a bakery, it`s a similar story. The proprietor describes how he used to flee the store, leaving doors unlocked and products on display, when shooting broke out. But on a recent Saturday night the bakery stayed open until 10 o`clock. Just a year ago, it would close at 6 p.m.

``You`re not fully secure, but it`s much better,`` says A.R. Bhat, an insurance surveyor who has an office above the bakery. The Indian security forces are not ``so much harsh`` as in the past, he adds. However, when it comes to the current thaw between India and Pakistan, Bhat, 65, is cynical. The two countries ``are not sincere . . . They want to distribute Kashmir like a piece of bread,`` he says. The only chance talks will succeed, he says to his American questioner, is ``if you people are also sincere. You wanted Saddam to go, he went.``

Visitors, though, are happy to forget talk of politics. Down at Dal Lake, Dimple Bafna from New Delhi, who hadn`t visited Srinagar in 23 years, is waiting for a ride. Motivated by vivid memories of previous trips, she`s come with her four sisters and two children. ``We had heard it`s become much safer than previously,`` she says. ``We thought, `Let us take a chance`.``

The only downside, she says, is that the Kashmir of her memory was more lush and less commercialized than today`s reality. Should violence ebb in the valley, the new challenge in attracting visitors may be living up to the region`s previous reputation -- a welcome change from living down its present notoriety.``

re: Soma Kumar

++
Musharaff, the man, did not disappoint me, although I must confess that I had hoped that he would turn out to be a more dynamic person.
++

I agree. Musharraf is a straight shooter who doesn`t know how & when to build rapport through diplomatic niceties and strong interpersonal skills. He should be smart enough to switch styles when talking to Indians, Pakistanis, Europeans and Americans. But perhaps this is easier for politicians than for generals.

I received this e-mail from a friend today...thought I would share it with you Chokies... And here it was, a piece about another glorious general. How fitting.

...SR

GEN. AQLEEM AKHAR RANI, SJ, HJ, VC
IRON CROSS CLASS I, LEGION D`HONOR DE FRANCE
1924 - 2002


JULY 02, 2003 IS THE DEATH ANNIVERSARY OF GENERAL AQLEEM AKHTAR RANI
RANI - THE LADY WHO HELPED GENERAL YAHYA COPE WITH
THE WAR GOING AROUND HIM. I THINK YOUR PAPER SHOULD
PUBLISH A MEMORIAM - A SHORT TERSE ONE - REMINDING THE
NATION OF THIS BRAVE HERO OF THE PAKISTAN ARMY AND
THE HIGHEST RANKING FEMALE FULL GENERAL OF THE PAKISTAN
ARMY. THIS HEROINE MUST BE REMEMBERED JUST AS THE
DRUNKEN HEROES OF 1971. LIKE AN OLD SOLDIER SHE NEVER
DIED - SHE JUST FADED AWAY IN THE ANNALS OF MILITARY
HISTORY. THE NATION MUST CONSTRUCT A MONUMENT TO
TO THIS GREAT GENERAL AS PER THE DESIGN SUBMITTED
BY NAYYAR ALI DADA - WITH GENERAL YAHYA HALF NUDE
PISSING INTO THE FOUNTAIN POOL SURROUNDING THE MONUMENT.
I DO NOT BELIEVE SHE CORRUPTED THE HIGHER COMMAND
DURING 1971 BUT IN FACT GAVE THE GENERALS HOPE FROM
DRUNKER DISPAIR....HER NAME WILL BE REMEMBERED LIKE
THAT OF MANSTEIN, HOEPNER, ZHUKOV, PATTON, ROMMEL
AND MONTGOMERY....

#12 Field Marshal Romair

{{There is an interesting X factor here. Pakistan has not placed any pre-conditions to talks with India. While India has always placed quite a few. The reason is that India`s economy has recently been stronger, and India had better relations with the USA. Now Pakistan is best friends with the USA.}}

Eric Margolis Romair’s favourite strategic ‘expert’ and commentator on ‘South Asia’, has a rather different - and IMO more realistic - take in his June 29 column:

http://www.canoe.ca/Columnists/margolis_jun29.html

“When the US says jump, it wants Pakistan to jump”

Pakistan`s military ruler, President Pervez Musharraf, was granted the honour last week of an audience at Camp David with the Great White Father. U.S. President George Bush, who three years ago couldn`t even name Pakistan`s leader, hailed Musharraf as a ``statesman`` and ``friend of freedom.``

Gen. Musharraf was offered a conditional $3 billion US aid package, provided: a) Congress, which hates Pakistan, approves; b) Musharraf continues to arrest Islamic militants and support the U.S. military occupation of Afghanistan; c) makes no trouble with India over Kashmir; d) doesn`t supply nuclear technology to North Korea.

…

In a startling public insult to a ``friend and ally,`` Bush refused Musharraf`s request to release F-16 fighters bought by Pakistan in 1989. Pro-Israel members of Congress blocked delivery of the aircraft to punish Pakistan for its nuclear program. Ironically, Pakistan`s inability to acquire modern warplanes to counter India`s state-of-the-art French Mirage 2000s and Russian MiG-29s and SU-30s compelled Islamabad to rely ever more heavily on its nuclear forces to deter hostile India, whose powerful military seriously outnumbers and outguns Pakistan.

…

Obey, Washington warned Islamabad, or we will foreclose your loans, impose trade sanctions, cut off spare parts, and give India a green light to go after you. …. But Musharraf, with a near-bankrupt nation, and faced with what he viewed as a Hobson`s choice between obedience and ruin, caved in to Washington`s demands and became, overnight, its compliant servitor.

One couldn`t fail to notice the contrast last week between the leaders of Pakistan and India. While Musharraf was at Camp David playing the loyal sepoy to the American Raj, India`s Prime Minister Atal Vajpayee was concluding an historic strategic agreement with rival China. …

…

Before leaving the U.S., President Musharraf rightly warned Americans that terrorist attacks were largely due to smoldering political grievances around the world, and that ``state terror`` against Muslim peoples was being ignored or abetted by America - an obvious reference to Palestine, Chechnya and Kashmir. Unfortunately, Bush was too busy trying to organize an international campaign against Hamas and Israel`s other Palestinian opponents to heed Musharraf`s sensible warning.

….

Musharraf`s pleas to Bush to help resolve the Kashmir dispute - the world`s most dangerous crisis that risks nuclear war between India and Pakistan - were ignored.

``Take your money, go home, arrest more militants, and don`t cause trouble,`` was Washington`s sendoff message to the general.

re: #19 by arjun_m on June 30, 2003 11:03am PT

Notwithstanding the personal integrity of General Musharraf and his immediate circle, the rest of the system is still very fishy. Of particular concern is the secrecy of Pakistan`s defense budget. Pakistan spends $27 per capita on defense. How much of this is spent on salaries of poor soldiers and how much ends up in the generals` pockets is a closely guarded secret. Luckily, one of the American conditionalities for aid is that Musharraf would continue the democratization process. This means sooner or later, the politicians will also get a chance to audit the defense budget. Given the media explosion and rising political awareness in Pakistan, IMHO the first parliamentary defense committee in Pak history is likely to be formed within 2 years!

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

In the US of A Mush-e-ruff said

when he, talking to Pakistani pressmen in the US, said that `democracy of minority` could not prevail in Pakistan, nor could the country be held hostage to the whims and will of a few persons and parties.


Now what was the reason for TNT.....the minority couldnot stand the thought of being in a minority....is the good general making a CASE FOR ANOTHER DIVISION OF PAKISTAN!


I guess the pakistanis have learnt the ability of the minority to make merry hell very well after all they did it in the 1930 and 1940s. and have done it in India.

Now when the chickens have come home to roost mush-e-ruff is getting cold feet!

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#12 Hot-Air Commodore Romair

{{And Pakistan`s economy has stabilized, and is picking up. If the current financial team continues for another five years, it will reach 6% or higher.}}

If the Pakistan’s current economic managers and statisticians continue for another two years, the GDP growth rate will soar to 12% or higher. Read how they fearlessly finagle fiscal figures in the following article by Andleeb Abbas in the News:

http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/jun2003-weekly/nos-29-06-2003/pol1.htm#1

What lies beneath?

[Behind the fanfare of a glowing economic performance lies the sad reality that the exaggerated figures in the recent budget will mislead the public for a short period, until realisation hits that they have been taken for a ride again]

“For the last few years, our economic managers have been consistently flaunting a higher provisional estimate of growth in our gross domestic product (GDP) at budgeting time, and subsequently, reducing this growth rate by the next June, so as to lower the base line. This enables them to blow the trumpet of a higher growth achieved in the next year.

In June 1999, the budget for fiscal year 1999-2000 fixed the target for growth at 5%. The nation was told in June 2000 that the actual growth achieved was 2.6% and the target for FY 2000-2001 had been fixed at 4%.

In June 2001, the provisional figure of 2.6% was depressed to 2.2% in order to show the growth for FY 2001-2002 at 3.6%, to bring it closer to the target of 4%.

In June 2002, the GDP growth target for FY 2002-2003 was fixed at 4.5%, while the achievement, as it was proclaimed in the provisional estimate for FY 2001-2002, was 3.6%.

The National Income Accounts Committee this year once again depressed the figure for FY 2001-2002 to 3.4%, to project the growth for next year FY 2002-2003 at 4.9%.

But that was not all. A few days prior to the presentation of the Finance Bill before the parliament, the NIA Committee once again met to revise the estimate of five items to raise the GDP growth even higher to 5.1% for FY 2002-2003. If the past trend is to be maintained, we shall see the GDP growth for FY 2002-2003 depressed once again in June 2004.

Manipulation of data for public consumption, to get a favourable response from the general public, may bring temporary laurels, but it is the real situation on the ground that changes public perception of governance. Faith in government estimates, by and large, is non-existent, as far as general public is concerned. There are no independent institutions to verify or check the Federal Bureau of Statistics` claims.”

…

“Another area touted as a strong economic recovery indicator is the official reserve account. A ten and half billion-reserve account has been widely hailed as proof of a strong economy. Unfortunately, it is not trade, but aid and foreign remittances that are responsible for this increase. Most of it is caused by a rise in remittances from overseas Pakistanis, who, under compulsion of circumstances, are forced to send money through official channels instead of hundi.”

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

hamidm#16
What you say is true, but so incredibly is also what Harimou says (according to The Economist of June 21). The two statements are not mutually exclusive.
During his last budget, India`s Finance Minister told several (but not all!) donor countries that it will not accept any more govt-to-govt grants or loans. He also announced a $600 million aid to selected Asian and African countries.
I am not against this policy. History has proved that that there is an inverse relationship between a country receiving aid and the effort it makes to improve its economy on its own. Moreover, the administrative costs of loans from smaller countries, such as Norway and Sweden are too high to be of any practical use.
With respect to becoming a donor country, maybe Indians have found out that a substantial proportion of the bilateral aid by the developed countries to the developing gets recycled back to the donor countries through consultants, feasibility/assessment studies and assorted contracts. Indians are perhaps thinking of doing the same in the countries they are going to aid (e.g., give aid to African countries to buy CILPA`s aids drugs) and leveraging this aid for other politico-economic interests.

Romair #12

India is not making any territorrial concessions to Pakistan. India is 5-10 times stronger than Pakistan. Pakistan has one real option which is to start a full scale war. There are problems in Indian Kashmir. They would have to resolved between Indian leaders and Kashmiri leaders. There is no way Indian leaders will negotiate under the threat of force. Pakistani and Kashmiri leaders will not get anything through violence. The quicker people realize it the better.

There are too many variables in Indian economy long term outlook. Pakistani economy will have long term problems. You have political issues, no energy reserves, high illiteracy rate, high population growth rate, no govt spending on human resources/infrastructure and dependence on a single river system for water. It is not difficult to guess where you go.

hamidm2 #16

There is Indian state, Indian companies and Indian citizens. Indian state has money - a lot of FOREX reserves. They can either collect 1% in a money market account or they can loan it for a higher rate of return. Indian citizens do not need money per se. They need job opportunities which can pay for food, housing, education and health care. It is hard for commies to understand.

#1 by Inquirer on June 30, 2003 7:04am PT
He has to first neutralize the radical and uncultured tribes of NWFP before he can address controversial issue of India-Pakistan policies.

People from the NWFP are not really pushed about Kashmir; it is primarily the population from Punjab that is the most concerned about Kashmir.

#16 by hamidm2 on June 30, 2003 10:23am PT

[harimau,

......... don`t be ridiculous! ....... india, a donor nation - how silly can you get! ........ let`s not get carried away and start giving away money to norway and sweden .........i think there are plenty of folks in india who need the money more than the starving scandinavians ........... this is almost as silly as pakistan giving ``aid`` to bangladesh.........]

Dear Sri Hamid,

Your points are well-taken. Yet, I knew I wan`t dreaming when I saw the news last night. So, I did a quick google search on India and the IMF and the attached news item popped up at the top.

As Urstruly would like to point out, India is doing this in the typical bania tradition of money-lending at usurious interest rates, contravening the Quranic sanctions against riba and thus confirming its status as a kaffir nation, notwithstanding its huge Muslim population, thus further infuriating 12-Head/Tipu/Studebaker who is already incensed that Farzana Versey`s Didi is being diddled by a Hindu brahmin just like that Muslim-basher VS Naipaul is diddling a Pakistani Muslima, both against all teachings of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).

Please allow yourself a double dose of Macallen tonight. I am sure Srimathi Hamid will understand.

Regards.

Harimau



Forex reserve boosts India`s image as creditor

IANS[ MONDAY, JUNE 30, 2003 03:55:26 PM ]

NEW DELHI: Buoyed by a strong foreign exchange reserve, India is striving to project its stature as a creditor to other countries and multilateral lending agencies, reversing its decades-old role of an aggressive borrower.

Analysts say India`s emerging image as an international creditor sends strong signals regarding the country`s strength and resilience of its external sector to the global community.

``When you have a very comfortable foreign exchange reserve, the very first thing you do is to stop borrowing from others and pay back all outstanding loans, which India did in recent years,`` said economist D H Panandiker.

``After doing that, it is also a prudent move for a country like India to extend credit to other countries and agencies that are likely to give higher rate of returns,`` Panandiker said.

``It`s a good investment move than keeping the foreign exchange locked up inside the country.``

According to Panandiker, a large chunk of India`s foreign exchange reserve is parked in government securities of developed nations, mostly in US treasury bills, which fetch barely two percent interest annually.

``On the other hand, India can get an interest rate of nearly five per cent by lending to multilateral lending agencies.``

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) on Saturday said the country had joined the International Monetary Fund`s (IMF) pool of lenders in view of its comfortable foreign exchange reserves position.

IMF has selected India to become a member of its financial transaction plan (FTP) from the September-November quarter of 2002. Countries under this plan help the IMF finance the balance of payments needs of other nations.

``The IMF selects countries with strong balance of payment and foreign exchange reserves position for contributing to the FTP,`` said an RBI statement.

India`s foreign exchange reserves touched a record high at $82.120 billion in the week to June 20. The country`s foreign reserve has risen rapidly in the last few years on strong inflows from overseas and rising portfolio investment.

Enthused by the strong reserve, India has decided to put a curb on excessive borrowing and prepay all outstanding loans. The country paid back all its IMF loans by 2000.

New Delhi also reportedly prepaid foreign loans aggregating $1.67 billion to World Bank and another $1.3 billion to the Asian Development Bank last fiscal.

The government is also likely to prepay another $3 billion worth of costly foreign loans this fiscal in continuance of the exercise for reducing interest burden and fiscal deficit.

Finance Minister Jaswant Singh had indicated in the fiscal budget for 2003-04 that the government would continue to prepay foreign loans.

India has also framed a new set of guidelines for taking bilateral loans from other countries that would help minimise the federal government`s commitment in repaying loans.

``Becoming a creditor to multilateral lending agencies and other countries will also boost India`s credit rating status in the international market,`` said Panandiker.

arjun_m #32

I would not quote Eric Margolis. He is a mouthpiece for Pakistani Islamic Jihadists. He is trying to undermine Musharraf among Pakistani expatriates.

re: harimau #40

...dont` be too harsh on hamid uncle...he is from some phony consulting firm and gets easily confused, hence his difficulty understanding that a state can decline aid due to plump forex reserves but urge that it be sent directly to NGOs...

#30 by arjun_m on June 30, 2003 2:02pm PT

You are reading too much into the Bush-Musharraf meeting. I don`t think Bush was trying to please India here. After all, Bush is an American President, not Indian President. As a rule, the Americans follow an independent foreign policy guided by American national interests. They never let one ally dictate their relationship with another ally.

Example: Israelis have been lobbying against Saudi Arabia for decades yet America never lets its oil interests be affected by its friendship with Israel. And vice versa. America will never let Saudi Arabia to use oil for blackmailing America into ditching Israel.

To put it succintly, India/Pakistan are America`s friends.. not masters.

If Bush wanted to please India, he would have made demands that would be unpalatable to Pakistanis such as ``forget-about-Kashmir``, ``rollback-nuclear-programme``, ``reduce-military-size``. He did not make any such unreasonable demands. He simply echoed the demands that Pakistanis are themselves making of Musharraf. And in the same order:

1: Democracy
2: Kashmir
3: Sectarianism and Extremism
4: Afghanistan

If you add TIFA and Science & Technology program to the overall picture, it is clear that Americans want to be friends with Pakistan, despite Indian attempts to prevent such a friendship through propaganda. Ultimately America will neither let India threaten Pakistan nor let Pakistan create mischief in Kashmir. Keeping both countries in its circle of friends is crucial to American goal of gaining a strong foothold in Asia (and keep China under check).

...good ole deluded pakis at it again...


...get this trough your head romair uncle:

...bush tossing aid to buy guns into mushraf`s beggin bowl is a LOT different from capital investments in economic growth, which is what india gets...

Here is another interesting piece of news. The MMA maybe in big trouble, if the Supreme Court upholds this:

``Court removes Pakistan politician


Islamic parties say their qualifications are valid
A court in Pakistan`s North-West Frontier Province has removed a member of the national assembly in a row over his qualifications.
Peshawar High Court`s Election Tribunal ruled that the qualifications of Mufti Ibrar Sultan - a member of the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) - are inadequate.

Mr Sultan`s degree was obtained from an Islamic seminary and was not equivalent to a university degree, as required by Pakistan`s Election Commission.

Justice Tariq Javed, who made the judgment, has ordered a new election in the constituency.

Mr Sultan was the successful candidate in the elections for the national assembly in the NA-14 Kohat constituency of NWFP.`` (www.bbc.co.uk/urdu)

re:#16 by hamidm2
India really does not need the kind of aid it used to get in the past. PL-40 or whatever that was is fresh in some people`s memory. There used to be a Aid India Consortium that would meet yearly in Paris to decide how much aid India needs.
All that is history. India`s economy is booming today. Money is coming in as investments. India still needs huge investments and aid related to infrastructure. For eg the idea of linking canals to connect major rivers in India is strongly being considered for implementation. S.C of India has given its opinion that this should be completed by 2020. A dedicated NRI in US is helping in technical matters but the cost runs into many billion dollars and cannot be completed without foreign aid.
India does not need aid for food or other essentials. With a booming foreign exchange (more than 80billion $ on last count), India has already paid off debt from smaller nations.
Sridhar

re:#12 by Romair
As India forges strategic alliance with US, improves trade with China and forges military alliance with Israel, it will be more difficult for Pak to extract anything out of India. India will simply wait for the day when Pak would be taken over by jehadists. That day will come when Mushy`s rule ends. India would not compromise on anything until jehad ends. Jehad won`t end because ending it would mean end of Mushy. So, wait until eternity.
Sridhar

re:#8 by rsaxena
Not just signing trade treaties, India is also putting diplomatic pressure on Pak. It is India`s way of saying`` if i can have trade with my enemy, forgetting about the border problem, what is wrong with Pak having trade with India and shelve the Kashmir issue for the time being``.
It makes eminent sense to tackle easy issues first and then go to the most vexed issue, which is Kashmir. But Mushy is no diplomat. Imagine this guy wanting to have a dialogue telling Pranab Roy that another Kargil cannot be ruled out. What was he thinking? The guy is a fukcing moron.
Sridhar

re: #12 by Romair on June 30, 2003 9:12am PT

A very well-reasoned post. However, I don`t agree with the proposal of granting independance to part of Ladakh bordering Kashmir Valley. Any proposal of independence is likely to be rejected by both India and Pakistan. That`s like asking India to give up not only the Kashmir Valley, but also parts of Ladakh and Jammu.

Pakistan should expect a minimal readjustment of the LoC instead of a maximalist one. But I agree that conversion of LOC into border is a non-starter because it ignores the fact that 38,000 to 70,000 Kashmiris died opposing it.

I hope Pakistan does not add conditionalities to its dialog offer as things pick up in the economy. At this rate, the recession will practically be over by early 2005. With improved credit ratings and favorable IMF reports, it is only a matter of time before the domestic and foreign investment start pouring in.

I don`t think we should negotiate any issues with India, we should demand the rights of Kasmiri people. we all know ``Hindus`` are inferior to Muslims.

One must admire today the great vision of the founder of Pakistan Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah and his fellow leaders about the two-nations theory. Quaid-e-Azam understood the Hindu mentality quite long ago. In 1934, in an address, he said: ``The Hindu sentiment, the Hindu mind, the Hindu attitude led me to the conclusion that there was no hope of unity.” “We (Muslims) are a Nation`` he asserted, ``with our own distinctive culture and civilization, language and literature, art and architecture, names and nomenclature, sense of value and proportion, legal laws and moral code, custom and calendar, history and tradition, aptitude and ambitions; in short, we have our own distinctive outlook on life and of life. By all canons of international law we are a Nation.``
Then on the resolution day, 23rd of March, while addressing to the annual Muslim League convention in Lahore, he said, ``Hindus and the Muslims belong to two different religions, philosophies, social customs and literature. They neither inter-marry nor inter-dine and, indeed they belong to two different civilizations, which are based mainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions. Their concepts on life and of life are different. They have different epics, different heroes and different episodes. Very often the hero of one is a foe of the other, and likewise, their victories and defeats overlap. To yoke together two such nations under a single state, one as a numerical minority and the other as a majority, must lead to growing discontent and final destruction of any fabric that may be so built up for the government of such a state.``

#46 by rsridhar on June 30, 2003 3:57pm PT

++
Jehad won`t end because ending it would mean end of Mushy
++

I disagree. Musharraf realizes that Jihad is a means to an end, not the end in itself. Although the lower ranking officers in Pak Army are still wedded to the idea of Jihad, the higher command understands that the Kashmir cannot be wrested away through Jihad. At best, Jihad can only internationalize the Kashmir issue (which it has). Final resolution has to come through US involvement (which has already been under way since last year, albiet behind the scenes).

Judging from the statements of Advani and Vajpayee, India too has signalled a shift from its ``atoot-ang`` position. Therefore, the policy of Jihad is no longer necessary for a final settlement of Kashmir.

In another 2 years, all Jihadi generals and remnants of Zia era will retire anyway. Then Musharraf will easily replace them with pro-West generals of his choice... just like he replaced Maj.Gen Mahmood Ahmed of ISI with Maj.Gen. Ehsanul Haq. This will remove any internal threats to Musharraf from ISI or Army.

Left to their own, the Mullahs cannot challenge Musharraf. They simply don`t have the numbers to do so. The Mullahs can only challenge Musharraf if they form an alliance with Benazir Bhutto, Chaudhry Shujaat, Nawaz Sharif and/or Altaf Hussain. Since none of these politicians support Jihad anyway, the Mullahs will be forced to tone down their hardline policy.

re: hrrehman

...would you please inform your countrymen of this so they stop naming their grocery stores and restaurants as ``indo-pak`` to win business....call the damn things paki and see how many people show up....

re:#24 by HisExcellency
Mushy has no personal integrity. He, like other Generals before him, uses Pak like his fiefdom. His hatred of India and jealousy of various things ``Indian`` shows. If Mushy had integrity, why would he dodge paying Income Tax (see my previous post). He could have set an eg in integrity by being one of the few Generals to pay the tax.
Sridhar

re:#19 by arjun_m
Do you know how much Mushy the whore paid as Income Tax?
``General Pervez Musharraf paid no wealth tax for five years on his extensive lands and properties, although he publicly announced in November 1999 that he had done so, a Pakistan Government Income Tax Department document obtained by SA Tribune reveals.

And finally when he did pay wealth tax in 1999-2000 on his assets worth much more than Rs 30-40 million in the market (or over half a million US dollars), he coughed up only Rs 710 or $12.``
And this is the guy who wants to do Pak some good!
complete story in Url:
http://www.satribune.com/archives/jun22_28_03/P1_taxstory.htm
Sridhar

musharraf is an idiot. pakistan is a failed state. pakistanis are terrorists. pakistan has no education, no democracy, no equality, no justice .it is worse than the worst in india etc etc. hey you intelligent indians we know that. tell us something new or go jump in the ganges coz
you guys are sounding like our mullah offering friday khutba.......

ps: sridhar loves to call musharraf a whore.......wonder how much sridhar paid for his tool??
pps: saxy:i know it aint fair, we will tell the grocerywallahs to remove india....

#6 ,#9
YOU KEEP Your PERVERTED VOCUBLARY TO UR SELF. I HAVE VISITED INDIA POVERTY,CRIME AND BEGGERY IS ALSO THERE.HALF OF THE POPUL aTION SLEEP ON FOOT PATH.,MOST OF THEM ARE UNDER NOURISHED,WITH DRACULA LIKE FACES.PAKISTANi are thank ful to india ,he by delaying kashmir solution,made pakistan nuclear power.

musharraf spoke wll as situation demanded.there are two solution
;1independent kashmir
:2:owen dixon formula.

musharraf spoke wll as situation demanded.there are two solution
;1independent kashmir
:2:owen dixon formula.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

harimau, rsaxena, babu, dost-mittar and my other bania cousins .........

............ since i have some bania blood running through my veins, (even though most of my relatives claim to to be syeds and qureshis) i fully understand the economics of being a ``donor`` nation - i was just yanking your chain, so quit getting your dhotis in a knot, you can hurt yourself ............ however, the fact of the matter remains that having billions in the bank does not necessarily make india a ``rich`` nation .......... but i will admit that it is a good start, and a heck of a lot better than the pathetic pakis who are running around with a begging bowl ...........

re:#48 by hrrehman
Let us qualify your statement: Paki muslims and Hindus are different. Heck, Paki muslims are different even from Bengali muslims, otherwise why would Bangladesh secede (I know, i know. The wily Indoos were responsible. But still, how about the Hamdoor Rahman report).
Secession of Bangladesh is the last nail in the coffin of ``Two nation theory``. You may or may not believe it but that is how it is. If it were not true, we should be seeing a big line in front of Pak embassy of Indian muslims wanting to migrate to ``the land of pure``.
So, you may continue to believe whatever gives you comfort. As Ghalib would say: ``Dil ke khush rakh ne ko Ghalib ye Khayal accha hai``. Wow, i am talking urdu poetry now!
Sridhar

not that i care, but here is what markets saw about india yesterday. btw both rating agenecies categorize india`s debt as junk.

Standard & Poor`s Keeps Negative Outlook on India (Update2)
2003-06-30 08:30 (New York)

Standard & Poor`s Keeps Negative Outlook on India (Update2)

(Adds possibility of revision to outlook in sixth paragraph.)

June 30 (Bloomberg) -- Standard & Poor`s maintained the
negative outlook and junk rating it assigned India in September,
citing rising public debt, a statement said.
India`s foreign currency long-term rating will stay at BB and
the outlook remains negative, the credit rating company said in
Singapore.
``Rising public debt, projected at about 95% of gross
domestic product this year, and growing fiscal inflexibility from
running general government deficits of about 10% of GDP over the
past few years, are the most pressing issues affecting the
sovereign`s creditworthiness,`` said Takahira Ogawa, credit
analyst at Standard & Poor`s said.
India`s budget deficit in the financial year ending March 31
remained unchanged at 5.9 percent of gross domestic product from
the previous year. India`s consolidated deficit, including the
deficit of the country`s 29 state governments, is 10 percent of
the GDP.
India is the eighth state to lose its investment-grade status
on local-currency debt since S&P started assigning the ratings in
1990.
S$P may revise its outlook to stable if the government
introduces proposed legislation to control budget deficits and
public debt and adopts value added tax, Ogawa said.
Efforts to implement the value added tax, a uniform sales tax
system aimed at replacing the myriad sales taxes that India`s
states currently levy, faces widespread protests from retailers
and political parties, who say the switch will increase red tape
and push up prices.
``The negative outlook reflects the risk that the
government`s debt burden may continue to rise rapidly over the
medium term, especially if GDP growth were to decelerate,`` Ogawa
said.

--Cherian Thomas in the New Delhi newsroom (91-11) 5179 2023 or at
cthomas1@bloomberg.net. Editors: Atkinson

Story illustration: Click on {CNP 08930330102 } for a tour of
top stories from South and Southeast Asia, the most active Indian
stocks, India economic indicators, and inflation tables and
graphs. Press spacebar to pause, {} to continue.

#53 rsaxena:
[...would you please inform your countrymen of this so they stop naming their grocery stores and restaurants as ``indo-pak`` to win business....call the damn things paki and see how many people show up.... ]

..you name your business Kolcata, Chennai, Kerala, ganapatirajgopalan-murlidharan grocery or Lahore grocery and see how many north Indians would go to Lahore as opposed to other places.....just go to jackson height and notice the amount of business sikh music store owners have compared to the bengalis music stores on the back side along the theatre and liquor store...it is not the indo-pak but language that sells...

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

re: sameer

{.. see how many north Indians would go to Lahore as opposed to other places.....just go to jackson height and notice the amount of business sikh music store owners have compared to the bengalis music stores on the back side along the theatre and liquor store...it is not the indo-pak but language that sells...}


...i am north indian and in the US i will go to any store that sells me what i need regardless of what it is named....my point was just that mr. jinnah was being a bit generous with the truth about pakistanis being from a different civilization or something...

Studebaker #62

`` As long as there is one Muslim in INdia (bharat after partitined Union of INDIA)..Theoreticaly he can marry his progeny and become refreshed INDIAN as only 56 yrs undivided Indian Unionof which Bdesh & Pak is integral AToot AANG hai :)) ``

Sorry if people want to hurt you govt can deny you entry and citizenship even if you marry an Indian Muslim. There is not a thing you can do.

Look no further than post 9/11 in USA

rsaxena #53

I am not sure what is in a name. I have patronized Middle Eastern grovery stores in the past.
I have no problem patronizing Pakistani groceries. All I care is the product is top quality and price is reasonable. Of course I might reconsider if I think the fellow is funding Jihadi movements back in Pakistan.

hamidm2 #55

Modern Macroeconomics is a lot more complicated than you think. Nobody said having billions in the bank make them rich. You need to have the equivalent of one year imports as FOREX reserves to handle debt payments, prevent currency speculations etc. India`s 75 billion dollar reserves is $75 per head. It is a pittiance. FYI USA, Canada, Australia, France have much larger foreign debts than India.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#59 by septran on June 30, 2003 6:25pm PT
HALF OF THE POPUL aTION SLEEP ON FOOT PATH.,MOST OF THEM ARE UNDER NOURISHED,WITH DRACULA LIKE FACES.

You don`t have to go that far just look at most of the Indians in US, they are scary
looking.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filt