The Indo-Pak Symbiosis: Brothers or Neighbors?

this is a nice thought, but if we try to reverse the 1947 partition, it will result in more tumult, upheaval and anarchy than what took place in 1947.

the trouble with south asia is that there are several identities within one identity, struggling with each other. its just like several alike cats in bag fighting and scrambling at each other within the bag.

but ironically, a further sub divison of the subcontinent or any of the countries in it will not help- it will leave it vulnerable and identity less.

pakistan zindabad.

Urstruly
Pakistani Army thought those Yemenis, Afghans, Uzbeks and Chechens were atoot ang.

#Dedicated to my friend Urstruly

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_18-3-2004_pg3_5

Why are only Muslims incensed when the French have banned all religious symbols from schools, including the Jewish skull cap, including large versions of the Christian cross? If Jews have no problem, if the Christians have no problem, why do Muslims have a problem?

What the devil did the Spanish do to deserve the train bombs that killed many hundreds of innocent people in Madrid the other day, babies, children and old folk among them? We do remember do we not, that the Spanish were vociferously against the invasion of Iraq? We do remember do we not, that despite the support their government led by former Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar gave to George Dubya, the people of Spain came out in millions to protest that dishonestly conceived war. Why then were they attacked in such a cold-blooded and vicious manner? What did the terrorists gain by making this wholly unprovoked attack, other than to turn the world even more against Muslims?

Isn’t this yet another example of the loonies doing the absolutely wrong thing? Of making the Muslims more enemies, as if their actions had not made us enough already? What in the world is wrong with this lot, for heaven’s sake; that they should behave in the most bizarre fashion all of the time? In this particular case, not only were the Spanish people against the Iraq war, the mass of them have been most welcoming to the poor from Muslim countries. Why then did the terrorists act in this inexplicably stupid, and incredibly cruel, manner?

Indeed, the attacks on the Spanish are not isolated attacks but seem part of a new campaign to attack European countries in general and France in particular. France? Well, why France too, when that country loudly opposed the US-led attack on Iraq, particularly that country’s arrogant unilateralism? We are told that there is now a written threat to the French by an hitherto unknown terrorist group that it will soon attack targets within France because of the banning of the Muslim headscarf in schools, and because the French are ‘swine-eaters and alcohol drinkers’!

Well, while I have a definite opinion on the banning of the scarf, first the proposition that the French are swine eaters and alcohol drinkers, and that therefore they should be blown up. Well, so what if the French eat pork and drink alcohol; what skin off the noses of the holy ones? How can they, cold-hearted terrorists and murderers, arrogate to themselves the right to speak down to someone else, indeed to determine what they should eat and drink?

As for the French banning Muslim girls from wearing the headscarf, it is their country, is it not? Should they not apply any law that pleases them, whether any foreigner likes it or not? Will those who agitate so at this act of the French be honest and answer this question: What if foreigners in this country asked that because it is not against their religion, pork should be served openly to them in restaurants and hotels and PIA flights?

In any case, why are only Muslims incensed when the French have banned all religious symbols from schools, including the Jewish skull cap, including large versions of the Christian cross? If Jews have no problem, if the Christians have no problem, why do Muslims have a problem? Must we always try and prove the point that we are a unique people, unlike all other people? Standing alone and completely apart from the rest of the world?

Why don’t those that threaten innocent French people and their children with death and destruction, those who like other of their compatriots and brothers-in-Islam in other European countries use (and misuse and abuse) the benefits provided by their ‘swine eating and alcohol drinking’ hosts, get out of these dens of sin? And migrate back to Algeria or Morocco, or Egypt, or Syria or wherever they came from in the first place? Even back to the Land of the Pure? In which case they will not have to be part of the secular and therefore rotten European culture they so detest, and live more fulfilling lives in the cradles of Islam that are the countries they sprang from, practising freely what they consider are the tenets of their religion?

Whilst the fault is mainly of those that bite the hand that feeds them, the Western states who opened their doors to all comers when they needed unskilled and semi-skilled workers to run their factories and buses and trains after the World War need to answer a question, too: Why didn’t they take cognisance of the antics of Muslim militant organisations within their own countries when they first began to poison the minds of young Muslims? Why did they not take action at the very time that these young and marginalised immigrants first began to show their teeth by actually invading British university campuses, for example? And spout the height of incendiary nonsense in the name of Islam?

Why didn’t these governments take a hard look at these militant organisations, let’s name one: the Hizb ut-Tahrir, formed in Palestine in 1953, now headquartered at 56, Gloucester Road, SW 7? Why didn’t these so-called ‘advanced’ countries pay any heed to the demarches and verbal requests of other countries, that the Hizb be stopped from advocating the overthrow (by any means) of the governments of countries as diverse as Turkey, Libya and Pakistan? Nobody listened then, for they were all sitting on their high horses: the only countries in the line of fire were other countries. Well, just deserts now, what!

It should be understood that the poison is spread far and wide now. Indeed, Britain is one of the countries most exposed. Let me here add my voice to that of my friend Irfan Husain, who whilewriting on these pages on the Guantanamo Five just a few days ago asked why these young men were in Afghanistan at all? This is not gainsaying the fact that they were probably most horrendously treated by the Americans; but what the devil were they doing in Afghanistan in the first place? Irfan is also right when he says that wanton acts such as the one in Madrid can only serve to put at great risk innocent Muslim immigrants in Europe, most of whom abhor terrorism like any other half-way decent human being.

Let me end by saying that during both the One-day matches there was this great big lump in my throat, and a tear in the old eye, when I saw the camaraderie and the bonhomie between the cricket fans, supporters of both the teams, Indians and Pakistanis. The slogan painted on many banners “We Want Peace” should send the message to our leaders loud and clear.

Oh, and kudos to General Musharraf for appearing at the Rawalpindi match looking so sure of himself, so cheerful. This is the only way to stare down his enemies.

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

from the CHOWK Archives...



Listen South Asia


Listen to the leaves in the wind

The gentle cry of the myna bird

And smell the mustard

On the breath of spring


I ask not for your silence now

As you plan the atomic future so well

While I cradle the past

With the firmness of the desperate


Your work never rests

Mine is all but forgotten but

Who knows why we cannot

Together weave common rope?


Listen to the children cry

Can you hear them?

Muslim or Hindu, all children

We often claim to be deaf yet

Hear their hunger

As our children cry


by

Ras H. Siddiqui

An email from an Indian professional after his vist to Pakistan for the first one day match in Karachi. Floating around in certain e-groups.
Subject: Pakistan

Folks,

This mail has nothing to do with work. just wanted to share certain very overwhelming experiences. Had been to karachi for the 1st one dayer on saturday.

1. Imagine 39,990 Pakistanis & 50 of us Indians cheering lustily `for` each other, throwing chocolates at us!!. Quite a few were carrying the flags of both countries imaginatively stitched together. Then they all stood to give a standing ovation to the Indian cricket team!

2. Guy on the street selling `bhuttas` refused to accept money saying that we were `mehmaan` in their country !!

3. people rushing to shake our hands on the streets & asking us to come to their home for dinner

4. Restaurant owners refusing to accept the bill payment after coming to know that we were from India

5. Everybody we met & we met quite a few, had some relative staying in India.

6. Star plus is the most favourite channel in Karachi

7. There was a TV star called Heena ?? who was sitting in the stadium, one pakistani put up a impromptu banner saying ``heena, will u marry me ?``!!

8. Shops gave us 40 to 50% discount...........India again

9. Taxis, autos, army guys......the list is endless.......everywhere loads of courtesy, respect.....more than we would get in our own country
!!!!!

It is really sad that we have an impression of that country that is so negative. I shudder to think of the plight of pakistanis who would come to india when the Indo-pak matches will happen here.

Sad, that we consider ourselves `secular` & yet will spare no thought before making negative statements on that country. It`s sad but true , this experience teaches one that......``Perception is not reality``.

Thank u for sparing your time.

Have a lovely day.

Warm Regards

satyamvada #47 I see you have avoided taking up my challenge to cut and paste the post where I wrote that ``it is ok to kill non-innocents``. If you put attribute something to me, you better be prepared to back it up. Or else stand exposed as a liar.

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

mohar11 #20
``The point is the ideas behind nations``

There is another essential difference between India and Pakistan. The state in Pakistan at some point of time seems to have declared itself as an ideological state.

BJP and the Sangh Parivar have attempted to follow suit by casting India, too as an ideological state(ideology of the Sangh of course). They have attempted to make it the norm to tag all Indians` points of view with their respective ideological distance from Sangh`s ideology, which Sangh claims is synonymous with the state, Indianness, patriotism etc. ALL THE MORE REASON BJP/SANGH NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT DOWN MANY PEGS.

Anyway, this problem has been around for longer in Pakistan. Underlying every contentious discussion is a tussle about who understands/represents the ideology of the state better.

Who has seen this thing called ideology of the state anyway? Do Bush or John Kerry ever say they represent `Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness` better than their opponent? No. Because it is understood that every American and his views are equally representative of the state, and this essential equality is not questioned(except in the McCarthy days, for example).

Claiming one has a closer adherence to purported `real ideology/intent` of the state makes for meaningless wrangling over pecking order.

So my suggestion to neighbouring country is to outlaw raising the ideology of state in discussions. There is apparently enough of it in the Constitution and the textbooks.

If some people advocate a particular role for religion in public affairs, let them do so under the understanding others have equal right to disagree. If people want to project certain other values in legislation or certain political positions in internal/external affairs, let them do so without their opponents measuring their purported distance from the mythical ideology of state.

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

Tahmed,
There is no need to start calling names. calm down.

No, you did not say that it is ``ok to kill innocents``

But, just like Musharraf you say ``it is ok to kill non-innocents``.
Now that is a distinction right ?

I would like to request you to consider the following questions ?
- Are kafirs - innocent or non-innocent ?
- Is it ok to kill Kafirs ? - because clearly ``the book`` says that kafirs must
be eliminated.
- Is Musharraf right in implying that it is ok to kill non-innocents ?
- who decides who is innocent and non-innocent ?
- is using the statements in ``the book`` for creating laws good or bad ?

The answers to these questions, which the majority of Pakistanis give,
- will dictate to a great extent the future of Pakistan.

A mature commentary in sharp contrast to the silly, sentimentality of this Mr. Bhaiyya.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_621691,00120001.htm

Our external relations look relatively calm. Our elections will be determined by other matters; and with the only power that can affect the world where it chooses also immersed in domestic preoccupations (Iraq excepted), what in international affairs needs any particular thought? Apart from watching out for the surprises the world has a habit of springing, we in India need to think more seriously than is our wont about the issues our next government must soon face. Pakistan and the US are not the be-all and end-all of our foreign policy. But they bring these issues into focus.

India today stands better placed globally than even the most carping critics can deny. That this should happen, to the surprise of many and the chagrin of some, under a party long considered narrowly inward-looking and, for all its great-power rhetoric, limited in its horizons, is essentially due to governments, even in democracies as loud-mouthed as ours, having far more latitude in foreign affairs than they themselves recognise. It has thus been possible for a handful in office — literally countable on the fingers of an incomplete hand — to take the appropriate decisions.

Since the glamour of summits wholly overshadows the sherpa-work that usually makes for their success or failure, the Islamabad meeting has obscured our national security advisor’s immediately-followed talks in Beijing — although this government’s attempts to get out of old ruts may in the long run be even more important vis-à-vis China than in almost any other external context. The two challenges that could have created excruciating difficulties — the American-led reaction to our nuclearisation and the Pakistan-led terrorism against our very nationhood — if not exactly things of the past, have been contained, the former even allowing for the continued search for more meaningful cooperation and the latter now seemingly set to do likewise.

Not that some things couldn’t have gone better — as always. Whether our full deployment against Pakistan last year (difficult to avoid given domestic pressures) served our interests as well as other responses might have will always remain debatable. Our on-off decision-making ways have unconscionably complicated the imperative dialogue with Kashmiris. And it evidently needed the PM’s recognition of public feelings to overcome some surprisingly strong urge to send troops to Iraq — but only after Washington had been allowed to expect we were going to. Such individual errors of omission or commission apart, our international situation looks at least fair enough to be spared electoral one-upmanship. Vain thought! Still, we must look further into the challenges ahead, the two described above as having been contained requiring particular examination.

Since the Indian public is persuaded that resuming India-Pakistan cricket ties is next-best to settling Kashmir, the games are on. Never mind that the world over, sports provoke the most virulent outbursts of chauvinism (consider Europe during football fever) — and that India-Pakistan hockey and cricket battles provide those rare occasions when all of India feels truly nationalist. The slogan of the day is that people-to-people contacts promote peace. Sports are a lively and popular form of contact, therefore they must do good.

It is such superficial attitudes that land us in trouble. No doubt real interaction between peoples — such as getting together constructively over common concerns including disputes — can mitigate the negativism often colouring official approaches, and dispel the ogre-images built up through decades of propaganda and lack of contact. But we will never get any significant easing of tensions, much less solutions of issues, by mindless reliance on fashionable platitudes — either friendly or hostile. What we need to fathom is what has happened to turn yesterday’s intransigent confrontation into the current hopefulness.

Guarding against our twin weaknesses — wishful thinking and modish cynicism — the objective reality is surely that both sides have found it convenient to take a breather to deal with other priorities. Alternative explanations lack both factual evidence and theoretical credibility. Of course, America urged talks. But it has put no real pressure. And to suppose that Islamabad has overnight decided that its age-old policy of confrontation was doing Pakistan more harm than good would be premature at the least.

The rise of terrorism within Pakistan has doubtless shocked its establishment into realising the need for drastic, if as yet unclear, domestic action. Indirectly the pressures Islamabad faces from Washington, both on the nuclear revelations and for doing more against al-Qaeda, add to the usefulness of détente with India — along with improving Pakistan’s international standing for re-entering the Commonwealth or joining the ARF. On our side, perhaps a deft handling of external relations adds to a leader’s general stature, even when such marginal benefits are hardly needed, as in the present case. More plausibly, seeking détente with Pakistan is intended to make the BJP family look less dubious about our own Muslims.

Unquestionably, the commitment to leave India-Pakistan relations moving towards full amity, long a major purpose of our prime minister, has also stimulated the current peace-search — though he is too much of a realist not to see the obstacles that remain so entren-ched. All in all, both sides really are taking time off.

Which implies, of course, not only that bad times can come again, but also that both sides still have to figure out how to tackle the basic issues. An impression is being fostered by outsiders that India’s agreement to discuss Kashmir derives from a decision to make concessions that could lead to a settlement. Anything that helps reduce tension is in principle welcome, provided false expectations are not engendered, to haunt us later.

Fundamentally, the maximum concessions India can make fall well short of the minimum Pakistan seeks. That could undoubtedly change one day — through various causes. But the only basis for enduring satisfactory change can be radical alterations of the maximum-minimum equation. When existing circumstances do not permit a solution, one must work to change the circumstances rather than devise ingenious formulae which we fool ourselves into considering as pathways to solutions.

Franco-German rapprochement, often cited to us for emulation, does carry unconsidered lessons. It worked because both sides felt a common threat, were helped by a common ally and, above all, had leaders determined to build upon the sentiment that they had had enough of conflict and must be friends. India-Pakistan relations lack all three compulsions. The more instructive, if indelicate, example is that of the US and the Soviet Union. Their former hostility — which incidentally always included a search for specific understandings sadly missing between India and Pakistan — might not quite have been succeeded by milk and honey. But there is widening cooperation, all because one side simply could not keep up with the other and decided the game was not worth the candle.

Pakistan would consider this very thought another example of India’s hegemonism. But it is a growing reality that India’s technical and economic potential is changing power balances. That potential faces two real threats: terrorism from Pakistan and small-mindedness among ourselves. The latter is beyond my scope, the former involves wider issues to be addressed in tomorrow’s article.

satyamvada #43 Like that other illustrious hindutva pal of yours - jay - I find you misquoting me. In other words, you are a liar.

So to you too I toss the challenge to prove you are not a liar by cutting and pasting anyplace where I said it is OK to kill innocent people.

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

Musharaff repeats what tahmed says - ``Islam prohibits killing of non-innocents``

http://www.dawn.com/2004/03/17/top3.htm

But of course, kafirs (like hindoos) can be killed as they are non-innocent.
The reason honor-killing is legal because the victim was really a non-innocent.

What Mushy does not state is that , the decision as to who is innocent or is not-innocent
is by what is stated in ``the book``.

This, my friends, is the difference between India and Pakistan.
Eating similiar types of naan and playing cricket does not mean anything.

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

re: The Whore speaketh
I was kind of worried that the tiger has changed its stripes. Mushy had not uttered the K word for sometime now and i was thinking `` what the heck is going on here?``. Just like a whore cannot thrive without sex (that is her profession), Mushy can`t thrive without bringing in the K word in every conversation.
I was much relieved that Mushy is the same old whore he used to be. Only he acts nicer now- a -days, no doubt due to the big bamboo stick that has been thrust up his A$$ by Uncle Sam, which i think is having a salutary effect.
The following article was an eyeopener. Peace is only a tactical move by Mushy. If things do not go well on the diplomatic front, expect the renewal of Jehad. We are told by this whore that it is in India`s interest to move ahead on the Kashmir front.
This is from one of the A$$ lickers, Inayatullah`s article:
http://www.sulekha.com/redirectnh.asp?cid=329636
Salient points:
1. The whore is still harping on the militants being ``freedom fighters`` and the ones who tried to assasinate him were different.
2. The whore is now telling India how much to spend on defense. ``your defence force levels are not based on threat but on power projection``.
I literally choked when i read that last sentence. Of course India is going to project its power far beyond its shores. It is a big country and in a different league than Pak. If the whore and Pakis do not understand this, they are deluding themselves.
It is clear that Mushy does not really want peace with India. What he wants is somehow to stay on his job and preserve the military power structure. If this can be done by having peace with India, he is willing. If not, he will do another one of his somersaults (Gosh! Even a whore has some morals; this guy has none) for which he has now become famous.
I say: to hell with the peace process. Let us preserve the status quo. I hope the fencing of LOC is going apace and will be over before the snow starts to melt.
Sridhar

re: A Paki`s complaint
Ha, ha, ha.
I am tickled now. Read the following:
http://www.sulekha.com/redirectnh.asp?cid=329612

``Pakistan actor Shaan is a superstar in his country. He is often called the Shah Rukh Khan of Pakistan. So he was in for a rude shock when he arrived in Mumbai for the FICCI Frames convention and discovered that no one recognised him.``

``The Pakistan delegation was also unhappy that Indians do not quite appreciate their television shows and films. ``The Indians have not accepted Pakistani films and dramas, unlike Pakistanis who have adopted Indian cinema,`` said Javed Sheikh, a Pakistani actor.``

``Indian television stars, actors and actresses are very popular in Pakistan,`` Sheikh added. ``When Urmila Matondkar went shopping in Pakistan, she was not charged a penny. No shopkeeper was willing to take money from her! But we have to introduce ourselves! Let`s hope people recognise us when we come next!``

Now, it is time for me to ask: Who the fukc is Shaan? Never heard of him.
Sridhar

``Bhaiyya`` Joshi - do you think a relationship between any pair of antagonists can be built out of emotions? Doesn;t that lead to

---

today we are happy so we love each other and tomorrow for some other emotional reason we hate each other.

Even relationships between indian states are tricky and require considerable institutional infra-structure. Neighbor states have quarreled over water (Karanata, Tamil Nadu), immigration (Biharis in Assam and Maharashtra), Language (North vs. South). It has been a long road of incremental progress. Some would say that it is yet to face its toughest test: when 10`s of millions of UPites and Biharis begin to move to the cities of the south in the next 20 years.

Where are the institutional supports for ``neighborly relations`` between india and pakistan? Today the BJP wants to use ``peace with neighbors`` for elections (nothing wrong with that!) and General Musharraf is desperately trying to find a success story for his western paymasters. Tomorrow all that may be gone and we will back to ``aar-paar yudh``. What wil prevent that? What are the shared goals of these societies? Who are the stakeholders who will actively move to mitigate conflict?


Without working these out, you are deluding yourself...

#27 by fuzair on March 15, 2004 9:45pm PT
//.... Why is it that the only ones who dream of a reunion are Indians? ....//

I agree. Some Indians just don`t get it. They still live in fantasy world - where there is a place called Akhand Bharat, land of milk and honey - the ``crown jewel`` of some forgotten crown.

But believe me - apart from Advani and some other deluded fools - nobody else in India wants to undo partition. It is simply impossible. Like I said earlier - fundamental ideas behind India and Pakistan as nations are poles apart and simply irreconciliable.

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

hamidm
//...what is it that we pakis supposedly have in common with the heeng-eaters from the wrong side of the border?...//

Much more than you have it with the buritto-eating Mexican or chilli-eating redneck from texas. And yet you all share the same nation - don`t you?

That`s not the point. The point is the ideas behind nations. Liberty and opportunity - that`s the idea that built America ..... and as long as paratha-eating pakis, pasta-eating italians, hing-eating hindoos and whatever-eating whoever subscribe to that idea - they can form a successful nation.

The ideas behind formation of Pakistan and India are diametrically opposite. Hence they should not unite. Jack fruit has nothing to do with it.

( Man - you are obssessed with this heeng thing. Who eats it anyway? I don`t even know what it looks like or smells like )

Joshi

I agree.

(just need to isolate the Qazi Hussains & Bal Thakrays amongst us & marginalize them)

this bhaiya joshi gona mad.he enlisted to brigrade of dost mitter(who gona sanile and new cortrie of sonia gandhi and got f*ckin slav`s mind of 1947),praful bidvai,mani ayeer,premsankar jha,kuldeep nayer.this ppl r ISI agents in india who converted to islam secretely and pratanding to be hindu.beware of this ppl.

this man praised jinnah who is the man behind genoside in india and who called direct action day(means kill kafir where u found,slay them,chop them.pure islamic ideology).
this bhaiyagi man either mad or secretely convert to islam.

#31
This line is rather puzzling too ` My background is Hindu, but I am not much of an ascetic.`

It is hard to imagine even the stereotypical soodosec-commie-Macaulyte-add-on-the-perjoratives being so ignorant as to equate Hindu = ascetic.

Prime suspect is chowk staff, IMHO, who appear unable to drive this djinn out of their systems :).

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

``...is it late to undo the infamous split of the brightest jewel in the British crown? The alluded process can lead the way to a federation with twin capitols, a unified province of Kashmir....``

Just out of idle curiousity, what have you been smoking? Must be some powerful stuff!

I agree that Partition was a horrible mistake BUT you can`t unbreak an egg. A ``Union of South Asia`` is as much an opium dream as was the original idea of Pakistan by Ch. Rehmat Ali. Why is it that the only ones who dream of a reunion are Indians? No Pakistani ever wants to get back together again. Certainly not my family who are from what used to be East Punjab. If anyone wanted `reunion,` it should be people like them. My father was 14 at the time of Partition and, while he wants to see what his old gaon now looks like, he certainly doesn`t want to undo Partition!

`` Hindu hai ek aankh musalmaan doosri``

arrey Bhaiyya Joshi sahib -- thanks for a visionary article -- with a 20/20 stereoscopic vision......

hasan

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

you don`t know jack !

............ i have no friggin idea what these guys are talking about ............. what is it that we pakis supposedly have in common with the heeng-eaters from the wrong side of the border? ......... okay, i will grant you that there are certain distasteful similarities between an arain from gojra and a jat from jullunder, but what do we have in common with a keralite or a telgu-type or a madrasi ??.............. as far as i can tell i have much more in common with a parisian - a passion for merlot and foie gras ..........so why can`t we join the french?............tell me, how many pakis put coconut milk in their karahi gosht?......... no one, yes?........... as far as we are concerned coconut is a fruit that is used in halwa and mithai.......... now, turn around and look at the the horrible hindoos - not only do they put it in their curries, they also put it on their head!.................

............ do you know what is a jack fruit?............you know why bangladesh is not part of pakistan any more?.............nobody in pakistan had ever seen a jack fruit while millions of bengalis were killed by falling jack fruits every year !

Am willing to bet my fat a$$ this article has been written by a Pakistani. Probably our friend Godot who`s been lying low for a while. the references are typically Pakistani- from Imran Khan to Noorjehan. The references to Gujarat and Ayodhya are a dead giveaway. Even the author`s name is far too contrived.

Bhaiyya, take off your mask and say what you really want to. This subterfuge vagera aint gonna work. Bhaiyya, appki ISI bhi naa kar paee aap kya teer marogay?

Idiot.

#23 by mohar11
``For all those who are feeling very mushy mushy - here is a reality check.

Back to Sqaure One ``

Aye! Aye!!

Just can`t trust the Pak army.

An extract from my recent post on another thread for reference.

``I doubt that it is something(better relations) the army wants to continue. They will control and would always like to be in a position to snap whatever relations develop. If the current state of affairs changes and the US eases its pressure, the army would just find an excuse to go back to square one. ``

``As long as genocide in Kashmir go on there cannot be peace. Peace without justice is not possible. ``

Urstruly, if we give you the valley and keep Jammu and Ladalkh will you be happy? Or do you want entire J&K so u can commit genocide on Hindus/Buddhists?

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

For all those who are feeling very mushy mushy - here is a reality check.

Back to Sqaure One

http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_619236,0012.htm
Pervez Musharraf ... indicated confidence-building measures would be held hostage to progress on Kashmir. He made a thinly-veiled call for the US to broker a Kashmir solution if it wants to dampen the fires of Islamic militancy.

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

~~During the partition riots and thereafter in four wars, more than a million Hindus and Muslims perished─most of whom had neither political affiliations nor a perception of a nation state~~

It is amazing how the Sikh dead can be made to dissapear with one sentence.


~~Are the Indian Muslims unhappy? Not any more than the Hindus. Fact, the Muslims succeed as much as others in India, and in every field.~~

Give me a break. Indian Muslims are shafted just like Hindus but Hindus do not live with the threat of state sanctioned lynch mobs being unleashed on them nor the subsequent political white washing of the brown KuKluxKlan brigades.

Apart from that this is really facile stuff.

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

sadna
//.. Indians of all shades were able to arrive at a quick and relatively untroubled consensus on a Constitution...//

Exactly. Those who believed in exclusive theories like TNT - demanded and got a separate piece of land where they can continue to practice and live in their own way. And for most part they have been true to their belief system. Islam and other exclusive ideologies reign supreme in land of pure.

And those who believed in Pluralism and other enlightened ideas - got a fair chance to practice it. And they have been successful - to a certain extent.

So let`s keep it that way. There is no point opening old battle of incompatible ideologies. A confederation or whatever with pakistan is a non-starter. As long as pakis keep their poisonus weeds to their own side of the border - we would all be happy.

hmm....More inane stuff.

Bhaiyya joshi must be sent to Kashmir in the spring as the snow melts,
so that he can hold hands with Praful Bidwai, wave candles and sing songs
to the jihadis as they infiltrate into India.

In typical ``dhimmi`` manner, Bhaiyya Joshi wants to prove to Pakistanis
that Muslims are safe in India. Also added in, is a little bit of praising
JeehNabhai as secularist.
The word secular is a most abused word indeed.

Hello B. Joshi

It is amazing that in the past 30 years the world has changed yet India and Pakistan

have yet to come out of their usual positions.

Let us try another scenario that may also lead to what you are proposing.

Let us come up with an honorable settlement of Kashmir and liberate the people

there from BOTH the terrorist/freedom fighter AND the Uniformed oppression of India.

After that what will the Pakistan Army have left to rally the masses with?

In the age of information, news travels by fast and is difficult to hide from people.

Kashmir appears to be the last hurdle towards a ``new`` relationship between official

India and Pakistan. This divide is not amongst our peoples and is artificial.

The Goras did a number on us via Kashmir.

It is time to think of the possibilities and outpacing their original craetivity.

A loose Confederation BEFORE or AFTER Kashmir?

The possibility of either is not as far fetched an idea as many may think.

People should matter. There is much to talk about and rediscover between Indians

and Pakistanis.

Good to see you and your ideas on CHOWK!

Ras

Have you heard of a country called Bangladesh? Why leave it out, poor thing?
If I may also ask, what is your plan to get Indians to live under Hudood ordinances or get Pakistanis to give up living under Hudood ordinances?

`` I have met many Pakistanis and was surprised a large number of them have views not essentially different from mine``

Indians and Pakistanis get along abroad because neither is running the government.

Dispute over the terms for sharing power in government was the issue which led to Partition, which if avoided at that time, could have happened with even more bloodshed at any time subsequently because the differences on this issue were so fundamental. Those differences have only grown over the years, so there is no going back.

Partition did do good, it helped realise the visions of founding fathers for people on both sides - Pakistanis of all shades donot have to deal with even a single Hindu from birth to death, much less share power with them and Indians of all shades were able to arrive at a quick and relatively untroubled consensus on a Constitution. How are you planning to get them to give up these respective advantages?

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

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

Mr Joshi,
Thats a wonderful article you wrote. However, I do have some comments regarding the right of land business.
You see, south asia has very limited resources and everyone is trying to extract as much as possible in a rather cut-throat manner. Do you really believe that in such conditions there should be one rule? A true democracy perhaps would be have a legion of many smaller autonomous states that would be able to govern internal affairs as they see fit. This essentially involves granting freedom (decision making power) to ethnic groups and states. What you see in kashmir is not a result of hindu-muslim hatred, but of struggle for power between different leaders who are able to use religion as a flag. Its all about money and power and therefore, it is best to allow several smaller units of power to balance out the utitlity of resources and keep one group from overpowering the other. I know thats very idealistic, but like you said its unreceptive enviroment that concocts new ideas.
Perhaps its time for all of us to grow up and stop dreaming of one india, rather think of it as a collection of many independent states that are bound by mutual interests.
A common analogy is when in a jount family people cannot get along and then eventually they split up. Often times the relations get better later on as distance lessons the intensity of aggression. Perhaps you have seen that too.
In any case it will take many years before the two stupid countries will stop fighting. And it will take many many many broadminded people to make this happen.

Bhaiyyaji,
I think you are getting emotionally carried away with the current warm-up of relations between the two countries. It is ridiculous to go from extreme hatred to becoming one nation/federation. A much better model is the US-Canda relations or European Union type relations where the two countries maintain complete sovereign status while having open borders, free movement of people, cultural exchnges and extensive economic cooperation.

Also, the Kashmir issue will be resolved via some sort of a grand compromise, maybe along the lines of N.Ireland solution. There may not be territorial exchange but mechanisms may be put in place where Kashmiris run their own affairs with defence, foreign affairs etc. jointly managed by India and Pakistan. That way all sides keep their honour and get what they want on the ground.

=== 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

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

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

I agree with the writer (like whom, I live in the US) that the two countries have a special relationship. For fifty years, the relationship has been of two siblings quarelling over a piece of turf, and by now they have worn themselves out of quarelling and the general public has clearly shown that they have no quarrel with one another. I can see the paper tigers of chowk getting stomach cramps on seeing the karachi cricket match - but that is nothing more than what I have been saying for the past 3-4 years on chowk: those who seek a continuation of hostilities on one pretext or another are on the wrong side of history. Time is proving my prediction to be correct.

I would only add that we should go beyond just establising close links: we should have peace but with ``malice towards none``. Thus, instead of the two Abduls joining hands to do what they seem best able to do (build weapons), I would suggest we get rid of both Abduls along with the damned nukes and missiles they are associated with and focus our energies on poverty alleviation. Rather than being inspired by nationalistic fervor, I think the writer should be inspired by something even bigger and better: those are the ideals of his adopted country (the US), where people from all over the world come and spend their energies fighting the real battle on behalf of all mankind: the battle to further our scientific borders, the battle to find cures for diseases. The Abduls of South Asia as well as the hatemongerers of South Asia are relics of our animal past. They have no place in that noblest of struggles - the struggle to improve the quality of life for all mankind, the struggle in which the US is at the forefront.

I agree with the writer (like whom, I live in the US) that the two countries have a special relationship. For fifty years, the relationship has been of two siblings quarelling over a piece of turf, and by now they have worn themselves out of quarelling and the general public has clearly shown that they have no quarrel with one another. I can see the paper tigers of chowk getting stomach cramps on seeing the karachi cricket match - but that is nothing more than what I have been saying for the past 3-4 years on chowk: those who seek a continuation of hostilities on one pretext or another are on the wrong side of history. Time is proving my prediction to be correct.

I would only add that we should go beyond just establising close links: we should have peace but with ``malice towards none``. Thus, instead of the two Abduls joining hands to do what they seem best able to do (build weapons), I would suggest we get rid of both Abduls along with the damned nukes and missiles they are associated with and focus our energies on poverty alleviation. Rather than being inspired by nationalistic fervor, I think the writer should be inspired by something even bigger and better: those are the ideals of his adopted country (the US), where people from all over the world come and spend their energies fighting the real battle on behalf of all mankind: the battle to further our scientific borders, the battle to find cures for diseases. The Abduls of South Asia as well as the hatemongerers of South Asia are relics of our animal past. They have no place in that noblest of struggles - the struggle to improve the quality of life for all mankind, the struggle in which the US is at the forefront.

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

//..Whatever may be the brutal truth, is it late to undo the infamous split of the brightest jewel in the British crown?..//

Yes it is. The damage is done and for most part - irreversible.

Also - stop using phrases like ``brightest jewel in the British crown``. It means what ? A 5000-year-old civilization that went from Riches to Rags within a couple of century under the rule of the British Crown. And till date, remains a $hit-hole compared to any other signficant nation in the whole world.

So how does this translate to ``Jewel`` in anybody`s crown?

yeah times have changed. it used to be munh maiN churri baghal meiN Ram Ram just a month ago and now it is baghal maiN churri aur munh maiN Ram Ram now.

The Muslim of subcontinent are fighting a mortal combat for their freedom and such shenanigans have never been able to prevent freedom movements to achieve their objectives though all oppressors and genocidal maniacs never get tired of using them.

wafa karo gay wafa karaiN gay
jaffa karo gay jaffa karaiN gay

Hum insaan haiN tumhaare jaise
jo tum karo gay woh hum karaiN gay.

As long as genocide in Kashmir go on there cannot be peace. Peace without justice is not possible.