A Bold Agenda for United Progressive Alliance (UPA)

Well its congress time and its missile time in pakistan. I guess the blackmail has started again..........will the congress wilt and hand over Kashmir. The congress has to decide between being wnating to be obliterated by not handing Kahmir over and living to tell the tale.....

the news item:

Pak to test-fire 3500 km long-range missile in June


Friday, 21 May , 2004, 15:03

Pakistan is all set to test-fire on June 3 its new long-range ballistic missile Ghauri-III, which is capable of carrying a nuclear warhead and having a range of 3,500 km covering all major cities in India.
Discuss: Pakistan is asking for trouble!



The missile, which has a range of 3500 kilometres compared to the 2000-km Shaheen missile test fired in March, would be launched from the firing range near Nowshehra into the Arabian Sea, official sources were quoted as saying on Thursday.

Prime Minister Mir Zafarullah Khan Jamali was informed of the details of the test when he visited the country`s premier nuclear installation Khan Research Laboratories (KRL) on Thursday, English daily The Nation reported.

It said, according to officials the missile could be tentatively test fired on June 3, close on the heels of a new government headed by Manmohan Singh assuming office in India.

Based on liquid fuel, Ghauri-III is a ground-to-ground ballistic missile. If test fired, Ghauri-III would be the second long-range missile developed by the KRL. It had test fired 2500-km range, Shaheen-II in March.

anil:
Your friend`s wife probably knows more about Manmohan Singh, the professor.
(btw what happened to your plans to visit north?)

nakhok#54
``A quarter million of Kashmiris (the Pandits) have been forced into exile by the merciless terrorists let lose on Jammu & Kashmir by the ISI.``

We should resist the tendency to blame everything on the ISI. The pandits were driven into exile by the JKLF goons, the same people who are often eulogised as the secular elements within the separatist movement who are disliked by the Pakistan govt.

nakhok:
``By some accounts, Indira Gandhi and Bhutto arrived at an unwritten agreement that the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir would be accepted as the border. Bhutto pleaded that he be not compelled to commit this in print, which would have undermined his political standing in Pakistan. Indira Gandhi agreed. ``

If your leader was stupid enough to believe in ``unwritten agreement``, and one which was not backed by a statement at that time of the existence of such an agreement even by Indira Gandhi, then why blame Bhutto for outsmarting your leader?


HE#57
``Besides the soft borders, the UPA will also have to think about a comprehensive economic package for Kashmir Valley, release of political prisoners, and reduction in troops if it really needs to normalize Kashmir.``

Vajpayee had already started substantial economic program for J&K, especially the billion dollar program of building a railway-track right up to Srinagar which is generating large number of jobs in the state; release of political prisoners has also been proceeding at a steady pace. Reduction of troops will follow automatically as/if the insurgency subsides.


``But normalization is still not the same thing as integration. For the latter, a political concession (e.g. Autonomy within Indian Union) will perhaps be necessary. Do you think the UPA is capable of such measures?``

This is where the BJP govt. would have been an advantage. Congress in opposition would have accepted such compromise; the BJP in opposition, on the other hand, is likely to call it treason on the part of the Congress. In any case, talks with Hurriyet as well as Pakistan will, in all likelihood, be quite protracted and who knows which party will be in power if and when these talks culminate in an agreement?

nb#62:
I am aware that there are ``inglish medium convant`` schools even in the slums of Delhi. But one can count on the genius of the Indian bureaucrats to devise a system which excludes them from any levy. In my opinion, even govt. schools are better than these shops; they hire unqualified teachers and pay them a pittance (while forcing them to give receipts for a higher salary) and should be closed down.
..I do not see any problem in teaching that islam -as opposed to muslims- came from outside.

No, they didn`t accept my agenda:(

From The Hindu:

CMP seeks 8% GDP growth; for selective privatisation
New Delhi, May 21. (PTI): Seeking up to 8 per cent annual growth and eliminiate deficit by 2009, the draft Common Minimum Programme of the new United Progressive Alliance Government today said there would be no privatisation of crucial oil and power PSUs like ONGC and NTPC and rejected the idea of automatic ``hire and fire`` in labour policy.

Committing to step up public investment in agriculture and irrgiation and employment oriented growth in the country, the draft, circulted among the allies and supporting parties of the Congress-led government, promised major tax reforms, broadening of tax-payers base and a stable and conducive tax rate for growth and investment.

``A detailed roadmap for accomplishing this will be unveiled in Parliament within 90 days,`` it said.

It said reforms would be aimed at stimulating growth, investment and employment with particular thrust on ``rural prosperity``.

It also pledged to develop capital markets through tax and other policies to refelect true fundamentals of the economy while warning of strict action against market manipulators.

``All privatisations will be considered on a case by case basis. The UPA will retail ONGC, IOC, HPCL, BPCL, GAIL, NTPC SAIL and BHEL in the public sector while disinvestment takes place,`` the draft said.

# 66 by dost-mittar

+++++
The pandits were driven into exile by the JKLF goons, the same people who are often eulogised as the secular elements within the separatist movement who are disliked by the Pakistan govt.
+++++

Those that take genuine pride in Kashmiriyat, are most unlikely to turn on fellow Kashmiris just because they are ``infidels``. The Pandits were driven out on the morrow of Russia`s defeat in Afghanistan when a lot of ``Mujahedeens`` had to look elsewhere in search of ``infidels``. These foreign ``Mujahedeens`` played an active role in instigating the ``JKLF goons``. But these veteran ``Mujahedeens`` from Afghanistan were not the type who would desist from contributing more directly to the exodus of the Pandits whenever afforded a chance to do so. And they did so with gusto.

So, the task before any Indian government is two-folds:

(1) To cut off the inflow of ``Mujahedeens`` from across the LoC who have a vested interest and an ideological compulsion to impose PoK`s religious homogeneity on the rest of Jammu & Kashmir.

(2) Make sure that Kashmiriyat, the embodiment of the region`s composite culture, gets its say over the ``JKLF goons`` who have come to subscribe to the Mujahedeen`s evil ideology of cleansing Jammu & Kashmir of all infidels.

The first task can be accomplished by forcing Pakistan`s military to live up to the promise extracted out of General Pervez Musharraf of ending cross-border terrorism.

The second can be accomplished by giving the Kashmiris an economic as well as an emotional stake in remaining with India. And if more autonomy helps toward this goal, then so be it.

India has absolutely no cause to yield the high ground to ``JKLF goons`` just because they make their unholy exclusivist demands under the banner of ``self-determination``.

Even as they mouth ``self-determination``, ``JKLF goons`` pursue an obnoxios exclusivist ideology that blatantly infringes on the fundamental rights of the Pandits and other minorities. It matters little if they have majority support or not - majority support is just not enough to turn an unholy war into a holy war. Thus, even if a referundum in Iran were to validate Ayatollah Khomeni`s fatwa against Salman Rushdie, it will not turn the deadly fatwa into a fair and democratic action.

Cries of ``self-determination`` are nothing more than unholy shibboleths if they are merely the means to destroying the age old regious diversity of the land. Here`s an article that articulates the immeasurable pains of the Pandits at the hands of the ``JKLF goons`` carrying out a ``holy war`` under the banner of ``self-determination``..

---

The Horizon
30th October, 1998

Self-determination Isn`t Always Sacred
by Pravin Satsangi

Self-determination is fast becoming the most abused concept of our times. When Woodrow Wilson coined the word, it was to verbalize his compassion and concern for fellow human beings. But the political arm of terrorists,like those in Kashmir, use the word in a way that is a travesty of the lofty principles that had animated President Wilson and is a cruel mockery of human rights. No one can possibly be left in doubt about this once he witnesses the plight of the quarter million Kashmiri Hindus who have had to flee their ancestral home in the face of fanatical terrorists from abroad seeking self-determination for the Muslims in Kashmir.

The political representatives of the terrorists in Kashmir weave the word ``self-determination`` into their righteous chants in a clever public relations effort to glean support for their goal of turning Jammu and Kashmir in the mold of ethnically cleansed Pakistan. The world needs to be informed that self-determination of ``their`` people is ruthlessly violating the human rights of others.

Self-determination is indeed a basic human right. But it loses its sanctity when self-determination of a group implies marching orders for the rest. Ofcourse, people don`t leave their homes voluntarily. They have to be persuaded. That means killing them untill everybody gets the idea.The massive ethnic cleansing of 1947 in Jinnah`s Pakistan is an example of self-determaination of this evil variety. Pakistan lived upto its name by becoming a ``cleansed land`` within weeks of independence. And now Kashmir is taking a leaf out of Jinnah`s book. Self-righteous chanters of ``self-determination`` with direct Pakistani assistance seem well on their way to stamping out religious diversity from Jammu and Kashmir.

Will we never learn the cruel lessons of history? The previous UN Secretary General Boutros-Ghali put it about as bluntly as could be: ``If every ethnic, religious or linguistic group claimed statehood, there would be no limit to fragmentation. Peace, security and economic well-being for all would become even more difficult to achieve.``

Self-determination for a group must never sanctify the violation of human rights of another. Automatic self-determination, for whosoever shouts the loudest, is a sure recipe for tragedies like Kashmir. It is the greatest of evils to allow one person`s self-determination to degenerate into his neighbour`s extinction. Kashmir desperately calls out for respite from fanatical terrorists from abroad who have turned the land into a living hell.

Abraham Lincoln courageously faced down those that chanted ``secession`` to perpetuate the evil of slavery. We, too, must summon the courage to confront those that chant ``self-determination`` in heedless pursuit of Jinnah`s evil ideology of religious apartheid.

---

dost-mittar #67

``This is where the BJP govt. would have been an advantage. Congress in opposition would have accepted such compromise; the BJP in opposition, on the other hand, is likely to call it treason on the part of the Congress. In any case, talks with Hurriyet as well as Pakistan will, in all likelihood, be quite protracted``

This was my impression as well. The common Indian is too deeply embroiled in economic, health and communal problems to worry about Indo-Pak relations, Kashmir or other external issues. Economic policy and social welfare are likley to take precedence over foreign policy in general (not just viz-a-viz Pakistan) under UPA rule. I would agree with the UPA`s focus on domestic issues, instead of external ones. As they say, all politics is local.

# 67 by dost-mittar

+++++
If your leader was stupid enough to believe in ``unwritten agreement``, and one which was not backed by a statement at that time of the existence of such an agreement even by Indira Gandhi, then why blame Bhutto for outsmarting your leader?
+++++

I don`t think it is a question of blame apportionment. From what I have heard, Indira Gandhi was advised by her aides about both sides of the coin. One side said that this is a golden opportunity to impose a settlement once and for all. The other side said it would result in a settlement smelling so much like the Versailles Treaty that a Pakistani Hitler in the future would have no difficulty in abrogating it unilaterally - better to allow Bhutto some breathing space in the hope that ultimately he`ll be able to sell the ``unwritten agreement``.

Indira Gandhi decided to put faith in the latter argument and allowed Bhutto to ``get away``. It was certainly a gamble. And it is certainly possible to argue that the wily Bhutto never ever had the intention of living up to that, even if he had remained a strong, secure leader after a respectable distance in time from the December 1971 surrender. But we`ll never know for sure.

In my opinion, it is a little too harsh for dost-mittar to denounce Indira Gandhi in hindsight as ``your stupid leader``. I don`t think it was an unreasonable gamble on Indira`s part in the morrow of the Dhaka surrender. It was a gamble that promised lasting peace if it worked out.

In retrospect, it didn`t. Whether Bhutto had negotiated in bad faith or he never really got a chance to pursue it from a respectable distance in time from the Dhaka surrender, we`ll never know.

Once bitten twice shy - the experience will inevitably have a strong influence on all future negotiations. Any Indian government has to insist in the light of this experience that the way to peace is for Pakistan to officially agree to respect the LoC as the international border between India and Pakistan.

dost-mittar #51
``..and he comes from the same potohar region of Pakistan that my parents do.``

Yes, Dr. Manmohan Singh was described in a news report as the second Indian PM born in Jhelum :).

Thanks for sharing your impressions of him.

``But dont you think that empowering Panchayats with funds for schools will also improve the quality of education? ``


The Sarva Shiksha Abhiyaan (which is currently in force) aims to do so.

http://ssa.nic.in/ssafram.asp#1.0
Excerpts from SSA framework documents:

``An effort at effectively involving the Panchayati Raj Institutions, School Management Committees, Village and Urban Slum level Education Committees, Parents` Teachers` Associations, Mother Teacher Associations, Tribal Autonomous Councils and other grass root level structures in the management of elementary schools. ``

``All funds to be used for upgradation, maintenance, repair of schools and Teaching Learning Equipment and local management to be transferred to VECs/ School Management Committees/ Gram Panchayat/ or any other village/ school level arrangement for decentralisation adopted by that particular State/UT. The village/ school-based body may make a resolution regarding the best way of procurement. ``


There was this very sarcastic article about it which forced people like me to go dig up the details.
http://www.expressindia.com/election/fullestory.php?type=ie&content_id=43085
Education Shining
The amazing saga of how 30 million kids were put into school in 12 months

Another news report even said that the concerned Union Ministry feels the enrolment figures submitted by certain states are too good to be true and is sending central teams to investigate. I believe the loophole is the new definition of enrolment and school in SSA which ultimately serves to hide the real state of affairs.

sadna:
I think that the intent as well as the design of SSA was soundd. The rest is a matter of proper auditing to ensure that the program is implemented and administered as planned.

nakhok:
``In retrospect, it didn`t. Whether Bhutto had negotiated in bad faith or he never really got a chance to pursue it from a respectable distance in time from the Dhaka surrender, we`ll never know``

Yes, the 20/20 hindsight is wonderful. But even without it, Mrs. Gandhi should have been in a position to know that she was dealing with an unreliable individual on the basis of his past performance. If he had been unfaithful to his own bosses in his country, where was the reason to believe that he would be any different with the leader of the country he regarded his enemy.

arjun_m #53
``when was the last time you heard about an ``international body`` success story in reducing poverty... ``

I do not know enough to agree or disagree with you and I have not been keeping track of international body success stories. If they only compile statistics, that too is good value for money. Then perhaps they pay enough rent to keep Switizerland solvent, so that it is prevented from attacking its neighbours. Now that`s being useful.

Here is one thing which Amartya Sen said which is not earthshaking but relevant:

``He felt that China`s post-reforms policies were indebted to pre-reform policies and India could learn from China how to best use a market economy and at the same time not lose social commitments. ``The most successful economic growth in the world is in China. We need to learn a lot from them,`` he said, but hastily added, ``we have nothing to learn from China as far as democracy is concerned.``

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

rahul_capri #55
``Along with political will it is going to take some radical thinking too.I actually liked the idea of Kalyan Singh govt in UP to make cheating a cognizable offense. It was going a great way in cleaning up the stables. ``

If I am not mistaken, the reason Kerala achieved high literacy was because the commie governments took a lot of interest including threatening to sack governemnt school teachers who did not enroll sufficient students in their neighbourhoods. Of course that required support from the local commie cadres otherwise such a punitive measure on teachers by another party`s government would only lead to the commies going on strike.

#72 by nakhok
# 67 by dost-mittar

Here is my perspective of what happened at Simla in 1972 between Mrs.Gandhi and Bhutto.

I hope we are clear about the backdrop of that meeting in Simla and there is no need to go in detail there.
You are missing one huge element that was the main reason for Simla meeting. The 90K Pakistan prisoners; most of them army personal.

There were two issues there.
First, India never intended to keep those prisoner in Indian custody for long. There was also lots of International pressure that was bearing down on India.
Secondly, Bhutto himself was under tremendous pressure from the Pakistan army generals to bring the prisoners back.
Bhutto also was looking for ways to ensure that somehow he is not overthrown by the army as a result of failure of talks in Simla.(That happened eventually). India felt the need to support a civilian -and perhaps last democratically elected- govt in Pakistan. It was clear that if Bhutto failed to get the prisoners back, he will not only lose support of the Pak Army but also lose support of people in Pakistani Punjab, who were the most affected party in Pakistan.

Mrs. Gandhi took a prudent decision. She freed the prisoners and in the process might have helped Bhutto to avoid a coup for as long as he could.

I would not put it beyond Bhutto that he might have suggested a status quo in Kashmir. I am also inclined to think that he may have offered to make LOC a permanent border. One thing that we need to remember that after Simla agreement Bhutto never talked about Kashmir and any 1000 years of war with India. Kashmir and 1000 years of war were his constant mantra before the 1970 elections in Pakistan.

That alone makes me think that Bhutto did make some promises to Mrs. Gandhi and it appears to me that he did honor them until he lost favor with the army.

“Once bitten twice shy - the experience will inevitably have a strong influence on all future negotiations.”

It seems to me there is an unwritten policy within the India Admin, they avoid signing agreements with the Pak Army. If you look at the history of Pak-India agreements, there is only one agreement that India signed with the Pak Army, and that was in Tashkent 1n 1966.
Rest of the signed agreement were always with a civilian govt. last being the Lahore accord in 1999.
You may also recall that before going to Agra in 2001, Musharaf took over as the president of Pakistan and before the Saark summit in Islamabad last year he forced president vote on Pak national assembly. ABV visited Islamabad soon after, and some progress was made in India Pak relations; still no agreement. Go figure.

It turns out Manmohan Singh is from Chakwal. Right next to Jehlum. Gujral was from Jehlum. Jehlum, since it is not feudal, doesn`t produce any powerful politicians in Pakistan. Hence its chance of producing a PM in Pakistan, are next to nill.

But, the area has already produced two in India.....Go figure....

Everyone from Jehlum and Chakwal goes into the military. So following that rule, is Manmohan Singh from a military family? Sardarji from Chakwal. Has military written all over it..........

HisExcellency/Dost-Mittar #various: There is only one solution that is going to work in Kashmir, at least, as far as I know.

People tend to take Kashmiris` own views for granted. Those of us who have family there, will tell you that Kashmiris are quite emotional about their land. Pakistan`s Kashmir is still not a part of Pakistan, officially. It has its own flag and President and govt. If you ask Pakistani Kashmiris, when they will join Pakistan, they will tell you that they are waiting for their brethren on the other side of the border to get free, first.

So, for them it is serious stuff.

Very few Indians have any idea about what is going on in Indian Kashmir. Hardly any of them have lived there. At most, they have visited once in their life. It is almost a foreign land to them. What does a guy in Tamil Nadu know about Kashmir? There is no attachment amongst Indians, for Kashmir, other than the Pakistan factor. Indians have far more in common with Sri Lanka and Nepal (or with Bangladesh and Pakistan`s Punjab, for that matter) than with Kashmir.

There are a few realities that need to be accepted, so that people don`t remain in a state of denial. Any solution that does not revolve around these, will never work:

- Pakistan cannot take India`s portion of Kashmir militarily
- India cannot take Pakistan`s portion of Kashmir militarily
- Given the chance, Indian Kashmiris (at least in the Valley) will overwhelmingly vote to separate from India
- Pakistani Kashmiris will 100% vote to join Pakistan (I will vote twice)
- India cannot control the insurgency in Kashmir, even if the insurgency doesn`t have Pakisatani support The population of Kashmir is more pro-insurgent, than pro-India. That is how the insurgents survive, with local support. That is why the insurgency is still going on today and the elections were attacked and boycotted
- The human rights violations in Kashmir, according to international Human rights sources, are so huge, that it will open a Pandora`s box for India, if they start coming out (I say this with all seriousness and with references)
- India has crossed the point of being able to successfully integrate Kashmir with India. It hasn`t been able to do so, over 55 years, and with all the killings now, it is beyond the point of no return
- Pakistani do not want to go to war with India, over Kashmir
- However an overwhelming portion of Paksitani population (according to surveys) does consider a solution to Kashmir central to peace with India, ie. no govt. in Pakistan can survive if it shortsells Kashmir

So this is where we stand, today. I don`t think India can fight insurgencies in Kashmir, like it is currently doing, for decades and decades in the future. And it cannot integrate Kashmir into India. And it will be unwilling to let is Kashmiris vote and join Pakistan. No Pakistani govt. can take Kashmir military, but none can survive by dropping the cause all together.

So what the solution.

I know of only one that will work, and which to a great deal matches the voting patterns. Pakistan gets Azad Kashmir. India gets Jammu and Ladakh (or most of it). The Valley becomes an independent entity, either on its own, or with joint control of some sort, between India, Pakistan and UN, or UN, or just India/UN etc. The Valley is actually very tiny. Most Indians probably don`t even know where it starts, where it finishes etc.

I have a gut feeling that Musharraf and Vajpayee had agreed to some variation of the above. That is why Musharraf made such a huge policy change by dropping UN Resolutions. He would never have done that, without knowing beforehand that Vajpayee was ready to give up something in return......

If anyone else has any bright ideas, I am all ears. The other option, of course, is that we continue fighting each other, forever and ever.

P.S. There is an X factor in all this, that no one is considering. Usually, in freedom movements, it is the occupying country that is in trouble. While the country supporting the movement is on the offensive. Since the country supporting the insurgency only has to supply small arms, which barely cost anything, while the occupying country has to deploy its whole Army in the area. Much like the scenario in Bangladesh, where Pakistan was in trouble.

However, in Kashmir, Pakistan is the country that has suffered internally more, even though India has had to deploy 500k to 700k troops in Kashmir (4 to 5 times the size of the US military deployment in Iraq, in an area smaller than Iraq). This is because, from the movement the insurgency started, around 1990, Pakistan`s economy has been in a nosedive. Despite the much lower costs to Pakistan in the Kashmir conflict vis-a-vis India, Pakisatn`s economy was unable to sustain the conflict.

However, now Pakistan`s economy has stabliized and is poised to grow. And Pakistan`s position in the international arena is much stronger politically. If India wanted to force a miltiary solution on Pakistan, the best time was right after the coup. Pakistan was isoalted and bankrupt. I had actually suggested, at that time, that it is now or never for India, as far as military solutions go. It waited and then acted a few years later, by piling up troops. By that time, it was too late, since Paksitan was out of the doldrums.

India needs to take the scenario into account, where Pakistan is growing economically. What if that happens? What if at that point, Pakistan starts laying down conditions on Kashmir, much like India has been laying them down? What if India waits too long to solve Kashmir, and Pakistan concludes that it will continue paying the small costs of keeping the insurgency growing, since it has huge costs on India, and keeps half of India`s Army occupied in Kashmir? With a strong economy, Pakistan could do so quite easily, much like India did in Bangladesh.

So I think Indians need to act on the room and goodwill that currently exists, and try to solve Kashmir. It is in their interest also. They have been too late on the military option. I cannot see Pakistan ever being as weak as it was during the time the coup occurred. It is extremely difficult for even a powerful country like USA to fight a freedom movement indefinitely, just because of ego. Imagine what a mess Pakistan would have been in, had Bangladesh not separated, and India had been able to support an insurgency there indefinitely. It was good for Pakistan that there was a clear end to that problem. It will be good for India if there is a clear end to Kashmir also.......

Manmohan Singh needs to tread carefully. I think once trade starts, and the image of the Pakistani monster is removed from the Indians` minds, most Indians (being decent people) will agree to the above solution. Specially since, barely any of them, have any links with Kashmir. From Pakistan`s side, by dropping the UN Resolutions has meant that it has already accepted it.

If Indians don`t accept a compromise solution, and keep the status quo going, they may Bhagwan help us. Because Allah will have refused to help us by that time. Right now Pakistan is in a hurry to solve Kashmir, while India is not/ What if Pakistan, one day, with a stronger economic base, also says it is not in a hurry to solve Kashmir?

From Pakistan`s side, Pakistan needs to sit back for five to ten years, and try to get 7-8% economic growth rates (quite possible now), for the time being, and keep encouraging India to solve Kashmir.......

Romair -- sink or swim -- the Valley is an `Attoot Ang` of Jammu and Ladakh -- may be it was BJP idea -- but it certainly wont float with Manmohan Singh......with Arif khans and bashir badres and madam Heptullah joining the Bjp....... the Hurriiyet loving Hurriyet better start opening its ranks for Kashmiri Hindus Kashmiri Sikhs Kashmiri Christians and Kashmiri Buddhists as well.......:-)