My other writings
Cricket 24 x 7
Jaagruthi
Yahoo! 360
Mayajaal
My Bloglines
My 43 things
My LinkedIn
On Orkut
Badri's Tamil thoughts
Ganesh's Happily Haphazard
Nitin's Acorn
Prabhu's Pethals
Raghu the reluctant Delhiite
Samanth's blahg
Sankhya the busy idler
Srini the movie critic
Rabble Rousing Random Ramblings by S Jagadish is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License.
Explain this dramatic u-turn. Pakistan yesterday struck a deal with an organization called the "Tehrik-e-Nifaz-e-Shariat-e-Mohammadi", a group that openly supports the Taliban & is in favour of imposing Sharia rule all over Pakistan. The group is headed by Sufi Mohammed, whose son-in-law formed an alliance with Baitullah Mehsud's Tehreek-e-Taliban (banned in Aug 2008) after the end of the Lal Masjid complex siege in Islamabad in July 2007.
One day before the announcement, Pakistani President, Asif Ali Zardari, told CBS News 60 minutes
Q: Do you have the support for this campaign against the Taliban? Do you have the full support of the military and the ISI?This is a very lovely definition of a campaign against the Taliban! To fight the Taliban, bow to their demands. This is how the military and the ISI are supporting the action. The great game continues.
A: If that wasn't the case, then Islamabad would have fallen because obviously if the army doesn't do its job, these men are not restricted. They've blown up the Marriott Hotel before. They've attacked us inland before. They would be all around us, wouldn't they?
There are significant implications for India. The Swat valley is around 500 km from Gilgit, in Pakistan-Occupied-Kashmir. The distance between Gilgit and Srinagar or Kargil is between 170-200 km. Given the close affiliation between the Pakistani military, ISI & the various Taliban factions, this provides Pakistan more resources at continuing the terrorism in Jammu & Kashmir, and by extension, India. Lest we forget, during the post-independence attack on J&K by Pakistan to wrest control, Pakistan's army first took control of Gilgit and then used the tribals in the area to capture Skardu, Kargil and the Poonch valley.
Labels: india, jammu and kashmir, pakistan, taliban, terrorism
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
David Miliband echoes Barack Obama's prescription
In an article in "The Guardian", David Miliband, currently visiting India in his role as the Foreign Secretary of the UK, reckons that the various terrorist entities across the globe need to be handled differently since their motivations are different and points out the example of groups like the IRA & Eta to back his argument since those groups really had nothing in common.
The central difference is that the main aim of terrorist organizations is to challenge the state, rule of law, liberty and various freedoms by using violence, including mass-scale attacks & suicide attacks, as a mechanism to achieve their goals. In this respect, terrorist groups are all identical - take your pick from the Lashkar-e-Taiba, Al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas, LTTE, SIMI, the various units of the Sangh Parivar which went on a killing spree in Gujarat, Jaish-e-Mohammed, Harkat-ul-Mujahideen, Naxalites, Maoists, etc.
Miliband goes on to write
Although I understand the current difficulties, resolution of the dispute over Kashmir would help deny extremists in the region one of their main calls to arms, and allow Pakistani authorities to focus more effectively on tackling the threat on their western borders.This echoes what Barack Obama said in his interview with MSNBC late last year.
The flaws in this thinking are:
- Assuming that the terrorists' only aim is the liberation of Kashmir.
- Assuming that Pakistan will co-operate in helping eliminate the Al-Qaeda & Taliban in Afghanistan when the Kashmir problem has been resolved.
- Assuming that if Kashmir and Afghanistan are both cleaned up & resolved, then the Pakistani army and the ISI will sit idle when their raison d'être is to bleed India with a thousand cuts.
Labels: india, jammu and kashmir, pakistan, terrorism, uk
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
Obama's remarks on a Kashmir quid pro quo with Pakistan
In an interview with MSNBC, US Presidential candidate Barack Obama indicates that if elected, he would 'facilitate a better understanding between Pakistan and India and try to resolve the Kashmir crisis so that they can stay focused not on India, but on the situation with those militants.'
I guess he is implying that in return for the USA stepping in & facilitating an agreement between India & Pakistan on Jammu & Kashmir, Pakistan will automatically switch focus away from the eastern border and help out with isolating and eliminating Al-Qaeda and Taliban terrorism on the other border.
Unfortunately, that's just wishful thinking. Jammu & Kashmir is just one of the thousand cuts that the Pakistani establishment (civilian, military and intelligence) wants to use to make India bleed.
Labels: jammu and kashmir, obama, pakistan, president, terrorism
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
'Daughter of the East' wanted to go further east
In a new revision of her autobiography, "Daughter of the East", Benazir Bhutto has claimed that Mirza Aslam Beg, in 1989, and Pervez Musharraf, in 1996, had offered/claimed to capture Srinagar. Extracts from this autobiography are being published by Outlook magazine, in the next issue.
"I once again heard how Pakistan would take Srinagar if only I gave the orders to do so. Musharraf concluded the briefing with the words that a ceasefire would be in place and Pakistan would be in control of Srinagar, the capital of Indian-held Kashmir. I asked him, ‘And what next?’. He was surprised by my question, and said, ‘Next we will put the flag of Pakistan on the Srinagar Parliament’.For one, this is hardly surprising. Everyone knows that Pakistan has always had
"‘And what next?’ I asked the general.
"‘Next you will go to the United Nations and tell them that Srinagar is in Pakistan’s control’.
"‘And what next?’ I pushed on. I could see General Musharraf had not been prepared for this grilling and was getting flustered. He said, ‘And you will tell them to change the map of the world taking into consideration the new geographical realities’.
"‘And do you know what the United Nations will tell me?’ I looked General Musharraf straight in the eye, as the army chief sat silently by and the room grew still, and pointedly said, ‘They will pass a Security Council resolution condemning us and demanding that we unilaterally withdraw from Srinagar, and we will have got nothing for our efforts but humiliation and isolation.’ I then abruptly ended the meeting."
An army-connected friend informed me that the dead bodies of soldiers were kept in frozen lockers and released in small tranches to prevent the news spreading of the high casualties inflicted during the conflict.
Labels: bhutto, india, jammu and kashmir, musharraf, pakistan, terrorism
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
Pervez Musharraf's four point solution
In Indo-Pak relations, the term 'back-channel diplomacy' is heard very often. But Pervez Musharraf has evidently perfected the art of 'TV channel diplomacy'. In an interview to NDTV, Gen. Musharraf outlined his four-point solution for ever-lasting peace in Kashmir ™
- Kashmir will have the same borders but people will be allowed to move freely back and forth in the region
- The region will have self-governance or autonomy, but not independence
- Troops will be withdrawn from the region in a staggered manner
- A joint supervision mechanism will be set up, with India, Pakistan and Kashmir represented
I have just one issue with his 'four-point solution for ever-lasting peace in Kashmir ™': Why doesn't it say a single word about Pakistan agreeing to rein in the terrorists it foments, supports and sponsors?
Reactions from Nitin and Offstumped.
Previous posts on Musharraf & TISJaK: Joint anti-terror mechanism, Admitting that J & K was part of India, Pakistan and the earthquake: part 1, part 2 & part 3, Indian bloggers' protest against his visit in April 2005 to watch cricket, different democracy yardsticks in Iraq & J/K, Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus service grounded, Manmohan rejects Pervez's three-point solution for ever-lasting peace in Kashmir ™, Musharraf's claims on Indian soldier deaths during the Kargil war, cuts in Pakistan armed forces announced, sabre-rattling over lack of progress in talks, Kashmir issue will be resolved by the end of 2004, among many others that I may not have trawled through!
Labels: jammu and kashmir, kargil, musharraf, pakistan
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
Farooq Abdullah's plea for clemency
Farooq Abdullah's interview to Karan Thapar on CNN-IBN effectively threatens the Indian nation with rivers of blood and murder of judges/lawyers if Mohammad Afzal's Mohammad Afzal's family's/supporters'/pseudo-human rights activists' appeal against the death sentence given to him isn't accepted. He questions the Indian legal process. He questions the competence of the judiciary. He links a possible hanging to civil war in India and a coup-like situation in Pakistan.
I see two huge holes in the arguments put forward against the death sentence handed out to Mohammad Afzal.
Firstly, the apologists argue that putting him to death would severely dent India's image in the minds of the people of Jammu & Kashmir. The counter-argument is that Kashmiris aren't the only ones who've been hanged. Dhananjoy Chatterjee was hanged in 2004. That didn't mean all of Bengal went up in flames. If the judicial system were flawed, all those chargesheeted in the 13 Dec 2001 attack on Parliament would have been sentenced to death. Nothing of that sort happened. In any case, it is the responsibility of the union and state governments to ensure that public peace and order isn't disrupted because one group wants to vent its feelings over a judicial pronouncement.
Secondly, as was the case with Dhananjoy Chatterjee, arguments against the death penalty are being given after the sentence was handed out. What were those against the death penalty doing in the two years between Dhananjoy being hung and the judgement on Mohammad Afzal? If they were really serious about doing away with that mode of punishment, shouldn't they have led a vociferous campaign in the intervening two years? They did nothing of that sort. So what they're looking for is just a public relations coup.
The 1989 release of prisoners in exchange for Rubaiya Saeed was the defining act which convinced Pakistan and the terrorist movement that it was possible to terrorize the Indian government for fun. If we give in again, I see no scope for getting rid of terrorism and terrorists for the next hundred years.
Labels: death penalty, jammu and kashmir
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
Straight from the horse's mouth
CNN-IBN is right now screening Pervez Musharraf's interview with Karan Thapar. I haven't been able to find the transcript of the interview on their site. They'll perhaps put it up soon.
Karan Thapar asked him something about the recent problems in Balochistan and some killings in Waziristan. To that his reply was (not verbatim)
So what if some people are killed in Waziristan? In India, see what is happening in the North-East, Kashmir, Bihar. Does this mean India is going to pieces?Forget the mentions of the North-East and Bihar. Musharraf has effectively admitted that Kashmir (the state of J & K in fact) is part of India.
Having made it a habit of making bold statements and conducting diplomacy through the media, he will perhaps realize now that sometimes, verbal diarrhea, can be a bad thing! Then again, this is as bold as he can get!
Update: The transcript is online and this is what the sequence was
Karan Thapar: Even on Friday, papers said that eleven people were killed in Waziristan and the hand of suspicion is pointing towards the Taliban.
President Musharraf: So, what is the problem if eleven people have been killed? How many people die in India? There are people dying in the North East of India, in Kashmir, and in Bihar. There are so many insurgencies in India also. There are about eighteen insurgencies going on. Is India breaking-up?
Labels: jammu and kashmir, musharraf, pakistan
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
The Pakistan military's attitude towards the earthquake
In the context of my earlier post mentioning Salman Rushdie's thoughts and Nitin's post on the military's attitude, I found this piece by Muralidhar Reddy in 'The Hindu' a couple of days ago illustrative of the Pakistani establishment's approach to the earthquake.
He writes about how during the recently concluded SAARC summit, there were only cursory references to the quake victims and relief efforts to mitigate their suffering. Instead, Pakistan continued to stress on how if India demilitarized the area, the wounds would heal by themselves. If India was in a conciliatory mode, Pakistan lost all credibility when blasts went off in Delhi. Jammu & Kashmir has been attacked multiple times in the last week.
But should we really be surprised? After all, Pakistan was more focussed on haggling over helicopters and about accepting relief from India at a time when rapid action was needed. In February, it had no words of solace for those that it claims to support diplomatically and morally when they were buried under snow.
Labels: jammu and kashmir, musharraf, pakistan
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
Rushdie: The greatest calamity of all may lie ahead of us
In an evocative piece in The Times, Salman Rushdie points out that with winter almost upon the people of Jammu & Kashmir and Pakistan occupied Kashmir, the absence of substantial aid and relief could ensure that more people suffer and die.
But the people of Kashmir deserve better than they are getting. They certainly do not deserve to be subjected to a kind of "political test" of aid-worthiness. Yet, ever since the day of the earthquake, people in the US and Europe have been asking me and many others the same politically loaded questions: will the disaster "help"? Will it allow India and Pakistan to sink their differences and, at long last, make an end of their long Kashmiri quarrel? It has been hard to avoid the conclusion that Western attitudes to aiding Kashmir are dependent to some degree on the answer to these questions being "yes".He is practical enough to rightly realize that the romantics' wish that this disaster would perhaps bring India and Pakistan closer to each other will remain just a pipedream, given the fracas over helicopters and accepting relief from India. In fact he seems to suggest that aid is being given with the hope that the differences between the two countries will vanish overnight, just as Pervez Musharraf's wish for the Kashmir issue to be resolved overnight.
Alas, the answer is "no". India and Pakistan are still mired in mutual suspicion, as the saga of the Indian helicopters revealed. (India offered them, but Pakistan refused to accept unless they were flown by Pakistani pilots, a condition that India in turn refused to accept, and, in the meanwhile, the quake victims went right on dying.) Also, as the murder by militants of a Kashmiri moderate politician showed, and as the bombs in Delhi would seem to confirm, there are Islamist groups who are determined to continue to sabotage any improvement in Indo-Pakistani relations, and as long as those groups find sanctuary in Pakistan, a peace settlement will be impossible.
Rushdie also hints at a potential compassion fatigue following last year's tsunami and hurricanes in North America.
Labels: jammu and kashmir, musharraf, pakistan
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
Musharraf plays politics with quake hit in Kashmir
On Saturday, an earthquake measuring 7.6 on the Richter Scale hit northern parts of India and Pakistan. The death toll is expected to go beyond 40,000 in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and 1,000 in the Indian state of Jammu & Kashmir. Aftershocks continue to create chaos.
Even as Pakistan battles to cope with the humanitarian crisis caused by the worst earthquake in its history and biggest in the region in the last century, its leader Pervez Musharraf has chosen to act cautiously on India's offer of assistance for rescue and relief work.
In response to India's offer, he said
Whatever we need, we will certainly ask, but there is a little bit of sensitivity there.
Wrong again, Pervez. Just as the common man couldn't care less about who Pakistan's allies were as long as he earned enough to feed himself and his family, educate his children and live comfortably, he would not bother about who sent in assistance to help him and his family members in their hour of need.
As Nitin succinctly puts it
There is a chance that India can save lives in Pakistan. That should be good enough a reason to accept Indian assistance.
I am fairly sure that had the quake happened in say Lahore or Karachi, Musharraf's response towards India's offer of help would have been more positive. Effectively he's saying that because of 'political sensitivities' involved, he is willing to stake the lives of tens of thousands of people living in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir.
This isn't the first time Pervez and Pakistan have been oblivious to calamities in Kashmir. Earlier this year, when avalanches in J & K left several hundreds dead/missing, Pakistan was mum when it came to even condoling with the losses suffered by people. Mind you, we are not talking of Pakistan offering aid. Even a mere statement expressing its grief was missing.
Update: Pakistan will accept aid from India in the form of blankets, tents, medical supplies and food but not helicopters or joint relief efforts along the Line of Control.
Labels: jammu and kashmir, musharraf, pakistan
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
Blast from the past: Kargil and the World Cup
Thanks to Pradeep, a friend from NTU who has since moved on to other pastures, I've rediscovered older writings of mine for IGNet, a site setup for the IG at NTU, Singapore. Thanks a lot to Srijith for hosting IGNet when its domain expired. Given that I've always had an opinion and have somehow or the other managed to find a way to express it, I'm totally delighted at locating these articles/opinions/write-ups. Mind you, these are rather dated, most of them written in 1999.
Normal blogging will also happen, but some of the next few entries (called "Blast from the past") will be a copy-and-paste effort, just to ensure there is some sort of 'permanent' record on this blog. It is tough for me to evaluate, but has the writing style changed in the last six years?
We start off with a comparison of Kargil and World Cup 1999.
Along with the fact that the Pakistani intrusion of Kashmir succeeded in exposing Pakistan's obvious military involvement with the Kashmir militants, the Kargil encounter showed us a facet of India we had seldom seen before, that as an aggressive, super patriotic nation.
At the forefront of this radical change was a septagenurian Prime Minister who was extremely forthright and clear in the way he handled the issue even though some of the ministers in his cabinet chose to expose themselves to be the idiots they really are. But what was even more amazing was the way all Indians responded to his call and rallied behind the soldiers. The "war" brought about a patriotic feeling in India on a massive scale. People from all walks of life wanted to contribute something for the jawans. More than a dozen funds sprung up from nowhere collecting money for the soldiers and their families. Requests to donate blood came by the gallons to the hospitals and the army camps. So much so that hospitals would probably be better off enlisting those volunteers to provide blood to needy civilians because the army generally has a fairly good stock of blood.
All this was so eerily similar to the frenzy we saw in the lead up to the Cricket World Cup. Companies piled on the World Cup bandwagon by the hundreds. If you bought a TV set you could actually get a chance to watch the World Cup on another TV, for free ! Scooters proclaimed themselves the official carriers of the Indian fan, although it is impossible to believe that Apple Singh or Sivamani went all the way to London on a Bajaj Chetak ! Need I expond on the way cricketers who we never knew existed and those who we thought couldnt say a word in English, were thrust into the limelight and they suddenly became the "experts" !
Kargil wasnt too different in this respect too. Retired army generals, officers etc. were all in great demand with the various television channels eager to get their sound bytes before the others did. In much the same way as Harsha Bhogle went to England, just to interview the cricketers and the commentators there and also to present a daily report on what was happening where, NDTV sent Barkha Dutt and a few other reporters to the foothills of Tiger Hill during the daring raids. The reports from her were no less exciting than those from Bhogle, except possibly for the fact that Boycott wasnt around to say 'Mee moom would have climbed that hill bare footed'.
With a huge percentage of the population being in the youth bracket, it isnt difficult to see why Kargil suddenly became more important than the World Cup. (although admittedly by the time the Kargil conflict went into full blast, the World Cup dream was over for us) Any person born after 1970-71 or so would never have had the opportunity to have been in a 'warlike' atmosphere. On the other hand, he/she would have seen/followed at least 3-4 World Cups by now ! So the World Cup became 'just another event' while Kargil took centrestage. I wouldnt have been surprised if moms had chided their dissident children with words like 'Chup hoja bete warna 9 baje Star News dekhne nahin doongi' instead of the standard blackmail of not allowing him/her to watch the cricket match that day !
Things are a lot more saner now with definitely lot less excitement in the air. Perhaps it will stay so for a long time, for the Sahara Cup is unlikely to materialize, what with the fighting in the Pakistan cricket board now ! Life just isnt what it is when its India v Pakistan, either in cricket or in real life.
All the blasts: Kargil & WC 1999, Lata v Asha, Tam-Brahm wedding, Madras, Unglamourous Orissa, Idols and Bangalore.
Labels: jammu and kashmir, kargil
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
Musharraf's visit to India: The dictator has flown
Musharraf, who arrived in India on Saturday, watched some of the action from the India-Pakistan one-dayer at New Delhi yesterday along with Manmohan Singh and then the two got down to work in a two hour meeting. After their meeting, obviously the bureaucrats took over to frame the statement which was read out today by Dr. Singh and Musharraf.
The joint statement issued by Manmohan Singh and Musharraf talks primarily about:
- Irreversible nature of the peace process.
- Enhancing trade & cooperation across the LoC through meeting points, cultural integration, trade, pilgrimages etc.
- Not allowing terrorism to impede the peace process.
- Increasing frequency of the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus service as well as introducing other routes.
- Opening of consulates in Karachi and Bombay by end of 2005.
- Using existing mechanisms to discuss the issues of Siachen and Sir Creek.
- Exploring energy cooperation as well as enhancing commercial and economic interaction & cooperation.
- Manmohan Singh's visit to Pakistan.
Yesterday, he met the various Hurriyat leaders, who said the same old things. Who gave the Hurriyat the status of being the sole representative of the people of J & K is beyond me. Mirwaiz Umer Farooq, one of the saner voices in the APHC, is appreciative of the statement, although he wanted a specific timeline to be mentioned on the issue of resolving the Kashmir dispute.
One of the other offshoots of the Musharraf-Manmohan meeting on Sunday is that Pakistani students could be admitted into various Indian educational institutions. I sincerely hope no quota is set apart from them, since Indian governments use that as the first option. They must compete with whoever else wants to enter the institutions.
Today, in an interaction with the cream of India's publishing & electronic media, he asked for more magnanimity from India, the larger country. Apparently the larger country must relax and watch itself being bled to death by its smaller neighbour.
On the issue of the the Baglihar dispute, he said the sky was the limit. I assume this means India can build a very tall dam.
He is for soft borders but cannot accept the LoC as a border. He wants an out of the box solution without brushing issues under the carpet. I hope terrorism is also one of them. I'm fairly sure Pakistani carpets are more popular than Indian ones. So its safe to assume they hide more issues & secrets than Indian ones do.
Overall, I think he was far more successful than 2001 in conveying his sincerity. Prannoy Roy, who was at that meeting Musharraf had with the Indian media, felt that part of the reason was Musharraf's own realization about the extent to which terrorism had affected Pakistan, reflected in the recent assassination attempts on him.
Of course, he does continue to keep carping on "the core issue" of Kashmir, err ... Jammu & Kashmir. Interesting. Didnt the core issue use to be "Kashmir"? It has now become "Jammu & Kashmir"! So the Pakistanis are laying claim to Jammu as well! Nice!
An editorial in the Pakistani newspaper, the Daily Times, talks about how India is nicely obfuscating the core issues and instead talking about MFN, trade, bus & train services, etc. K Subrahmanyam points out in the Indian Express that it is upto Musharraf to come up with the out of the box solutions, since India is fairly comfortable with the status quo situation with the hope that things will unravel with time while Pakistan is the one itching with a revisionist attitude. Scott Baldauf writes in the Christian Science monitor about how Indian proposals on the LoC being converted into the international border and several other CBMs are putting pressure on Musharraf.
In my opinion, the two positives from this trip as far as India is concerned are that he is not as Kashmir focussed as he used to be. Secondly, I think he has realized that it is not possible for a rapid, one day turn-around time to resolve the disputes. So he has been amenable to India's proposals on increasing trade, cultural, sporting and other people-to-people contacts. Maybe thats because all that is happening anyway through trade in narcotics & fake currency, infiltration into J & K and other parts of India etc.
Labels: jammu and kashmir, musharraf, pakistan
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus route functional from today
The Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus service finally got going today with buses plying from the two end points amidst scenes of emotion. The journey was flagged off from Srinagar by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh while I couldn't care less about who did the honours in PoK.
The service has started in spite of attacks on the route a couple of days ago and yesterday's attack on the tourist centre in Srinagar.
Connecting families in divided Kashmir is obviously a good and noble idea. Barkha Dutt, on NDTV, did take the hyperbole a little too far when she interviewed two bichde hue brothers on either side of the LoC. But the feelings expressed by the two brothers were genuine. That said, the onus is on India to ensure that terrorists do not manage to sneak in using whatever documentation has been agreed upon. I also get the feeling too much is being invested in what is, in my opinion, a symbolic gesture. I think India has invested much more in bus diplomacy compared to Pakistan and so if the experiment fails, we'd have a lot more to lose. Pakistan will be perfectly happy bleeding India through attempts at eviscerating our country, as it has been doing since it came into existence and especially so in the last twenty five years. Why 25 years and not fifteen? I guess you totally forgot about Khalistan.
Labels: jammu and kashmir
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
US State Department's Human Rights Report for 2004
The US State Department released its Human Rights Report for 2004 recently. There're several instances of the report indicting Indian military forces, especially in the context of dealing with terrorism (referred to as insurgency) in Jammu & Kashmir. Bizarrely though, there is not a word of how Pakistan's diplomatic and moral support to terrorists in various parts of the world causes violates the right of people to lead peaceful lives.
Of course, it is also mum about torture at Abu Gharib. Interestingly enough, I couldnt find any developed country in the list of those accused of human rights violations.
I am certainly not claiming that India's human rights record is perfect. There is a lot more that we can do. However, the US cannot point fingers at others when its own record is not impeccable, especially in the last couple of years. As the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson noted, the US needs to clean its own Augean stables first.
Labels: jammu and kashmir
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
Jammu and Kashmir buried under snow. Where is Pakistan?
Avalanches on Sunday night in Jammu & Kashmir have so far resulted in more than 200 dead people and hundreds more missing, feared dead or buried under the snow. A humanitarian crisis is brewing in the areas affected by the avalanche. Major parts of the state were cut off from the rest of India because the highways were completely filled with snow, aircraft could not land and communication links had snapped. It is only in the last couple of days that normalcy has been restored to transportation and communication.
The Indian military has responded to the crisis through distributing supplies, helping with relief work and using its strategic reserves to provide petrol, diesel, kerosene etc. to the affected people so that they could attempt to return to their normal lives.
However, I have not, to date, seen any statement from Pakistan's government or military establishments [are they not the same by the way?] condoling the loss of lives, livelihood and property for the people of Jammu & Kashmir. Perhaps they only want to bring up Kashmir when it suits them. They are not really bothered about the people, they just want the land for strategic purposes. While hundreds of Kashmiris lie dead, Pakistan is more concerned about the sluggish progress in resolving the issue. If Pakistan displayed even half the commitment and effort it normally puts in towards alleging India's terrorism in the state in attempting to understand the people of J & K, it might evoke some sympathy from people like me who want India to not concede a needle inch of territory.
Labels: jammu and kashmir
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
Mirwaiz Umer Farooq feels that with India talking to Pakistan and India talking to Kashmir, it is time to let Kashmir talk to Pakistan. He claims that what the Hurriyat has been fighting for is equally applicable to the people of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh. As an aside, isnt it queer that the three regions in the state start from consecutive alphabets?
Labels: jammu and kashmir
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
Pervez is upto his shenanigans again. He stunned a gathering in Pakistan yesterday with his new proposals for resolving the issue of Kashmir in a reasonable timeframe [I suppose that means 2 working days for him!]. Lets just analyze his proposals and what could happen.
Demilitarisation of the J & K and autonomy granted to the entire state
Should demilitarization be one-way? Can Pakistan ensure that supply in the form of moral, diplomatic, weaponry, training etc. to the terrorists is cut off? No. They cant, and they wont. Should India take his word for granted when he claims that he cannot shut off terrorism since Pakistan does not control the terrorists? Would autonomy work? Autonomy is fine, as long as the intentions of both parties involved are honourable. Pakistan is yet to convince India that it wants to co-exist with India. India also needs to do its bit, vice versa.
J & K under joint control of India and Pakistan
Right, which country takes charge of defence? Who allocates the defence budget? What about finance? Who prepares the budget? Is the budget in Indian rupees or Pakistani rupees? What about communications? How about law and order?
Some parts go to India and others to Pakistan. Kashmir valley comes under UN supervision or becomes autonomous.
I think the general has been watching Sholay a little too often for comfort and has really been taken in by Asrani's portrayal of the angrezon ke zamaane ke jailor. Nice solution this, aadhe us taraf jaao, aadhe is taraf jaao, baaki mere peeche aao.
Labels: jammu and kashmir
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
I wonder what the good general has been smoking. He claims that Kashmir can be solved in a day if India and Pakistan disband their maximalist positions. So he doesnt want India to carp on the terrorism? He wants India to accept that the terrorists are gentle human beings? If it could have been solved in a day, it would have been solved 50 years ago. That doesnt of course imply that we must never resolve it. We must. But I dont see a solution acceptable to both sides happening for the next 10 years.
Labels: jammu and kashmir
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
Should India trust Musharraf based on the stories he weaves to his domestic audience? Charles de Gaulle II claimed that Manmohan Singh's speech to the UN General Assembly acknowledged the centrality of Kashmir and thus understood Pakistan's position. Pakistan (and by implication Musharraf) keeps harping on the need for India and Pakistan to move from their extreme positions so that negotiations can begin. I wonder how Pakistan has moved.
Labels: jammu and kashmir, musharraf, pakistan
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
Charles de Gaulle II spoke at the UN General Assembly yesterday and primarily focussed on building up a dark scenario of an iron curtain descending between the West and the Islamic World [ed: I wonder where India figures in that categorization] if "legitimate" and internationally recognized disputes [ed: obviously alluding to Palestine and Kashmir here!] were not handled sensitively. [ed: obviously to the satisfaction of the Islamic world, who he seems to be trying to represent. Since when did Pakistan become the spokesperson for the OIC?]. He speaks of Pakistan recognizing the right of Israel to exist, but wants Israel to revert to pre-1967 boundaries. I wonder if he'll agree to apply the same logic to Kashmir - pre 1948 or pre 1975 positions. Does Pak have diplomatic relns with Israel? I remember he had proposed it last year, I wonder if it bore fruit.
Its interesting that he mentions that trade, and not just aid, is the way to promote growth and benefit from globalization. Yet Pakistan continues to dampen India's efforts at provoking more intra-SAARC trade through the SAFTA. Absence of MFN status to India means that prices of goods continue to be high and also ensuring that trade barriers exist to the detriment of consumers across the sub-continent, specifically India and Pakistan.
He takes potshots at India's aspirations to get a permanent berth on the UN Security Council and seeks the inclusion of small & medium states [ed: obviously meaning Pakistan?] in the UNSC. Even more interestingly, he takes on the US when he talks about the need for multi-lateralism based on the UN Charter!
All in all, I suppose a far less vitriolic speech than last year or 2002. Perhaps he's aware that India will call his bluff if he doesnt act responsibly.
Labels: jammu and kashmir
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
Some of the links may now be broken/not take you to the expected report since the original content providers may have archived/removed the contents.
All opinions expressed are mine alone. My employers (past, present or future) are in no way connected to the opinions expressed here.
All pictures, photographs used are copyrights of the original owners. I do not intend to infringe on any copyright.
Pictures and photographs are used here to merely accentuate and enhance the content value to the readers.
