Discussion in 'Foreign Relations' started by ajtr, Apr 22, 2010.
Qureshi's comments were made after his visit to GHQ.
for a meaningful and structured dialog with pakistan we need to by pass the civil set up there and it is high time it is done. we need to draw a mechanism where no matter who is in power in pakistan we still directly talk to their armed forces where it remains a undeniable fact the real people running the show are their armed forces, and till the time such a thing does not happen all such talks are nothing more than drama being played out for the galaries of the two countries.
to being with we could rope in our NSA to pursue the process and once some ground work is done then other important dignitaries be brought in else let the stalemate continue, india in no way has to legitimise the rule of democracy in pakistan, its not our responsibility!
The fact is that the PA/ISI combine trulybelieve that they have changed their strategic orientation arouond. Post Musharraf the Kashmir "policy" was reversed and we have seen an increase of infiltrations in J&K. In Afghanistan, they believe that the US is ready to outsource a major part of its governance so that Obama can win his elections in 2012. So there will be no incentive for Pakistan here.
GoI will have to slug it out until 2012 when the situation in Afghanistan will become clearer. Italso means that GoI should be prepared for acts of terrorism that will most definitely be provoked so that India and Pakistan go to war and PA can curtail its operations in FATA. The Mumbai attacks were just an example of this.
At the same time, India should devolve SAARC into three sub-regional groupings to multiply economic and security co-operation between members asap. SAARC-east will consists of Bangladesh, Bhutan and Nepal. SAARC-south will be Sri Lanka and Maldives and SAARC-west can be Pakistan and Afghanistan. India will play a role in all three groupings. This was the economic and security progress in the region will not be hostage to Pakistan. Relations with China, Iran and US will also play a crucial role in keeping the pressure onPakistan.
The bloody high price of peace
Slightly hawkish but valid points nonetheless
Imagine the class's biggest boy being roughed up by a little rogue. He then runs to the principal, who asks him to shut up and patch up.
He goes back to the smaller boy begging for truce, gets kicked and insulted again, comes back sulking, and announces that this was all part of a highly intricate, mature and sophisticated diplomacy.
India's latest "peace process" with Pakistan has been just as ludicrous.
What has India done in the 597 days after Pakistan-trained and -sponsored terrorists slaughtered 173 people in a four-day spectacle across Mumbai's hotels, railway station, holy places and pubs?
It went whining to the US, meekly accepted the orders of the Obama administration which is only concerned about baddies on Pakistan's northwestern border with Afghanistan where US interests lie not to create trouble, and started a "peace process".
What has India gathered so far: an accidentally captured terrorist; curt, mocking slips of denial from Pakistan to our copious dossiers of evidence; a fresh round of insults to our external affairs minister; and little else.
However, every time one demands action, politically correct pundits call it "jingoism".
How can you sit and negotiate with an attacker without taking strong action on the ground?
What is jingoistic about defending your citizens and attacking, reaching grave harm to the people who attack and kill your people?
Why should a nation forget the audacity with which commuters returning home after a hard days work were killed?
Who is to answer for November 26, 2008, and hundreds of other massacres?
The Congress government seems only too eager that the nation's collective memory lapses.
What is more insidious and dangerous is that the Congress seems convinced that hostile action against Pakistan, or even the hanging of Pakistani terrorists, will enrage our Muslims.
Ironical that the biggest insult to Indian Muslims should come from a party that claims to be the biggest champion of secularism.
And let the BJP not fish for brownie points, for its government escorted terrorists to Kandahar, helplessly watched lynched Indian soldiers sent back from Bangladesh hung like animals to bamboo poles, and merely managed to regain Kargil after grave loss of soldiers' lives. And yes, it also gave up our conventional weapons edge with a loud, hollow nuclear noise.
India's last diplomatic, intelligence and military victory was 1971. Defeat of Pakistani troops. Creation of Bangladesh. There was strong, decisive action on the ground. Imagine if '71 hadn't happened, we would have another Pakistan to our left today, in addition to the one on our right!
One doubts if Mrs Indira Gandhi for all her dark flaws would have allowed the nation to be humiliated like this, or would have started a peace process without a trace of retaliation after 26/11.
Pakistan today knows well that India has no teeth. It'll never as much as touch a single terror camp across the border, or assassinate ISI's men in cold blood as an Israel would.
Pakistan has successfully convinced the world that any act of aggression by India will result in war, and no act of aggression by Pakistan will.
There lies the biggest failure of India's foreign policy. And that is why a man named Shah Mehmood Qureshi can't stop flashing his smug smile on television these days.
Executive Editor, MiD DAY
But unfortunately you'll never such such an article appear in any widely circulated English dailies in India.
but would pakistan army would be ready to talk with us. wont it undermines pakistan political part power.PA would never talk with us directly untill it is sever perssure form USA. i think pakistan political party are largely to blame to give powers to army. if theis party unities then i do not think pakistan army could do anything
like i said, we are in no way obliged or responsible to prop up democracy in pakistan, it is the responsibility of pakistanis and if they cant earn and preserve it then they dont deserve it nor is it our fault.
why will the pa not come forward if we were to tell them that we will deal with them directly, forget america, pakistan is desperate for talks, through talks they look to legitimize themselves as a responsible state in the eyes of the wider world which other wise is seen as the largest exporter of terrorism world over, the worst effected country of which is india. just go a few months back when open diplomacy was completely cut off and every now and then pak FM used to say india is shying away from talks, and talks are the only way out, we stop talks now and they will be sweating again.
let us look at the bigger picture, what can pakistan achieve by not talking to us? they backed a full scale proxy war on us but they still could not do a fuck about it, they raised the issue internationally but their calls fell and still falls short for there is no patient hearing for their concerns, heck even the arabs and persians dont give two hoots to what they have to say, forget the rest of the world who have no sympathy for them or for their mission, now they are financing these street protests which really have no effect at all, the only thing, indian media is allowed to cover all this so people assume it is too much to handle, on ground we remain in complete control, one of the best CI ops we have ever carried. so what is it that pakistan is left with? TALKS, and for that they completely depend on us and on our set guidelines. we dont talk kashmir as they want us to and we see the end result as happened in this press meet. so, if we tell the pakistanis that we will deal with the pa on the question of kashmir then they have no other option left but to talk to us and dont forget last when we were directly dealing with them it worked to our benefit, we had them by the collars which made musharraf give in too much than he would have ever liked to have (something only and only their army can do), few of the most peaceful years we have seen in kashmir post insurgency were when he was around. it is simple when you deal with pa you deal with the real face behind terrorism in kashmir. lastly india was most comfortable in dealing with pakistan when we were directly talking to the pa, today for all practical reasons we are largely clueless of whom to deal with there and will our dealing with the civil pakistan govt have any real difference on ground, just see how one visit by kayani to their PM changed the whole tone of the way this whole meet was going on, which till the very last moment was seen as successful.
the bottom line is, in pakistan pa is the state and you deal directly with the state and not with illegitimate babies who have no say in running of the affairs of that country, and for things other than kashmir we deal with those illegitimate babies ofter referred to as "bloody civilians" by the mighty military elites.
My simple question which i asked earlier too. Why talk Kashmir at all with Pakistan? Why does India take a defensive line on the issue of Kashmir?
infact we dont need to at all.
without kashmir the pakistan will not come on the table for talks as they have to tell their people they are not weak....and our Indian govt[specially our PM-who always want to walk an extra mile] agrees to such BS....
my assumption is that the only two reasons we talk to them is because we intend to make use of their land as a transit route for our goods to be moved to other destinations, and later on we intend to make use of those 170m odd people to sell our products, so there is certainly a corporate interest in this. the other reason is no matter how much we want to lecture we are independent off international pressure but we do scum to that pressure which wants us to talk to pakistan.
well what can we expect from pakistan.........they haven't change and they wont change............our leaders are matured that we need to engage with our neighbours but they don't realize that pakistan doesn't deserve so much respect which we give.........i think its time to be little more aggressive in our stance
Wonder if the Indian intelligentsia will rise and protest against the GoI policy of talking to Pakistan. I think there has to be pressure built on GoI to NOT talk to Pakistan on any issue. Clearly tell to Pakistan once and for all that Kashmir is not an issue to discuss at all in India Pak talks if at all the Pakistanis are interested in any talks to improve trade relations.
There is nothing wrong with talking. We can talk all we want, doesn't mean either is conceding anything.
We have better thing to do than talk to them Singh. Next that Qureshi will come to town. And with him all the expense India will have to bear for hearing his diatribe.
mate, our most vocal, most opinionated, most dominant, and most heard intelligentsia are the left leaning intellectuals who crowd the media at large and the current government think tank and this group has some weird concepts of seeing a friendly pakistan some day and they are the strongest proponents of peace talks with pakistan and their aim it seems at the moment is to make sure that if there was to be another terror attack on india at the behest of pakistan the talks do not get derailed, dont forget most of those who head to pakistan as a part of tract two diplomacy and who light candles at wagah border are these same people.
How can our voices be made heard to those concerned? Seriously telling you all, a month or two ago i had sent emails to some of our younger Members of Parliament about DFI hoping they would be interesting in getting opinion from the young of our country. Sadly didnt get even one reply. Dont know if their mail ids were correct or not.
India is participating in these charade of Indo-Pak talks under pressure from US to keep the threat from India to Pakistan low so that PA can focus on fighting Taliban in Af-Pak badlands (it is again a charade). But India being smart always left open the pressure valve to extricate itself from these useless talks at the same time showing to US that we are talking to Paks. This time the pressure valve left open is the statement by home secretary Pillai that ISI was involved in Mumbai 26/11 attacks, which by the way is a fact and is also accepted by David Headley.
In the end, there is no use in talking to Paks unless there is an action taken against the masterminds of 26/11. Until then let them give rope to hang themselves. All India needs to do is to pay lip service.
Qureshi went too far, says ex-ISI chief
Islamabad: Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi was wrong in comparing the statements made by Jamaat-ud-Dawa chief Hafiz Saeed and Indian Home Secretary G K Pillai, former ISI chief Hamid Gul has said.
Gul, however also remarked that the timing of Pillai's statement was not appropriate. He said that the remarks were unnecessary, from both sides.
"I think that it was not necessary nor for Mr Pillai to come out with this on the eve of the talks and nor for our Foreign Minister to have gone to the extent to say this because I think it is only going exasperate already flared up sentiments. I think we need to douse the fires of aggression," he said.
But significantly, Gul chose not to make any comment on David Headley's revelation that the ISI planned and executed the 26/11 Mumbai attacks.
In an interview to the Indian Express earlier this week, Pillai said that Pakistani-American terrorist David Headley's questioning had confirmed "ISI had a much more significant role to play in Mumbai attacks... ISI was literally controlling and coordinating the attacks from the beginning till the end." Headley was interrogated in America recently by Indian officials.
Pillai was attacked by the Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi during a press briefing on Thursday night that concluded six-hour talks with his Indian counterpart SM Krishna.
These comments are "uncalled for," Qureshi had said curtly at a joint press conference he held with Krishna. Qureshi said Pillai's comments had been discussed during his talks with Krishna and claimed both agreed they were "uncalled for". Krishna, who sat beside him, said nothing to that. The BJP has attacked Krishna for not defending Pillai in Pakistan.
Separate names with a comma.