Pakistan: News and Discussions

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
A large part of U.S. military operations in Afghanistan are launched from the Pasni and Dalbandin bases situated on Baluch territory.3 The Taliban, backed by both Pakistan and Iran, also operate out of Baluchistan. If the pressure on Western forces in Afghanistan were to become unbearable, Washington and its allies could conceivably use the Baluch nationalists, who fiercely oppose the influence of the mullahs and also oppose the Taliban, to exert diplomatic pressure on Islamabad as well as Tehran.

Further, although it is the most sparsely populated province of Pakistan (about 4 percent of the present population),4 Baluchistan is economically and strategically important. The subsoil holds a substantial portion of Pakistan’s energy and mineral resources, accounting for 36 percent of its total gas production. It also holds large quantities of coal, gold, copper, silver, platinum, aluminum, and, above all, uranium and is a potential transit zone for a pipeline transporting natural gas from Iran and Turkmenistan to India.

The Baluchistan coast is particularly important. It provides Pakistan with an exclusive economic zone potentially rich in oil, gas, and minerals spread over approximately 180,000 square kilometers while giving Baluchistan considerable strategic importance. Two of Pakistan’s three naval bases—Ormara and Gwadar—are situated on the Baluchistan coast. Located close to the Strait of Hormuz, at the entrance to the Persian Gulf, Gwadar is expected to provide a port, warehouses, and industrial facilities to more than twenty countries—including those in the Gulf, on the Red Sea, and in Central Asia and East Africa as well as Iran, India, and parts of northwest China.5 Now that the first phase of construction has been completed, the port is capable of receiving freighters with a capacity of 30,000 tons and container vessels going up to 25,000 tons. The completion of the second phase of construction by 2010 will enable the port to receive oil tankers with a capacity of almost 200,000 tons. A special industrial development zone and an export zone have also been planned, and Gwadar should soon be declared a free trade zone. Finally, to make Pakistan the nerve center of all commercial activity in the region, the Pakistan government is building a road and rail network linking Gwadar to Afghanistan and Central Asia; the network is intended to provide these landlocked areas with an outlet to the sea.......

Baluchistan has failed to benefit from its own natural gas deposits. The first deposits were discovered in Sui in 1953. Gas was supplied to Multan and Rawalpindi, in Punjab, in 1964; but Quetta, the capital of Baluchistan, had to wait until 1986 for its share of the gas, which it received at that time only because the central government decided to extend the gas pipeline because it had decided to station a military garrison in the provincial capital. In the Dera Bugti district, home to the gas fields of Sui and Pircoh where conflicts have taken place recently, only the town of Dera Bugti is supplied with gas. It receives its supplies only because a paramilitary camp was opened there in the mid-1990s. Overall, only four of the twenty-six districts constituting Baluchistan are supplied with gas.

In fact, although it accounts for 36 percent of Pakistan’s total gas production, the province consumes only 17 percent of its own production. The remaining 83 percent is sent to the rest of the country. In addition, the central government charges a much lower price for Baluch gas than it does for gas produced in other provinces, particularly Sind and Punjab.9 Moreover, Baluchistan receives no more than 12.4 percent of the royalties due to it for supplying gas.

The government is willing to construct military garrisons in the three most sensitive areas of Baluchistan—Sui, with its gas-producing installations; Gwadar, with its port; and Kohlu, the “capital” of the Marri tribe, to which most of the nationalist hard-liners belong. The Baluch, already feeling colonized by the Punjabis, feel dispossessed by these projects.

Behind these three problems, which the Baluch consider a casus belli, looms the demand for autonomy, if not for total independence. While Islamabad considers Baluchistan’s resources as national property and has acted accordingly, the Baluch are demanding that the province’s resources be used only for the benefit of the Baluch people.

Islamabad has always denied the existence of Baluch nationalism, but the Baluch lay claim to a history going back two thousand years. Its most significant milestones are the confederation of fortyfour Baluch tribes under the leadership of Mir Jalal Khan in the twelfth century, the confederation of Rind Laskhari in the fifteenth century, and the establishment of the khanate of Baluchistan in the seventeenth century. The Mogul and Tatar invasions and the wars and mass migrations in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries also confirm and reinforce the idea of a national identity.13

The Baluch had secretly campaigned for independence during the final decades of the British Raj, and they were shocked by the inclusion of Baluchistan in Pakistan in 1947.14 The Baluch nationalists’ desire for independence clashed with the aims of the Pakistan government, which wanted to destroy the power of the tribal chiefs and concentrate all authority in the hands of the central government.15

The government in Islamabad sought to assimilate Baluch identity into the larger Pakistani identity. Since independence, Islamabad has come into conflict with the Baluch on four occasions—in 1948, 1958, 1962, and, most vigorously, from 1973 to 1977 when a growing guerrilla movement led to an armed insurrection that ravaged the province. During this most recent period, some fifty-five thousand tribesmen fought against seventy thousand Pakistan Army troops, deepening the resentment Baluch nationalists felt toward Islamabad.

During the Raj, British administrators claimed a narrow strip of land adjoining Afghanistan, which they called “British Baluchistan,” but beyond that they refrained from interfering in the affairs of Baluchistan as long as the Baluch did not deny access to Afghanistan to the British Army. They paid the sardars (tribal chiefs), whom they allowed autonomy, for this favor.

Full paper at:

Balochistan
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
It is a futile exercise for anyone to raise the Kashmir issue.

The Annexation of Balochistan, which was an independent state throughout history and and treaties with the British, speaks for itself!

So is the story of NWFP.
 

venom

DFI Technocrat
Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
601
Likes
11
Pakistan looks beyond P-22 frigates: says Admiral Noman

BEIJING, JULY 29 (APP): Chief of Naval Staff Admiral Noman Bashir has said that the induction of P-22 frigate in Pakistan Navy was a very big leap forward not only in respect of Pak-China bilateral co-operation but it also help enhance country’s defence capability, adding “we are looking beyond P-22 frigates”. The Chief of Naval Staff (CNS) currently on official visit to China, said here he had very useful discussions at leadership level and looking forward for commissioning of the first P-22 frigate named ‘PNS Zulfiqar’ on July 30 which was constructed in Shanghai.

“Because of extremely cordial relations between the two countries as well as among the two navies, it was very important for me to meet our most trusted friends and as soon as I got the first opportunity I embarked on visit to China”, he added.

Talking to Chinese media, Admiral Noman said that one of the important aspects of his visit was the interactions and discussions on how to further they can make progress and strengthen the relationship at all levels.

To a question, he said Pakistan, China relations are multidimensional and both countries have understanding on many issues. Both countries are cooperating in various civil as well as defence projects.

About India Nuke submarine, Admiral Noman said that although it was launched two days back, we knew it for a long time. Indian, he said has their own security perspective, but Pakistan believs that the presence of Indian nuclear submarine changes the security calculus of Indian ocean.

Pakistan, Admiral Noman said do not want to follow arms race as “we have our own priorities”.

He said that we are fully alive to our security and taking all necessary measures to safeguard it. In this regard he referred to acquisition of P-22 frigates for Pakistan Navy.

Admiral Noman Bashir pointed out that Chinese military production industry maintains very high quality and standard and Pakistan wants to benefit from their achievements.

To a question on security of Indian Ocean, Admiral Noman said that it is very important for many reasons. The Ocean is main arty for oil supplies and it connect East with the West as a result a large number of cargo ships passed through it every day.

“The Ocean is very important not only for Pakistan and China but for the entire world therefore Pakistan don’t want to see it monopolize by any country. So, this is important for all the countries in the world including Pakistan which is located on the mouth of Gulf to make sure that the India Ocean remains peaceful”, he added.

Pakistan Navy, Admiral Noman Bashir said was contributing its role with the international community in fight against illegal activities including drug and human trafficking through sea.

Welcoming the presence of Chinese Task-force in Indian Ocean, the CNS said we look forward for opportunities to work together for the common objective of maintaining peace and security.

Meanwhile Admiral Noman Bashir told APP that Pakistan Navy is still actively participating along with Navies of various countries including China in curbing piracy in sea of Aden. “Our performance was highly acclaimed by major countries”, he added.

Pakistan’s Ambassador to China Masood Khan was also present on the occasion.

Associated Press Of Pakistan ( Pakistan's Premier NEWS Agency ) - Pakistan looks beyond P-22 frigates: says Admiral Noman
 

hit&run

United States of Hindu Empire
Mod
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
14,104
Likes
63,369
http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect...no+foreign+help+for+baloch+struggle+brp-za-03
No foreign help for Baloch struggle: BRP By Saleem Shahid
Thursday, 23 Jul, 2009 | 05:01 AM PST |
A BRP spokesman appealed to the international community to take notice of what he called brutalities of security forces against the Baloch.

Gilani backs committee’s proposals on Balochistan Exclusive Interview
Understanding Balochistan QUETTA: The Baloch Republican Party has rejected the government’s allegations against its president, Nawabzada Barmdagh Bugti, and termed them an attempt to divert the world attention from the struggle for an independent Balochistan.

Sher Mohammad Bugti, a BRP spokesman, in a statement here on Wednesday also dismissed charges that India was providing assistance to Barmdagh Bugti, saying no foreign country was helping him. ‘The Baloch are fighting for their independence without any foreign help.’

He said massive arrests of party workers and atrocities against the Baloch people could not harm the struggle. ‘The government wanted to hide its atrocities perpetrated against the Baloch people from the world by launching a baseless propaganda,’ he added.

He said false cases were registered against Nawabzada Hairbyar Marri in London, but the British court freed him for want of proof.

He said arrests, kidnappings and killings of BRP workers and other Baloch people had become the order of the day.

The BRP spokesman appealed to the international community to take notice of what he called brutalities of security forces against the Baloch.

He said the authorities were not allowing the media to visit Dera Bugti and Marri because they were still no-go areas. ‘The international community should send independent observers to monitor the situation in these areas.’
 

Kasrkin

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
21
Likes
1
BTW Kaskrin, your position is old. The newly released joint statement of Indo-Pak mentions Balochistan and not Kashmir. That makes discussing Balochistan more relavent than discussing an obsolete issue like Kashmir.
In the context of Pakistani concern regarding Indian interference and terrorism. Not in the context of India's concern or involvement in the political and ethnic issues present there. That is still matter in which Pakistan, and the rest of the world, will not tolerate Indian meddling. The point was to deter and address the notion of Indian interference, not, as you suggest, to encourage it. Lastly, Kashmir was not excluded. It was agreed that all outstanding issues would be addressed, which includes Kashmir, even if not explicitly named.
 

Vinod2070

मध्यस्थ
Ambassador
Joined
Feb 22, 2009
Messages
2,557
Likes
115
Hardly. Only point I made here is that just because India wishes to see it as sovereign territory doesn't make it.

It is what it is. I didn't make that term up. The UN and a host of different international organizations consider it such, and so will I. If you wish to disregard my very relevant use of the term, you may do so, but it in no way can be considered a rant.
I don't remember the last time the UN had anything to do with the issue. The only one bothered about Kashmir is Pakistan and that is a reality.

You can't get on the table what you couldn't in war. We are waiting for the realization to dawn on you.

In the meanwhile if you care for Kashmiris, you can stop sending terrorists of all hues and making life hell for them (thankfully you have been doing that for some time now). More than one Kashmiri has said that Pakistan wants to fight till the last Kashmiri.

I've been through that thread. Which is why I felt confident enough to ask you for neutral sources, because I know there are none. 'Some' disgusting images of dead bodies does not 'prove' that a genocide of a whole race has taken place. Lets be professional about it and not substitute facts with cheap dramatics and third rate nationalist websites.

So you keep saying. In this case it should be very easy for you to look it up. Please provide a link or reference to any internationally recognized or reasonably neutral source of information that records 'Operation Searchlight' as genocide. BTW I might remind you, that genocide is a very serious term with very grave connotations. It is only used in the most extreme and serious instances of ethnic cleansing. And has only been used very occasionally since WWII and these few cases have been handled very seriously in the international criminal court and other international forums. If you're using the term loosely, don't. I await your substantiation.
Well, I know that people like you don't want to face the obvious and want to keep alive the myth that there is something still to be proven about the incidents of 1971. That it was not conclusive, that the violations were from both sides (as if it takes away the significance of what the armed forces did to their own population).

The 'Operation Searchlight' was only a start, the genocide went on for months. I think there were very substantial and reputed sources mentioned in that thread.

I (and others) use the term genocide fully understanding it's import. If Rwanda, Cambodia and Bosnia were genocides, Bangladesh in 1971 certainly was.

Anyway, we can discuss those events in another thread here. I will do that once I get some time. At this point, let's move on on this thread.

I never said it does, don't attack straw-men. I never made that argument. All I've said is that the Baluchis are still an ethnic group of Pakistan, even if they are the smallest.
You said this:

I don't consider the aspirations of Pakistan smallest ethnic group to be a legitimate issue of debate between us.
Now it does give the impression that being the "smallest ethnic group" was an issue to you.

No, in raising the issue you're being the hypocrite given that you're suppressing the will of a people who've never even been part of your country. These issues have no comparison, they represent completely different dimensions and realities. Talk about issues on their merit, even if it were true that most Balochis want to be rid of Pakistan, like most Kashmiris do India, it has no bearing on the rights and wrongs of the Indian occupation of Kashmir. IF Pakistan's control over Baluchistan was inherently wrong and illegal, which it is not, that still does not excuse India's disregard for the Kashmir issue, the Kashmiri people, international protocol, and the chances of peace between our two countries which is negated because of Kashmir. Two wrongs don't make a right. You're whole argument is inherently and fundamentally flawed, so I won't even bother entertaining it and explaining to you the endless differences.
Well this is a rant if there ever was one.

You guys have a certain way of thinking and that is fine. You also want to force it down the throats of everyone else and that doesn't work.

The highlighted parts are mere conjectures on your part and what you believe must be facts. They are not reality.

Yes, you better stop lecturing us on the differences and morality. It doesn't bear scrutiny.

The chances of peace between us don't are not negated because of Kashmir but because of other deep rooted factors. Kashmir is just a symptom.

If China was to invade an Indian province up north and annex it without the international community recognizing it, and Pakistan justifies the invasion by saying 'Indians should worry about the issues of Tamils down south before lecturing China about suppression', would that impress anyone? No. So instead of this rhetorical posturing, which basically comes down to 'who are you to tell us what is wrong', we should move beyond these childish, superficial, shallow and negative attitudes. If we sink to such a low denominator then the whole point of discussion becomes little more than bickering. Discuss the issue on its merit. If not, then I'll take myself somewhere else.
Totally irrelevant.

You can only delude yourself for so long. If you think that Baluchistan has more bearing on you than the long lingering dispute of Kashmir, then what more can I say. Kashmir is a dispute which has already caused 3 bloody wars and probably gave birth to nuclear weapons in the region. It is not something that can be shoved under the carpet, neither can military or diplomatic muscle alone make it vanish. But you still want to talk about Baluchistan instead, why? Because it has a greater bearing on you and you can't afford to look the other way? Maybe you if muster the courage to look away, you'd see the bleeding wound in our region called Kashmir. That is where the healing will start, if India wants to truly heal relations that is.
Its not "instead". We can discuss both the issues. Your sick and endless rants of Kashmir don't make it any bigger issue. Anyway don't turn this thread into a Kashmir thread. There is a dedicated thread on the issue. I know how Kashmir makes many Pakistanis act like a broken record.

If I, like you, try to ignore Kashmir then I know in the long term things will be worse for the both of us. Which is why I won't do so. I want Pakistan and India to have a future. The Kashmiri people deserve the chance to choose, a chance they were never given, and Pakistan and India need to respect that.
They need this as much as any other poeple of the subcontinent. Not any more, not any less.
 

natarajan

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2009
Messages
2,592
Likes
762
india is the best option compared to Pakistanis and also they cant remain independent as we all remember wat happened in 1948(maharaja):wink:
 

Kasrkin

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
21
Likes
1
I don't remember the last time the UN had anything to do with the issue.
Don’t dissemble. I don’t remember arguing over whether the UN has or has not hosted a debate over Kashmir recently. Your issue was with my use of the term Disputed Territory, which is one that represents the view of the UN, and others, as stated in UNSC resolutions pertaining to the issue, resolutions that have not been repealed or altered. Just because you wish to kick this reality out of memory, does not mean it’s not a reality.

You can't get on the table what you couldn't in war. We are waiting for the realization to dawn on you.
While we are waiting for the simple, and fundamental, ethical reality to dawn on you that what you’ve illegally and militarily acquired does not necessarily becomes yours. You’re stuck up in this notion that military prowess alone means you have the right to take what you can. Here is the heart of our problem. We may be in denial of Kashmir’s imposed reality, but you’re in denial of a basic concept in human morality: just because you can do something, or have done something, and no one has been able to stop you, doesn’t make it right.

In the meanwhile if you care for Kashmiris, you can stop sending terrorists of all hues and making life hell for them (thankfully you have been doing that for some time now)
But we have stopped assisting Kashmiri efforts to acquire freedom through armed resistance, as you’ve admitted yourself in the very same line. Maybe you can take a step in that direction too and reduce, if not withdraw, your heavy military footprint from the valley? Or perhaps try to reconcile with separatist elements so they may be included in the discussions that pertain to Kashmir’s future?

Well, I know that people like you don't want to face the obvious and want to keep alive the myth that there is something still to be proven about the incidents of 1971. That it was not conclusive, that the violations were from both sides (as if it takes away the significance of what the armed forces did to their own population).
Again, you choose to dissemble. I have had issue with your repeated use of the term genocide but I’ve never denied that excesses were committed, indeed on both sides, and do note that, unlike you, I’m not justifying a wrong with a wrong. Furthermore, if your contention that what the Pakistanis did was on a deliberate scale and intensity as to be considered ‘genocide’, then please make me ‘face’ this so-called ‘reality’ by displaying simple references to the term from neutral or impartial sources. Since you’re the one who can’t substantiate your claims, despite my repeated requests, the ‘myth making’ is very much yours, not mine.

The 'Operation Searchlight' was only a start, the genocide went on for months. I think there were very substantial and reputed sources mentioned in that thread. I (and others) use the term genocide fully understanding it's import. If Rwanda, Cambodia and Bosnia were genocides, Bangladesh in 1971 certainly was.
Again, is it so hard for you to PM me these very ‘credible’ and ‘reputed’ sources, since I can’t spot such anywhere, instead of insisting on what you can’t prove.

You said this:
I don't consider the aspirations of Pakistan smallest ethnic group to be a legitimate issue of debate between us.
Now it does give the impression that being the "smallest ethnic group" was an issue to you.
Just because you’ve highlighted it, doesn’t mean I did too. Now instead of sticking to a misconception that I’ve already clarified, it would be more productive if you consider, and address, the paragraph and context that went with that line.

Well this is a rant if there ever was one.
As per that standard, the line I addressed was not?

You guys have a certain way of thinking and that is fine. You also want to force it down the throats of everyone else and that doesn't work.
Actually, to be fair, it is you, along with many others here, who is convinced that Kashmir is an Indian state and that no one else’s view regarding that matters. Thus when I say Kashmir is not part of your country, with the authority of UNSC behind me, you say that I’m ‘conjecturing’. When I mention that Kashmiris do not want to be part of India, which is why India is bitterly averse to holding a plebiscite so they may choose, you rather I’m imaging things, without addressing any of it. I’m not sure how enjoyable this debate will be, and I’m certainly not the one who trying to force unsubstantiated beliefs down anyone’s throat here.

The chances of peace between us don't are not negated because of Kashmir but because of other deep rooted factors. Kashmir is just a symptom.
What is the ‘root factor’ then? That the Pakistanis are unreasonable? That we’re war-bent? Evil, bitter, jealous perhaps? No, Kashmir is the heart of the problem, anything else is dissemblance.

Its not "instead". We can discuss both the issues. Your sick and endless rants of Kashmir don't make it any bigger issue. Anyway don't turn this thread into a Kashmir thread. There is a dedicated thread on the issue. I know how Kashmir makes many Pakistanis act like a broken record.
Now that sir is a rant if I ever saw one. The only reason I’ve brought up Kashmir was because I, and my country through me, was being accused of not eliminating anti-Indian militants from Kashmir entirely. I’ve pointed out that in order to achieve that lofty goal, the issue of Kashmir will need to be addressed. A comprehensive and mutually agreed solution will have many positive consequences, some of which I’ve mentioned. Furthermore, the more Indians here will push me about Baluchistan, the more I’m obliged to point out the Kashmir is presenting the primarily genuine mutual concern for our respective peoples and nations. Lastly, calling Kashmir an unresolved Disputed Territory is not ‘sick’, but imagining Baluchistan to be one is.

They need this as much as any other poeple of the subcontinent. Not any more, not any less.
No, actually, they do deserve the chance to choose, more than anyone else, because they’ve been robbed of that for the past 60 years. Also, India and Pakistan need to give them the chance with much urgency, because their fate is entwined with our prospect for a peaceful future.

However, the UN made a very bad decision. By requiring India to hold plebiscite, it awarded the naked aggression of Pakistan, and ruled against India, which had played by the rules. This solution was obviously not acceptable to India. And that is where it remains to this day.
If the UN decision is inconvenient and embarrassing for India in hindsight, doesn't mean that it was a 'bad' decision as per an objective evaluation, and it certainly does not mean that it can or should be ignored. It would've been very constructive and fruitful, had India felt the need to purse and honor its commitments, particularly in regards to the plebiscite. Instead, hopelessly dubious interpretations were taken, and unilateral decisions made, that disregard multilateral ones. If you insist that India has a sound 'legal case', which I very much doubt and will perhaps argue over on another thread, then I'm simply obliged to ask why India hasn't taken this case to the UN to legalize its unrecognized annexation? Instead, Kashmir, or the 'K' word, is avoided by Indian diplomats and media elements alike.

Thanks.
 

Antimony

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
487
Likes
14
But we have stopped assisting Kashmiri efforts to acquire freedom through armed resistance, as you’ve admitted yourself in the very same line. Maybe you can take a step in that direction too and reduce, if not withdraw, your heavy military footprint from the valley? Or perhaps try to reconcile with separatist elements so they may be included in the discussions that pertain to Kashmir’s future?
Kasrkin,

I am going to step in here and interject 2 points

  1. You say you have stopped assisting Kashmiri armed resistance (your term): It does not mean that you will not do so the moment our backs are turned or the spotlight is off or whenener the SWAT operations come to a hold. Kargil happened after the Lahore bus yatra.
  2. Kargil : I am briging this point again, to highlight the fact that Kargil does represent a strategic chokehold on the geography of the land. However ill conceived the Pakistani side's tactical operations may have been, there is no doubt that strategically, this was a brilliant plan to cut off half the state to Indian forces. I have zero doubt that Pakistan will try this again. And no point trying to bring in 1984 and Siachen, I am not arguing a political point here. The same is with the Northeast, and thankfully the GOI is waking up to that fact

In spite of that, the powers of the armed forces under the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act is under review. Which to me seems an indication that the GOI is doing everything it possibly can to lighten its military presence in the state.
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
No, in raising the issue you're being the hypocrite given that you're suppressing the will of a people who've never even been part of your country. These issues have no comparison, they represent completely different dimensions and realities. Talk about issues on their merit, even if it were true that most Balochis want to be rid of Pakistan, like most Kashmiris do India, it has no bearing on the rights and wrongs of the Indian occupation of Kashmir. IF Pakistan's control over Baluchistan was inherently wrong and illegal, which it is not, that still does not excuse India's disregard for the Kashmir issue, the Kashmiri people, international protocol, and the chances of peace between our two countries which is negated because of Kashmir. Two wrongs don't make a right. You're whole argument is inherently and fundamentally flawed, so I won't even bother entertaining it and explaining to you the endless differences.

If China was to invade an Indian province up north and annex it without the international community recognizing it, and Pakistan justifies the invasion by saying 'Indians should worry about the issues of Tamils down south before lecturing China about suppression', would that impress anyone? No. So instead of this rhetorical posturing, which basically comes down to 'who are you to tell us what is wrong', we should move beyond these childish, superficial, shallow and negative attitudes. If we sink to such a low denominator then the whole point of discussion becomes little more than bickering. Discuss the issue on its merit. If not, then I'll take myself somewhere else.
With due regards, the election with international observers including Ambassadors and human rights hawks present had a high voting percentage.

There was the terrorists threat, the Hurriyat boycott threat and yet the voting percentages was higher than many parts of India.

Therefore, would it mean that the Kashmiris want to secede?

I would not know.

As far as Balochistan is concerned, the use of helicopter gunships and Artillery and the Air Force, indicates how keen they are to stay with Paksitan.

We don't use these weapons in our CI environment! ;)
 

Vinod2070

मध्यस्थ
Ambassador
Joined
Feb 22, 2009
Messages
2,557
Likes
115
Don’t dissemble. I don’t remember arguing over whether the UN has or has not hosted a debate over Kashmir recently. Your issue was with my use of the term Disputed Territory, which is one that represents the view of the UN, and others, as stated in UNSC resolutions pertaining to the issue, resolutions that have not been repealed or altered. Just because you wish to kick this reality out of memory, does not mean it’s not a reality.
Well, all I meant was that this doesn't seem to as much of a priority for UN as it is for you, considering that the UN has not even bothered to revisit the issue for decades. IIRC, the UN chief mentioned that the Kashmir resolutions have become irrelevant.

So perhaps you are late by a few decades in trying to derive legitimacy from the UN resolutions. Time and events have moved on.

While we are waiting for the simple, and fundamental, ethical reality to dawn on you that what you’ve illegally and militarily acquired does not necessarily becomes yours. You’re stuck up in this notion that military prowess alone means you have the right to take what you can. Here is the heart of our problem. We may be in denial of Kashmir’s imposed reality, but you’re in denial of a basic concept in human morality: just because you can do something, or have done something, and no one has been able to stop you, doesn’t make it right.
Perhaps we can go back a little in time and vacate the whole series of external aggressions (starting from Bin Qasim) from the subcontinent. Were they not illegal by your definition?

Were the attacks and temple demolitions by Gaznavi in line with human morality? Timur Lame's genocide?

Now I know this is a bit off-topic but I would like your sincere thoughts on these issues. Don't link them with Kashmir though, I am also not doing that.

the point is we have a complex history and that does have a bearing on the present.
But we have stopped assisting Kashmiri efforts to acquire freedom through armed resistance, as you’ve admitted yourself in the very same line. Maybe you can take a step in that direction too and reduce, if not withdraw, your heavy military footprint from the valley? Or perhaps try to reconcile with separatist elements so they may be included in the discussions that pertain to Kashmir’s future?
The heavy deployments started after the 1989 terrorist campaign and I am sure that when the government and security agencies have made a determination that the security situation warrants a reduced footprint, it will happen.

No one will be happier than us if that becomes possible ASAP.

GOI has been talking to the separatist elements. It is mostly they who keep running away on one pretext or the other and are hopelessly divided among themselves.

Again, you choose to dissemble. I have had issue with your repeated use of the term genocide but I’ve never denied that excesses were committed, indeed on both sides, and do note that, unlike you, I’m not justifying a wrong with a wrong. Furthermore, if your contention that what the Pakistanis did was on a deliberate scale and intensity as to be considered ‘genocide’, then please make me ‘face’ this so-called ‘reality’ by displaying simple references to the term from neutral or impartial sources. Since you’re the one who can’t substantiate your claims, despite my repeated requests, the ‘myth making’ is very much yours, not mine.

Again, is it so hard for you to PM me these very ‘credible’ and ‘reputed’ sources, since I can’t spot such anywhere, instead of insisting on what you can’t prove.
I have started a thread on this issue at: http://www.defenceforum.in/forum/indian-sub-continent/3872-1971-bangladesh-genocide.html

Let's discuss it there.

Just because you’ve highlighted it, doesn’t mean I did too. Now instead of sticking to a misconception that I’ve already clarified, it would be more productive if you consider, and address, the paragraph and context that went with that line.
OK. I drop this. Lets move on. So I assume that Balochi aspirations are something you approve of. Right?

As per that standard, the line I addressed was not?
No. I just asked you to practice what you preach. That is the first litmus test of sincerity. How is that a rant?

Actually, to be fair, it is you, along with many others here, who is convinced that Kashmir is an Indian state and that no one else’s view regarding that matters. Thus when I say Kashmir is not part of your country, with the authority of UNSC behind me, you say that I’m ‘conjecturing’. When I mention that Kashmiris do not want to be part of India, which is why India is bitterly averse to holding a plebiscite so they may choose, you rather I’m imaging things, without addressing any of it. I’m not sure how enjoyable this debate will be, and I’m certainly not the one who trying to force unsubstantiated beliefs down anyone’s throat here.
We don't consider the plebiscite demand to be a legitimate one. It doesn't mean that Kashmiris support Pakistan. It just means that for us Pakistan is not an issue for us in this matter.

We addressed the UN part earlier.

What you are imagining is that the Kashmiris support Pakistan. There have been surveys in Kashmir that totally negate this.
What is the ‘root factor’ then? That the Pakistanis are unreasonable? That we’re war-bent? Evil, bitter, jealous perhaps? No, Kashmir is the heart of the problem, anything else is dissemblance.
The root factor is the TNT, the theory that Hindus and Muslims can't live togather, that they have to be enemies. You believe in that and that is why it is so important for you to claim the "Muslim" Kashmir. the UN and everything else comes much later. You consider Pakistan to be the inheritor of the legacy of Bin Qasim and all other invaders to the subcontinent.

However this never prevented you from trying to snatch Junagarh and Hyderabad from us which were overwhelmingly Hindu.

I don't have to say why this is anathma to us.

Now that sir is a rant if I ever saw one. The only reason I’ve brought up Kashmir was because I, and my country through me, was being accused of not eliminating anti-Indian militants from Kashmir entirely. I’ve pointed out that in order to achieve that lofty goal, the issue of Kashmir will need to be addressed. A comprehensive and mutually agreed solution will have many positive consequences, some of which I’ve mentioned. Furthermore, the more Indians here will push me about Baluchistan, the more I’m obliged to point out the Kashmir is presenting the primarily genuine mutual concern for our respective peoples and nations. Lastly, calling Kashmir an unresolved Disputed Territory is not ‘sick’, but imagining Baluchistan to be one is.
Anyway, I suggest we discuss both Balochistan and Kashmir in their own threads. I can reply to this but it is not a game of point scoring, rather trying to understand the POV of the other person.
No, actually, they do deserve the chance to choose, more than anyone else, because they’ve been robbed of that for the past 60 years. Also, India and Pakistan need to give them the chance with much urgency, because their fate is entwined with our prospect for a peaceful future.
They choose their destiny in every free and fair election as all other Indians do.

It is a bit hard for us to believe that Pakistan and Pakistanis are the champions of free will and people's aspirations! History doesn't bear this out.

But anything that we can do to ensure peace in Kashmir is surely welcome.
 

venom

DFI Technocrat
Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
601
Likes
11
China delivers warship to Pakistan: navy

KARACHI — China on Thursday delivered the first of four state-of-the-art frigates commissioned by nuclear-armed Pakistan from top ally Beijing, a naval spokesman said.

"The first F-22P Frigate constructed for the Pakistan navy at the Hudong Zhonghua Shipyard in Shanghai was delivered to Pakistan on Thursday," said Lieutenant Commander Shakeel Ahmed.

In keeping with contracts signed between China and Pakistan in 2005, the frigates will be equipped with anti-submarine helicopters, surface-to-surface and surface-to-air missiles and other defence systems.

"The F-22P frigates will not only enhance the war fighting potential of the Pakistan navy but will also strengthen the indigenous ship-building capability of the country," said Ahmed.

The announcement came two days after Pakistan hit out at India, branding its rival's first nuclear-powered submarine "detrimental" to regional peace and vowing to take "appropriate steps" to maintain a "strategic balance".

Relations between nuclear-armed rivals India and Pakistan have plummeted since Islamist gunmen killed 166 people in Mumbai last November, attacks that New Delhi blamed on banned Pakistani group Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT).

India on Sunday launched the first of five planned submarines by naming the 6,000-tonne INS Arihant (Destroyer of Enemies), powered by an 85-megawatt nuclear reactor that can reach 44 kilometres an hour (24 knots).

China is Pakistan's strongest ally and Islamabad relies heavily on Beijing for its defence needs.

Many Chinese companies operate in Pakistan and China is involved in the construction of a deep-sea port at Gwadar on the Arabian Sea.

AFP: China delivers warship to Pakistan: navy
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
Good that China is helping.

Quid pro quo.

It will ensure that Pakistan halts the fundamentalist from going to Xinjiang!

And Pakistan madrassa are steaming over!
 

johnee

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2009
Messages
3,473
Likes
499
In the context of Pakistani concern regarding Indian interference and terrorism. Not in the context of India's concern or involvement in the political and ethnic issues present there. That is still matter in which Pakistan, and the rest of the world, will not tolerate Indian meddling. The point was to deter and address the notion of Indian interference, not, as you suggest, to encourage it.
I didnt get you. Please explain in detail, sir.

Lastly, Kashmir was not excluded. It was agreed that all outstanding issues would be addressed, which includes Kashmir, even if not explicitly named.
Well, the outstanding issues have not been defined jointly so far. So, we cant make any predictions, right?!?

But the document explicitly mentions Balochistan. So, we need to discuss what exactly is happening in Balochistan. Kashmir at best is on peripherals and at worst is excluded to Indo-Pak discussion(based on Joint statement).
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
Kerskin,

What is happening in Balochistan wherein helicopter gunships, artillery, missile and everything lethal and not used in CI has to be used?

Is it war against and enemy or is it CI?

How come India is not doing the same in Kashmir, if indeed they are as dangerous to India, as Balochistan is to Pakistan?

Is Balochistan such a lost case?
 

I-G

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Jun 16, 2009
Messages
2,736
Likes
57
Pakistani mob attacks churches, houses of Christians

Pakistani mob attacks churches, houses of Christians
PTI 1 August 2009, 12:12pm IST


ISLAMABAD: Muslim fanatics attacked churches and burnt down scores of houses of the Christian community in Pakistan's Punjab province, a news report
said on Saturday.

A mob attacked two churches and gutted 75 houses of Christians over the alleged desecration of papers inscribed with Quran verses at a wedding ceremony in Punjab's Azafi Abadi village at Chak 95-JB on Thursday, Atif Jamil Pagaan and Ashfaq Fateh, leaders of the minority community was quoted as saying by the Dawn newspaper today.

Fearing attack, the members of the minority community fled the village that allowed the fanatics to attack the church, houses and cattle, the report said.

The station house officer of Gojra Sadar has been suspended by the District Police Officer (DPO) Inkisar Khan, the Pakistani daily said.

DPO Khan said a case has been registered against Mukhtar Maseeh, Talib Maseeh and Imran Maseeh, who were accused of desecrating the papers inscribed with Quran verses. it said.

Christians are the second largest religious minority community in Pakistan after Hindus. The total number of Christians in Pakistan is approximately nearly 3 million or 1.6 of the population.

Christians, like other minorities, have been targetted in Pakistan for flouting blasphemy laws. International rights groups have urged the government to change the law because it was being used to terrorize religious minorities.

Sajid Ishaq, the Interfaith League chairman, has expressed concern over the violence against the Christian minorities.

Christians in southern Pakistan held demonstration last Sunday against an attack in Sikendarabad in which four persons were injured, leading to forcible occupation of a primary school, The Christian Post reported.

The attack came barely a month after a mob attacked 100 houses of Christian in Punjab province's Kasur district, destroying several houses and injuring many on blasphemy charge, it said.

"That attack was made in presence of police who did not move to save the Christians and rather protected assailants who took control of primary school building and threw children out of it," an eyewitness was quoted as saying in the report.

"More than 1,200 of Christian families have been living in Sikendarabad near Kotri even before the creation of Pakistan," he stressed.

In November 2005, 3,000 militant Islamists attacked Christians in Sangla Hill in Pakistan and destroyed churches. The attack was over allegations of violation of blasphemy laws by a Pakistani Christian named Yousaf Masih.

In February 2006, churches and Christian schools were targeted in protests over the publications of the Jyllands-Posten cartoons in Denmark, leaving two elderly women injured and many homes and properties destroyed.

Pakistan was recommended by the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) in May 2006 to be designated as a "Country of Particular Concern" (CPC) by the Department of State.

Pakistani mob attacks churches, houses of Christians - Pakistan - World - NEWS - The Times of India
 

duhastmish

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Mar 9, 2009
Messages
202
Likes
108
Country flag
hmmmm - happens every where - but we must condemn these idiot's attack - who dont have a clue about religion and fight for their own friggin weird propoganda issues.

this just proven how bloody - smiler pakistan and india are ???? like kandhmal to Gojra Sadar . idiots are found every where try finding one you will end up with a million.
 

I-G

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Jun 16, 2009
Messages
2,736
Likes
57
Communal clashes in Pak; 40 houses burnt

NDTV Correspondent, Saturday August 1, 2009, Lahore




In Pakistan, at least six people have been killed and 14 injured in clashes between two communities. The incident took place in Gojra village, which is about 160 km from Lahore.

The mob burnt about 40 houses and looted more than a 100. The clashes broke out over the alleged desecration of a religious book.

Witnesses said the persons were killed when police fired at the mob.

Witnesses also said at least five persons were injured in an exchange of fire between the two groups though there was no official word on casualties.

When the mob was stopped by a large contingent of police, it blocked the Gojra-Faislabad road and disrupted train services.

When they failed to disperse the protestors, police opened fire at the mob, witnesses said. Reports also said two senior police officers were injured in the clashes.

Communal clashes in Pak; 40 houses burnt
 

I-G

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Jun 16, 2009
Messages
2,736
Likes
57
Zardari condemns Gojra riots, 800 booked
IANS 2 August 2009, 07:46pm IST


GOJRA: Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari has strongly condemned the violence in the country's Punjab province in which nine people, including six women, were killed and dozens injured after two rival groups fought with guns and sticks, media reports said Sunday.

The violence erupted Saturday in the Gojra tehsil in Toba Tek Singh district of the province over the alleged desecration of the Holy Quran by one of the groups.

Fierce clashes broke out when a mob marched towards a village of the rival community to settle scores after the news spread. The authorities Sunday booked nearly 800 people for rioting and killing people, Geo TV said.

Meanwhile, on the orders of President Zardari a heavy contingent of police was immediately dispatched to the troubled area to bring the situation under control. The police had to open fire to stop the rampaging mobs, the Nation newspaper reported on its website.

Officials said 40 houses and a church were torched by one of the rival groups. Tension has been running high between the Muslims and Christians in the area over the alleged desecration of the Holy Quran.

Television footage showed burning of houses, streets strewn with blackened furniture and people firing at one another from their rooftops. Federal Minister for Minorities Shahbaz Bhatti alleged a mob "misled by extremists" attacked a Christian neighbourhood and torched dozens of houses.

"We have received six bodies with burn injuries - four women, a man and a child," Abdul Hamid, an official of the health ministry, said.

Zardari has directed the minority affairs minister to remain in Gojra until the situation becomes normal and to take steps for the security of people.Punjab Law Minister Rana Sanaullah condemned the attack and said an inquiry has been ordered.

He said a preliminary investigation showed there was no desecration of the Holy Quran. "It was just a rumour which was exploited by anti-state elements to create chaos."

"I request both the Muslim and the Christian communities to show restraint," he said.

The government will take strict action against the rioters and police who failed to stop the violence, Sanaullah added.

Meanwhile, the families of the victims staged a protest against the killings by laying the bodies of their loved ones on the railway tracks.

The families demanded immediate arrests of those responsible for the violence.

Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif has announced a compensation of Rs.500,000 for the families of the each of those killed in the violence.

Zardari condemns Gojra riots, 800 booked - Pakistan - World - NEWS - The Times of India
 

Global Defence

Articles

Top