As India rises, what does it have to lose if it goes to war?

[Indx TechStyle]

It seems you are eternally living in 2030-2050 rather than 2016. Always hallucinating of a rosy future when the present is filled with lethal thorns.

I'm predicting 2050 on basis of Roses of present (and World Bank, IMF and PWC to some extent) because there is a huge Universe beyond the Uri Attack to watch.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

One more intellectual.
Conspiracies over Indian HR violation and so called Hindu Fundamentalisn by a country itself based on religion.
Modi’s war

The writer is a former Pakistan ambassador to the UN.

FRUSTRATED by Pakistan’s refusal to bow to Indian diktat, encouraged by its strategic partnership with the US, alarmed by the renewed revolt in India-held Jammu and Kashmir and humiliated by the killing of 18 Indian soldiers in Uri, Narendra Modi is on the path of war against Pakistan. He has vowed to “isolate” Pakistan, support Baloch separatists, dam Pakistan’s rivers and conduct “surgical strikes” against Pakistan. Pakistan must assess these threats objectively. Its response should be characterised by resolve, responsibility and reciprocity.

New Delhi’s confrontational course reflects the ideological nostrums of the BJP-RSS cohort and the presumption that America will endorse Indian intimidation of Pakistan. The US no doubt would welcome a degree of Indian pressure on Pakistan to promote its own objectives, especially Pakistani action against the Haqqani ‘network’ operating in Afghanistan. To please India, it is also asking Pakistan to suppress pro-Kashmiri groups (LeT and JeM).

But Washington is not likely, at this time, to declare Pakistan a “state sponsor of terrorism”. The resolution moved in the Congress by two legislators is unlikely to be adopted much less endorsed by the current US administration. Declaring Pakistan a terrorism sponsor would hurt Pakistan, but would also lead to termination of all Pak-US cooperation, with dire consequences for peace in Afghanistan and South Asia. In any case, America is not the world. Isolating Pakistan will be a challenging, ultimately fruitless endeavour for India.

There’s a real danger that Modi may be tempted to take further reckless action.

China is a neighbour of both Pakistan and India and Pakistan’s strategic partner. In a conflict, China’s posture would be more relevant than America’s. Beijing has advised both Pakistan and India to open dialogue and exercise restraint. But it’s obvious which one needs to be restrained at present. Indian aggression against Pakistan will evoke a strong Chinese response.

The third major power, Russia, which has considerable regional influence, is no longer India’s all-weather ally, given Modi’s rush to jump into America’s strategic lap. Significantly, even as India’s anti-Pakistan rhetoric has been ramped up after Uri, the first joint Pakistan-Russian military exercises have gone ahead — that too in Gilgit-Baltistan, to which India lays claim.

Bangladesh, Bhutan, Afghanistan and Sri Lanka have bowed to Indian pressure and joined its decision not to attend the Saarc summit (which Pakistan should have itself cancelled in response to Modi’s threats). Their powerlessness illustrates how Pakistan’s national independence would be compromised were it to succumb to Indian hegemony. It validates the wisdom of our founding fathers in creating Pakistan and of our leaders in securing an effective conventional and nuclear capability to neutralise India’s ability to coerce Pakistan.

Afghanistan’s current alignment with India is strategically more significant. Partly, it is the result of Pakistan’s over-promise and under-delivery of a dialogue with the Afghan Taliban; partly, it is a reflection of the US attempt to use India to displace the influence of Pakistan and China in Afghanistan. But India’s presence in Afghanistan, like that of the US, is vulnerable to the hostility of Afghan insurgents. And, if Afghan territory continues to be utilised, especially by India, for terrorism and subversion against Pakistan, the latter has options for direct action to counter this. Pakistan has considerable space, now and in future, to reverse Kabul’s hostility through incentives and disincentives.

Modi’s threat to support Baloch separatists is ‘real’. Indian and Afghan intelligence agencies are already active in sponsoring subversion and terrorism by the BLA and other insurgents in Balochistan. This is likely to be intensified. Pakistan should be ready to inflict pain on the perpetrators of such hostile intervention. It should adopt more robust and imaginative measures, combining counterterrorism and accommodation of legitimate Baloch grievances to defeat the insurgency.

Modi’s desire to choke off Pakistan’s rivers is a more distant, yet more existential, threat. Pakistan should apprise the World Bank and the Indus Waters Treaty’s arbitration mechanism of the grave consequences of such action. Under international law, arbitrary blockage of rivers amounts to ‘aggression’ — justifying a military response from Pakistan.

In the immediate context, war is most likely if India conducts ‘surgical strikes’ or other military operations against Pakistan. Modi’s men have had to reconsider their post-Uri threats to launch such strikes. No doubt they’ve been cautioned against doing so by most countries. The Indians have tried, disingenuously, to portray their artillery attacks along the LoC as ‘surgical strikes’ to appease whipped-up public fervour in India to ‘punish’ Pakistan. The open Indian claim to have crossed the LoC provides Pakistan with justification to retaliate against India across the LoC at a time of its choosing. Hopefully, Pakistan’s restraint in refraining will not encourage India to try ‘bolder’ action which could lead to a general conflict.

There’s a real danger that as frustration at the failure of threats and bluster mounts in India, and Kashmiri protests continue, Modi may be tempted to take further reckless action. There are signs that India has been planning over the past few months for the possibility of a conflict with Pakistan. It would be wise for Pakistan to warn the world, including the Security Council, of the dangers of such adventurism. Islamabad should demonstrate, in part through its deployments, its readiness to respond to such Indian aggression.

Nor should Pakistan be diverted by the Modi-manufactured crisis from pressing for a just, durable solution to the Kashmir dispute. Unless this is resolved in accordance with the Kashmiri people’s wishes, they will persist in revolting against Indian rule. India will continue to respond brutally, evoking militant retaliation, for which India will always blame Pakistan. Unless Kashmir is resolved, war between Pakistan and India will remain an ever-present possibility.

To this end, Pakistan should open consultations with Security Council members mentioned by Nawaz Sharif in his recent address to the UN General Assembly. In such consultations, Pakistan’s aim should be to secure support for ending India’s human rights violations in occupied Kashmir, progressive demilitarisation of Jammu and Kashmir and elaboration of modalities for a free and fair plebiscite there.

Even if war is avoided, normalisation of Pak-India ties is unlikely until the departure of the Hindu fundamentalist cohort from office. Pakistanis, including those who entertained illusions of friendship with Modi’s India, must unite to defend our nation from the menace we wisely escaped 69 years ago.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

India Firing At Us Every Night, Wednesday Was the Worst: Pak Army Spokesman

 

[Indx TechStyle]

'India’s pursuit of hegemonic policies creating instability in region'

GENEVA: The Permanent Representative of Pakistan to the United Nations in Geneva, Ambassador Tehmina Janjua, said on Tuesday that India’s pursuit of hegemonic policies is creating instability at the regional and global level.

She added India’s efforts for military domination in the region are contributing to the same.

“The pursuit of hegemonic policies in South Asia by India and its efforts for military domination are creating instability both at the global and regional levels,” said the permanent representative at the Conference on Disarmament, a 192 member UN Committee which addresses disarmament and international security matters.

Highlighting India’s recent display of irresponsible behaviour, Janjua elaborated that South Asia’s security environment has suffered due to India’s arms build-up and a refusal to engage in any meaningful dialogue on regional security.

Referring to Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s address in the recently concluded United Nations General Assembly session, the ambassador said Pakistan is ready to agree on a bilateral arrangement with India on nuclear test ban and a response from India is still awaited on the proposal.

“Peace and stability in South Asia would not be possible without resolving underlying disputes especially the Jammu and Kashmir dispute; agreeing on measures for nuclear and missile restraint, and instituting conventional forces balance,” said Janjua.

She added that Pakistan’s proposal for a strategic restraint regime, based on these three inter-locking elements, remained on the table.

Pakistan at the meeting also demanded an urgent response from India over Pakistan’s proposal for the strategic restraint regime and the premier’s recent proposal for a bilateral arrangement on imposing ban on nuclear tests.

“Pakistan’s conduct continues to be defined by restraint and responsibility, and avoidance of an arms race.”

Somebody tell these kids, nobody is racing with such cockroach sized countries.

Referring to Pakistan’s bid for the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), Janjua shed light on Pakistan’s efforts towards strengthening of nuclear security and safety.

“We have instituted a stringent national export control system and a robust nuclear security regime that are at par with the best international standards,” said the permanent representative.

Soaring tensions

Earlier in September, in one of the worst episodes of cross-border firing along the Line of Control, at least two Pakistan Army soldiers were killed as Indian troops opened fire on the first line of defence.

India also claimed to have performed a surgical strike by crossing the disputed boundary. The Indian claims were rubbished by Pakistan Army.

Later it emerged that an Indian soldier was captured by the Pakistan Army, while Indian soldiers were also killed in the episode of firing across the LoC.

An Indian army official based in New Delhi said, “It is confirmed one soldier from 37 Rashtriya Rifles with weapons has inadvertently crossed over to the Pakistan side of the Line of Control”.

Following India's claims of surgical strikes, various quarters have asked for evidence of the same, including questions raised by India's opposition parties.

No evidence has yet been provided by either the Indian armed forces or the government.

 

[busesaway]

I wish Pakistan would just give up on India. It should join the Middle East and abolish all ties to India.

India, on the other hand, should seek to integrate Sri Lanka, Maldives, Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, Tibet, and China.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Pakistan neither wants, nor engaged in arms race in S. Asia: envoy

In a veiled reference to India, Pakistan voiced concern over the growing transfer of conventional armaments in volatile regions, saying it has every potential of fuelling instability and jeopardising the delicate regional balance.

“South Asia is a sensitive region where one state's military spending grossly and vastly outshadows all others,” Ambassador Tehmina Janjua, the permanent representative of Pakistan to the United Nations in Geneva, told the United Nations General Assembly's Disarmament and International Security Committee on Thursday.

“We remain concerned over the growing transfers of conventional armaments especially in volatile regions that are inconsistent with the imperatives of maintaining peace, security and stability,” she said in a thematic debate on conventional weapons.

“The policy of dual standards towards South Asia, based on narrow strategic, political and commercial considerations, must be eschewed,” the Pakistani envoy said.

Pakistan, she said, was committed to the establishment of strategic stability in South Asia, which includes an element of conventional force balance. “It [Pakistan] neither wants, nor is it engaged in an arms race in the region.”

In her remarks, Ambassador Janjua said efforts to eliminate nuclear weapons must not give way to an unworkable imbalance of conventional weapons similar to those that had triggered two world wars.

Spending on conventional arms had surpassed $1.7 trillion, she said, adding that the total budget of the United Nations was around 3 per cent of world military expenditures and that 33 times more money was being spent on fuelling and exacerbating conflicts than on preventing them.

Results would be few and far between if the issue of conventional weapons was not addressed in a comprehensive manner, the envoy said.

“The utility of a partial approach that separates motivations for arms production from the controls of their trade and transfers will be limited at best. As a result, these weapons will continue to fuel conflicts, destabilise states and societies, inflicting enormous pain and suffering to humanity,” she added.

Pakistan, she said, has developed the necessary legislative, regulatory, enforcement and institutional mechanisms to address the range of issues relating to conventional arms including small arms and light weapons.

“We are taking additional measures to strengthen the enforcement regime, which covers imports and licensing,” the envoy added.

Pakistan consider the the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) as a first step towards regulating trade and transfer of conventional weapons and note its entry into force, she said.

“Even as we continue our national review of the treaty, we believe that ATT's success, effectiveness and universality will be assessed on its non-discriminatory implementation in particular its criteria and strict adherence by its State Parties to the treaty principles,” she said.

The success of Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW), she said, lies in the delicate balance it seeks to maintain by minimising human suffering without sacrificing the legitimate security interests of states.

Ambassador Janjua said Pakistan shares the concerns about the acquisition and use by non-state actors and terrorists of small arms and Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs).

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Can the next Pakistani army chief get rid of the anti India lot?
One, two, three

The writer is a member of staff.​

ULTIMATELY, they’re going to have to do it. They know it, we know it and the targets do too: decommission the favourites; defang the good ones.

Get rid of militancy.

Think of it as an arc: from Musharraf to Kayani to Raheel to the next chief, a progressive clampdown against groups that had to be taken on.

Think of it as an arc: from Musharraf to Kayani to Raheel to the next chief, a progressive clampdown against groups that had to be taken on.

With Musharraf, it was Al Qaeda — 9/11 changed the world and the world changed how we did business.

From Kayani to Raheel, a second purge — the anti-Pakistan lot. They came after us, so we had to go after them.

And soon the next chief — confronted with the spectre of a roiling Kashmir and the long-term presence of a right-winger in Delhi causing the last line standing to go into agitated motion.

Something will have to be done before they do us in.

One, two, three — is there an arc of inevitability to it? Each successive chief having to go incrementally further than the last, not necessarily because he wanted to, but because he had to.

Lost in the warfare of the last month was an important consensus: the civilians said something needed to be done and the boys agreed — though, tellingly, the civilians resisted other actions in Punjab.

But the path to recognising that something has to be done about the anti-India lot has begun to be trodden.

It is the logic of utility, institutional self-preservation and the mechanism of jihad: if the groups exist, they occasionally have to go into action; and when they do, the outside world has a reaction.

Once, twice, thrice — from Mumbai to Pathankot to Uri, the future is being written for us.

Uri was perhaps the least significant and so the reaction the most telling. Pathankot was really the bigger deal, but it came a week after Modi’s Christmas Day Lahore surprise.

He couldn’t react as angrily because he had just pushed open the door to normalisation. So India swallowed its rage and the world kept quiet.

When Uri happened, there was no such luck. India went into a rage and the world sympathised, even before the facts were known.

On India, we don’t have the advantage we have with the Afghan-centric lot. There we can always nudge them across the border — go home to where you belong, we can tell them when the time comes.

With the anti-India lot, this is home. They’re from here and this is where the fallout will be suffered.

And so this is where they’ll have to be dealt with.

The past offers some clues about what the future could look like. With Al Qaeda there was an opening wallop followed by sustained action.

The wallop came because 9/11 was momentous. It is how history will be measured, time before 9/11 and time after.

The sustained, years-long pursuit of Al Qaeda, in Fata and the cities, came because America insisted and America had the resources to make sure we listened.

But then came the Osama anomaly — what the hell was he doing here for those long years in plain sight?

The lesson: we’re like the kid who hates homework. We’ll make a show of it in the beginning and then find reason to go slow or switch off.

Phase three, the push against the anti-India lot, will be a root canal — when we get around to it, we sure won’t like it and will find plenty of reason not to until it threatens to kill us.

From the push against the anti-Pakistan lot, a different lesson: the need to create a national narrative first, the fabled public consensus that the boys demand as the starting point.

The boys have already hinted at it in private: telling the civilians to get a parliamentary resolution; arguing that public opinion needs to be kept onside; cautioning against moving too fast and under a perception of Indian pressure.

It can seem a ruse and a delaying mechanism, but the experience of getting to the point of saying no more on the anti-Pakistan lot is mirroring the talking points on the anti-India lot — the boys won’t do it until they’re sure they have the public onside.

But let’s not kid ourselves — the anti-India lot are fundamentally a different challenge.

It’s not like that they’re hard to find — their power is derived from the ability to thrive in plain sight. When we do decide to go after them, the core networks can be shut down relatively quickly.

The challenge, then, is something else: separating them from the anti-India narrative.

We’ll have to find a way to shut down the anti-India lot without tampering with the story of India being Enemy No 1.

Because, as has become evident, India being Enemy No 1 is an unalterable truth, an inalienable position that the boys will never give up.

The logic of utility, institutional self-preservation and the mechanism of jihad means the boys can and will turn on the anti-India lot. What the boys will never do is give up on India being the enemy.

So how to do it? And can it happen as soon as the next chief?

It won’t happen when India is demanding furiously — this much we can see. And it won’t happen when the civilians try to make themselves look good.

But it can if — if — someone can figure out how to get the boys to do it without making it look like it was someone else’s idea and without the boys looking bad.

One, two, three — at least the logic is in place.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Trump would deserve Nobel prize if he resolves Kashmir dispute, says Sartaj Aziz

Adviser to prime minister on foreign affairs Sartaj Aziz on Tuesday said United States (US) president-elect Donald Trump would deserve Nobel prize if he intervenes and succeeds in resolving the Kashmir dispute between India and Pakistan.

"Trump would deserve Nobel prize if he helps resolve Kashmir dispute," he said on a lighter note while responding to a question regarding Trump's offer to mediate between Pakistan and India.

Aziz indicated that Pakistan will welcome any such intervention by the US president-elect Donald Trump.

The US president-elect, in an interview with an Indian newspaper in October, had said that he would be pleased to mediate between Pakistan and India.

“Well, I would love to see Pakistan and India get along, because that’s a very, very hot tinderbox. That would be a very great thing. I hope they can do it,” said Trump.

Pakistan to participate in Heart of Asia Conference in India

Sartaj Aziz, while talking to media in Islamabad, also revealed that Pakistan will participate in the Heart of Asia Conference scheduled to be held in India on December 3, 2016.

“Unlike India, that had sabotaged Saarc summit in Pakistan by pulling out, Pakistan will respond by participating in the Heart of Asia being held in Amritsar, India, on December 3,” confirmed Aziz.

The adviser said he himself will participate in the conference and will not repeat India’s blunder where it boycotted Saarc summit in November.

Aziz, however, said it has not been confirmed yet whether he will meet his Indian counterpart on the sidelines of the conference or not.

“Despite the fact that Indian forces killed our seven soldiers along Line of Control on Monday, Pakistan will not boycott the conference,” Aziz maintained.

@airtel @Project Dharma @Razor

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Tension at LoC by Indian forces threat to regional peace: PM

Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif says India's violation of the ceasefire agreement at the Line of Control (LoC) is an attempt to divert the world’s attention from the atrocities it is committing against innocent people of India-held Kashmir.

Chairing a meeting in Islamabad on Tuesday to review the situation at LoC a day after seven Pakistani soldiers were killed in cross-border firing, the premier said escalation of tension at LoC by Indian forces is a threat to regional peace and security.

He stressed that Pakistan cannot be bullied by such tactics as "we are fully capable of defending our soil against any belligerence".

He urged the United Nations to take notice of India's violation of the ceasefire agreement.

Adviser to the Prime Minister on Foreign Affairs Sartaj Aziz briefed the premier on the latest situation after the latest skirmish at the LoC.

Aziz said the recent incidents of firing by Indian forces have resulted in the deaths of 26 and injuries to 107 civilians.

The Foreign Office (FO) on Monday summoned Indian High Commissioner Gautam Bambawale to lodge a protest against the killing of soldiers across the LoC.

FO Spokesperson Nafees Zakaria said India must stop all ceasefire violations and avoid targeting residents along the LoC.

The prime minister was also briefed on Pakistan-US relations in wake of election of Donald Trump as the new American president.

Radio Pakistan quoted the PM as saying that Pakistan looks forward to closely work with the newly elected US government "for realisation of peace, security and prosperity in the region and beyond".

 

[Project Dharma]

Trump would deserve Nobel prize if he resolves Kashmir dispute, says Sartaj Aziz






Pakistan to participate in Heart of Asia Conference in India





@airtel @Project Dharma @Razor

Sartaj Aziz is widely mocked as a senile personality in Pakistan and he is proving true to his name. For the life of me, I cannot see a Trump mediation resulting in an outcome favorable for Islamic Pakistan and at the cost of making a permanent enemy out of India. Pakistan doesn't realize their insignificance at the world stage once the US is completely out of Afghanistan and Indian/US relations mature.

The perception of Pakistan in the West is comparable to Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq - a failed Islamic terrorist country.

 

[Razor]

Trump would deserve Nobel prize if he resolves Kashmir dispute, says Sartaj Aziz






Pakistan to participate in Heart of Asia Conference in India





@airtel @Project Dharma @Razor

Trump can start his own "Nobel Prize."

 

[IndianHawk]

Trump would deserve Nobel prize if he resolves Kashmir dispute, says Sartaj Aziz






Pakistan to participate in Heart of Asia Conference in India





@airtel @Project Dharma @Razor

Trump can !!
He can cease Pakistani nukes India can snatch POK hence Kashmir dispute resolved.

Trump should get a Nobel.:bounce:

If he also helps us in liberating baloochistan he should get two Nobels.:biggrin2:

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Strategic Weapons in Wrong Hands
BY ANAYA SHAHID
NOV 23, 2016

During the Indian Premier Narendra Modi’s last trip to Moscow, there was no progress made on the sale of missile defense system S-400 and Akula class nuclear submarines. Although two leaders were agreed on jointly producing Kamov-226 military helicopters and building nuclear power plants.

Indian defence ministry on the behalf of Indian Air Force showed interest in Russian S-400 Triumf air defense system. However the Moscow clarified it will never reciprocate to such request until India negotiates the joint Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) development program. So it was explicable when there was no follow-up negotiated on S-400 sale during Modi’s visit. But at the sidelines of the eight BRICS summit, India and Russia agreed to sign an inter-governmental agreement for the procurement of four regiments of Russian-made S-400 Triumf.

The S-400 Triumf (NATO designation: SA-21 Growler) is a new-generation medium and long-range anti-aircraft missile system. This missile system was manufactured by the Almaz-Antey Corporation and contains multiple missile variants to counter stealth aircraft, UAVs, cruise missiles and sub-strategic ballistic missiles. It can strike planes and tactical ballistic targets at a distance of 250 miles (400 km). The Indian Air Force desires the S-400 to enhance its air defense systems. Meanwhile, the purchase of S-400 is a sign that India is far away in creating an indigenous operative anti-missile missile system.

Recently, Vladimir Drozhzhov, deputy head of Russia’s Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation (FSMTC) claimed that, “The Russian Federal Service has prepared a draft intergovernmental agreement on the supply of the S-400 systems to India and passed it on to our partners, so we are awaiting a response.” Whereas, Aide to the President of Russia and head of the Control Directorate of the Presidential Administration of Russia, Vladimir Kozhin said that "There are many of those who want it (the S-400 system) but the case is that we are not able to supply everyone with it and therefore we will not deliver it to everyone because the priority is the Russian army, however, the negotiations with China and India are underway,"

Russia has been using the S-400 Triumf system for countering strategic threats with respect to its requirements obligatory in context of Europe against the United States. Now in future, the probable existence of these missiles in the South Asia, especially under Indian command is certainly going to contribute as another problem for Pakistani military. The future proliferation of S-400 to India is a grave challenge for Pakistan and it rings alarm bells also for China. The Triumf air defense system is easy to transport, well networked and has a range to defend huge areas. The traditional non-stealth fighter jets are specific target for the system and completely useless in the region where this system is being installed.

Some analysts contemplated that the best counter to the Triumf system is a long-range Surface to Air missile (SAM), for instance the Chinese HQ-9. Whereas, the genuine measure against Triumf system is to obtain a comprehensive ability which would preferably destroy India’s air defence capabilities. There are numerous methods available to counter an air defence system i.e. Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses (SEAD), Directed Energy Air Defense (DEAD), radar decoys, stealth air strike, drone air strike, cruise missile and ground invasion. Theoretically the conventional answer for Pakistan Airforce is to attain stealth aircraft along with anti-radiation air-to-surface missiles and sub-munition capable air launched cruise missiles (ALCM). Whereas Pakistan Army should invest in multiple independently-guided re-entry vehicle (MIRV) equipped ballistic missiles to counter any future acquisition of S-400 by India.

Sputnik reported last year that Beijing had already concluded $3-billion worth deal to purchase the S-400 Triumf from Moscow and it will receive the first batch as early as 2016. Therefore it is quite possible that China will be first beneficiary of S-400. In such scenario China will definitely not on the same page with Russia to supply such important strategic weapons to India. Whereas Russia can no longer ignore China’s likes and dislikes in contemporary picture. The reason for such closeness between Moscow and Beijing is pragmatic sanctions on Russia by the West and China’s unconditional support to Russia in this critical passage of time.

Meanwhile, the U.S. is quite concerned with Russian S-400 air defense systems going global. The U.S. is sensitive on the issue of deploying this system in any region especially in South Asia because this will put restrictions on the U.S. manoeuvrability in the region, as one senior U.S. Marine Corps said that, “(S-400) a complete game changer for all fourth-gen aircraft (like the F-15, F-16 and F/A-18). That thing is a beast and you don’t want to get near it.”

On the other hand the U.S. is building case to mainstreaming India into the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR). Therefore, India has to align itself according to MTCR guidelines but by the purchase of S-400 system it is violating the MTCR Guidelines and risking the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

The S-400 Triumf system under India’s command will contest Pakistan’s capability to conduct Air defense or Air offense operations in its airspace. It will also augment India’s ability to counter Pakistan’s aerial preeminence. Pakistan will be forced to invest in technologies to counter or develop comparable systems to highlight weaknesses in India’s air defenses to uphold regional balance.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

'We are not worried about India,' says Pakistan air chief
My heratly thanks to Mr. Sohail to tell us that he is not concerned about us.

I really hope that CPEC, the game changer floods him in money so that his mind can actually be free.

For listing up our so called aggressions, if you are not really concerned about it, it's party and do more time for Indians.

I hope you won't even mind and won't express concern if we take away any piece of your land.

 

[Chinmoy]

Strategic Weapons in Wrong Hands
BY ANAYA SHAHID
NOV 23, 2016

Make me understand what she exactly mean by this..

On the other hand the U.S. is building case to mainstreaming India into the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR). Therefore, India has to align itself according to MTCR guidelines but by the purchase of S-400 system it is violating the MTCR Guidelines and risking the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

Kaun se school college me padhkar aate hain and pata nahin koi aur dusri kitaab bhi padhte hain ki nahin.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Indian 'belligerence' can lead to strategic miscalculation: Pakistan

Sartaz Aziz stated that the Indian "belligerence" is a threat to the regional peace and security and can lead to a strategic miscalculation, which would be disastrous for the region.

ISLAMABAD: Indian "belligerence" is a threat to regional peace and can lead to "strategic miscalculation", Pakistan today told the envoys of the P5 countries here while briefing them over alleged "ceasefire violations" by India.

Pakistan Prime Minister's Adviser on Foreign Affairs Sartaj Aziz briefed the heads of missions of the P5 -- the US, China, Russia, the UK and France -- on the "continued unprovoked ceasefire violations" by Indian forces along the Line of Control (LoC) and the Working Boundary (WB), the Foreign Office here said.

Foreign Office Spokesperson Nafees Zakaria said in a statement that representatives of China, France, Russian Federation, the UK and the US were briefed at the foreign ministry.

Aziz stated that the Indian "belligerence" is a threat to the regional peace and security and can lead to a strategic miscalculation, which would be disastrous for the region, the Foreign Office said.

The Adviser strongly condemned the "reprehensible attack on the civilian bus in the Neelum Valley on November 23 in complete violation of the 2003 ceasefire understanding and international law, especially the international humanitarian law," the statement said.

"The Indian forces also fired upon the ambulances that had come to rescue the injured people from the site of the attack. The deliberate targeting of civilian populated areas is condemnable and deplorable and must be investigated," Aziz was quoted as saying.

Aziz referred to persistent "ceasefire violations" by India, especially during the last two months which he claimed had resulted in the loss of more than 45 civilian lives and caused injuries to more than 139 others along the LoC and WB in an effort to divert international attention from the continuing "human rights violations in the Kashmir".

Aziz has also addressed letters to the Foreign Ministers of the permanent members of the UN Security Council, on the escalation along the LoC and Indian ceasefire violations, the Foreign Office here said.

Copies of these letters were also handed over to the heads of missions, it said.

Aziz called on the permanent members of the UN Security Council to play a crucial role in maintaining global peace and security and urge India to immediately put an end to the "escalation and bloodshed" at the LoC, it added.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Will Qamar Javed Bajwa be as hostile as Raheel Sharif to India?

General Qamar Javed Bajwa, Pakistan new army chief. (AP photo)
HIGHLIGHTS

• Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa's name has been announced to succeed Gen Raheel Sharif as Pakistan's next army chief
• Bajwa has commanded the 10 Corps in Pak and is acquainted with his country's policy towards India
• He is well-versed with the complexities, nature of operations and terrain along the LoC

NEW DELHI: Pakistan army's deep-rooted professional hostility towards India will continue despite the change in guard, with General Qamar Javed Bajwa's name being announced to succeed General Raheel Sharif as the next chief.

However, whether it will be as visceral as it was under Gen Sharif is something that remains to be seen in the backdrop of three days of relative calm along the Line of Control after the Indian Army pounded over 15 Pakistan army posts on Wednesday to exact revenge for an Indian soldier's beheading and the two DGMOs talked to each other.

"Gen Bajwa is well-versed with the complexities, nature of operations and terrain along the LoC. He has also handled Kashmir extensively during his career. But it's actually too premature to say anything. Both Generals Pervez Musharraf and Kayani proved different from what their initial assessments were," said a top Army officer.

Pakistan PM Nawaz Sharif, who has now handpicked six army chiefs during his different stints as the country's leader, of course, selected Gen Pervez Musharraf in 1998 only to be ousted by him a year later and thereafter packed off to Saudi Arabia. Nawaz Sharif also did not enjoy a good rapport with General Raheel Sharif, who he had selected in 2013, and therefore would be extremely glad to see the last of him.

Gen Sharif, who had projected himself as the great savior of Pakistan and was widely regarded as one after he took on home-grown terrorists on the western front, was perceived to be extremely hostile to India. After all, his uncle was killed in the 1965 war and brother in the 1971 one with India.

Former Army chief General Bikram Singh, under whom Gen Bajwa served as a brigade commander in the UN peace-keeping operations in Congo in 2007, also says it's important to "wait-and-watch" how Gen Bajwa conducts himself.

"In the UN operations, Gen Bajwa's performance was totally professional and outstanding. But a military officer's conduct in the international environment is different from the way he conducts himself back home. There, he is governed by his country's national interests," said Gen Singh.

"Gen Bajwa has commanded the important 10 Corps in Pakistan. So, he is acquainted with his country's policy towards India. I believe there will be no let-up as far as Pakistan army's Kashmir policy is concerned," he added.

Several international South Asia experts echoed similar views. Asked about her opinion on the new Pakistan army chief Gen Bajwa, Georgetown University associate professor C Christine Fair tweeted, "Cut from the same cloth. It won't make a difference."

The assessment in India, too, is that Pakistan army's long-standing "confrontational attitude" towards India as well as its policy to covertly control the "terror tap" in J&K is not going to change anytime soon.

Pakistan army, of course, remains incensed over what India described as "surgical strikes" against terror launch pads in Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir on September 29. The force, in conjunction with its intelligence arm ISI, has after all been the prime driver behind Pakistan's Kashmir policy to "bleed'' India with a thousand cuts for decades.

Despite its history of interventions within and adventurism vis-a-vis India, the Pakistan army remains a motivated, extremely professional force that virtually holds the troubled country together from spiraling out of control, even though the Sunni-Deobandi radicalization continues to make deep inroads.

Given the Pakistan army-ISI combine's pathological obsession with India, the strategy to bleed India on its east through its jihadi proxies will continue unabated. The Indian response, consequently, becomes important rather than who is at the helm in the Pakistan army.

 

[republic_roi97]

Where do you find these icons ??? I don't have them in my smilies tray

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Where do you find these icons ??? I don't have them in my smilies tray

For example, I write

:biggrin2:

, it becomes ":biggrin2:".
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/help/smilies

 

[Indx TechStyle]

A key ingredient of Modi's policy with Pakistan: Impermanence
The missing Buddhist trick

The writer is Dawn's correspondent in Delhi.

It was 10 days of complete silence last week, a gruelling but rewarding Vipassana course in Kerala. We were some 25 men and women from different parts of India and elsewhere. We lived together but didn’t say a word not even with a sign. Vipassana is Gautama Buddha’s technique for self-awareness, harmonising life with nature’s law of impermanence or anichhya. Life is dynamic and impermanent, and so are the pains and the pleasures that we experience. Hatred is transient. Of this I am now doubly sure.

Being a creature of habit, the first thing I grabbed after coming out of enforced seclusion was a newspaper. Prime Minister Modi was threatening to change the flow of river water from India to Pakistan. I couldn’t help smiling. Modi is as good an example of anichhya as any. Impermanence has been an ingredient of his policy with Pakistan, indeed, as with others. When did he decide that Pakistan’s water supply should be cut off? Did he have this in mind when he invited Prime Minister Sharif to his swearing-in? That town in Russia they met to reset their ties. Was he planning to turn off the taps there? Or was this a bit of bad news he forgot to whisper into Sharif’s attentive ears in Lahore?

If Modi ever becomes familiar with the concept of ‘anichhya’ he would be a calmer person.

Modi can be full of bilious hatred but his targets keep shifting. Pakistan can be a target today and a friend tomorrow. Indian Muslims, whom he called Mian Musharraf ki aulad (Gen Musharraf’s children), were declared his closest brothers at a BJP rally in Kerala recently. Let’s see where his state of impermanence lands him after the elections in Punjab and Uttar Pradesh.

Read: From threatening Pakistan in 2011 to holding hands with Nawaz Sharif, Modi has come a long way

If Modi ever becomes familiar with the concept of anichhya he would be a calmer person. Vipassana trains the mind to liberate itself from all provocations with equanimity. If the knee aches because of prolonged sitting in one position in Vipassana, just learn to observe the pain with equanimity. All pain is transient as all other sensations are. Vipassana thus constitutes the essence of the Buddhist dhamma. The pain would go away without your reacting to the provocation. It is not an easy skill to acquire.

A Hindu businessman brought the technique back to India from Myanmar in 1969. This was centuries after Brahminical hostility to Buddha’s iconoclastic teachings, with his unsparing criticism of gory rituals and obscurantist beliefs, ensured its demise in the country of his birth.

I was in Patna the day Rajiv Gandhi was killed and thus remember the date. The morning papers were replete with pre-poll caste analysis in Bihar. This was where Buddha attained nirvana at the age of 35 and preached till he died at 80. Brahmins so many, Yadavs so many, Bhoomihars so many, Muslims so many, Dalits so many and Buddhists zero per cent, said the Times of India.

Why was there a column for Buddhists if they were reduced to zero per cent centuries ago? Whatever be the reason for the mysterious reference to Buddhism in the caste analysis, be it guilt from history or a mere clerical error, it had its irony. Bihar — once pronounced Vihar — was where Buddhism began its journey. Bhimrao Ambedkar had to make a new beginning for its teachings in India with the mass conversion of Dalits in defiance of the politics of Gandhi and Congress.

In Vipassana one begins by observing the breathing. The sensations you feel in the nostrils and the area above the upper lip is where you concentrate your mind first. Most people would not be able to successfully observe their own breathing sensations — warm, cold, moist and so forth — for more than a minute, if even that much. The mind loves to dwell in the past if it is not carrying the cargo of emotions into the future.

One place the mind seldom finds comfort in is the present. Possibly the prime example of your present is in your breathing. You can’t breathe in the past or in the future, can you? Once settled and trained, in some cases it could be longer than two days of sustained focus, the mind is dispatched to explore the rest of the body from head to toe, to scour and observe sensations, gross and subtle.

Having learnt to observe the gross pain or the subtler elation without reacting to them with aversion or desire, the mind is ready to face the most difficult provocations in life with equanimity. So says the Vipassana method. It must be logical, and so powerful too, that it threatened to topple centuries of entrenched Brahminical practices rooted in myth-making and sacrificial rituals.

Vipassana and its idea of impermanence can be a humbling experience, but the mind is full of tricks to dodge the rigour it requires. For example, among other memories that surfaced in my mind as I struggled to stay focused was the worried phone call from a senior citizen of Pakistan around August. I won’t name the lovely man who commands respect among leftist idealists across South Asia. He was concerned that an estranged scion of a political family, in whom he reposes great hope, was squandering her precious time with a Gandhi family scion from across the border. The secrecy more than their apparent proximity was hampering the political energies of both. I decided to ponder the story carefully, fearing the BJP would exploit it for regressive reasons. However, since I learnt that the young Gandhi had spent time in Vipassana abroad, with or without the friend, I am certain he is better prepared to face the world calmly with the truth. Disapproval like other emotions is impermanent. Life is anichhya.