SIPRA
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2019
- Messages
- 13,549
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
I agree with most of your post.
The comment above also makes sense when I look at it from a Pak perspective.
Then the issue lies in the fact that Pak has to be sensitive to Indian red lines in Kashmir and India to the Pak one’s in Afg and Balochistan.
Negotiations involve give and take. Pakistan’s attitude on Kashmir centric terrorists has been less than desirable from Indian standpoint.
But Kashmir is like quick sand for you guys. Even if you wanted to get out of the mess and help is out, you can’t because of internal and other strategic pressures. Creates a bitter environment to solve issues then.
My two cents.
You have said that you agree with most of my post. Thanks a lot. But, in fact, you have not agreed to an iota of it. But, even then, thanks.
Naturally, your perspective is typically Indian and has to be. No problem in it.
Fundamental issue between India and Pakistan is Kashmir; though it has, in its background, a historical animosity and cleavage of about 1000 years; but I wouldn't delve into it.
I don't believe at all that this issue, under the prevailing circumstances, can be resolved by some sort of negotiations, based upon quid pro quo. We would have to await for those conditions and circumstances, to be created by the social, political and economic forces, which would compel one or both parties towards some sort of resolution and settlement.
Let me exemplify it. If you care to read history, then, in 1937, the partition of India was deemed to be inconceivable and even to discuss it, as a hypothetical idea, was considered insane and childish, even by Muslims of India. But, then forces of circumstances lead towards it within a short period of 10 years.