Gen (R) Hamid Gul to India | We have to 'walk together,for peace'

[jbond197]

You are right in what you are saying. I don't deny that. But then some has to change. Thoda wo badlein, thoda hum. You need to be the change to see the change.

Sab batein hain, do din hoti hain fir LOC pe raat ke andhere mein terrorist ban kar attack kartay hain. Who will you talk to? Politicians - who have no credibility? Army - who is not able to outgrow defeats of the past? Extremists - who are in massive numbers and peace is against the concept of their Jihad?

So you will go for talks and in the end unable to find any one who is interested you will be back to Square 1. Then why take the pain?

 

[ZYXW]

Why not? - Azad Kashmir, belongs to the Kashmiris not to us.

awwwwwww Aeroooooooo

 

[makelove_notwar]

Sab batein hain, do din hoti hain fir LOC pe raat ke andhere mein terrorist ban kar attack kartay hain. Who will you talk to? Politicians - who have no credibility? Army - who is not able to outgrow defeats of the past? Extremists - who are in massive numbers and peace is against the concept of their Jihad?

So in the end, you will go for talks and in the end unable to find any one who is interested you will be back to Square 1. Then why take the pain?

Extremists of Pakistan and India, most of the Politicians etc. are just puppets, unknowing ones at that. Everything is a part of a much bigger scheme. And the conceives of that scheme want us to think exactly like you are thinking.

"The best way to destroy a community is to make it destroy itself" - Think about it.

 

[Jade]

Contrary to what many Indians may believe, its actually in Pakistan's interest to have good relations with India. Otherwise Pakistan in the long run is open to manipulation from China and Middle East, who will exploit our fears that may never come true. India will be exploited by America and EU. I always propagate to my friends and some folk from India who still have logical thinking before jingoism on their priority list, to 'look beyond Kashmir'.

If Kashmir issue is solved today - i bet you within 10 years, the whole S.Asia/C.asian territory will start to lose the 'rigid identities' when the 'tit flashing contest' stops. Peace between India and Pakistan is a 'threat' to a 3rd force, and its our duty to achieve that peace regardless of what happens in between. We have a choice between defeating them by moving on or keep being manipulated while everyone else surpasses us.

Long run may be yes...short or intermediate run definately no. Pakistan knows that it is short on time if it has to settle Kashmir on its term. Then there is always the Army-Government tussle in Pakistan, moreover, what use is Pakistan army if difference between India and Pakistan doesn't exist. Any peace between India and Pakistan is existential threat to Pak military.

 

[Iggy]

Maybe there is a 3rd force at play. If India,Pakistan are serious about the peace process, than there is someone who clearly isn't.

To be frank aero, you do not have to go around to look for the third party.. When a "charity worker" is publically calling for Jihad and his charitable organisation was branded as a terrorist organisation by UN, you could have easily identified..If organisations like that are still active in Pakistan, then there is no use of India and Pakistan being serious about peace process..

 

[Kompromat]

@Argus Panoptes

I don't understand, why would you jump from having a discussion on Kashmir to Balochistan, instead of answering my query?

Kashmir is an 'internationally recognized disputed zone' - where thousands of families were divided by LOC. What parrallel do you draw between JK and Balochistan?

Balochistan joined Pakistan by a democratic process. By no means its a disputed zone between two countries, nor there is a popular revolt. So What made you make this leap?

 

[Argus Panoptes]

@Argus Panoptes

I don't understand, why would you jump from having a discussion on Kashmir to Balochistan, instead of answering my query?

Kashmir is an 'internationally recognized disputed zone' - where thousands of families were divided by LOC. What parrallel do you draw between JK and Balochistan?

Balochistan joined Pakistan by a democratic process. By no means its a disputed zone between two countries, nor there is a popular revolt. So What made you make this leap?

After the Simla Agreement, Kashmir is no longer an international issue. It is a bilateral issue to be resolved between India and Pakistan by mutual agreement. And if we make a policy of contesting other countries borders, then others can do the same to our borders. And if we ask for international involvement in other countries, then others can ask for the same in our internal areas.

 

[Kompromat]

Is that why Ban ki moon came and asked for the UN resolution 1948 to be implimented?

How can you call Kashmir 'India's internal affair' when 'Faroooq Abdullah' , has said that its not India's internal affair on India's independance day?- I'm unable to see logic in here.

Kashmir is not a bilateral issue. Its the issue of the Kashmiris, they are the ones who should call the shots not Indians and Pakistanis.
@Argus Panoptes

 

[Argus Panoptes]

Is that why Ban ki moon came and asked for the UN resolution 1948 to be implimented?

How can you call Kashmir 'India's internal affair' when 'Faroooq Abdullah' , has said that its not India's internal affair on India's independance day?- I'm unable to see logic in here.

Kashmir is not a bilateral issue. Its the issue of the Kashmiris, they are the ones who should call the shots not Indians and Pakistanis.
@Argus Panoptes

Ban Ki Moon only said that UN is ready to mediate "if both parties agree" as per the wording in the Simla Agreement:

(ii) That the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them. Pending the final settlement of any of the problems between the two countries, neither side shall unilaterally alter the situation and both shall prevent the organization, assistance or encouragement of any acts detrimental to the maintenance of peace and harmonious relations.

He did not mention implementing ANY UN Resolutions on Kashmir. Important to note.

 

[Kompromat]

Ban Ki Moon only said that UN is ready to mediate "if both parties agree" as per the wording in the Simla Agreement:

He did not mention implementing ANY UN Resolutions on Kashmir. Important to note.

In other words UN is just acting as a veritable arm of long held US f.policy of maintaining status quo on Kashmir! - so that they can keep getting the strategic leverage produced out of animosity generated as the result of this status quo to further their set F.policy goals.

Doesn't take a genius.

 

[Argus Panoptes]

In other words UN is just acting as a veritable arm of long held US f.policy of maintaining status quo on Kashmir! - so that they can keep getting the strategic leverage produced out of animosity generated as the result of this status quo to further their set F.policy goals.

Doesn't take a genius.

No, I think it is simpler than that what you say. After the Simla Agreement, ALL border and other issues were changed into BILATERAL issues. That was the huge price we paid to get back our 93,000 POWs. If both India and Pakistan agree to make progress on Kashmir, no outside power including USA or UN can stop them. Indeed, USA has been pressuring India to resolve its issues with Pakistan so that it can think bigger in the region.

 

[notsuperstitious]

Sab batein hain, do din hoti hain fir LOC pe raat ke andhere mein terrorist ban kar attack kartay hain. Who will you talk to? Politicians - who have no credibility? Army - who is not able to outgrow defeats of the past? Extremists - who are in massive numbers and peace is against the concept of their Jihad?

So you will go for talks and in the end unable to find any one who is interested you will be back to Square 1. Then why take the pain?

Your observation is 100% right, but conclusion is wrong. When we talk peace, we give more pain that we take.

The occasional attacks by pakistan's ahem ahem non state actors in which they kill some Indians, military and civil is a small price to pay as long as it does not affect our important strategic objectives.

 

[Kompromat]

No, I think it is simpler than that what you say. After the Simla Agreement, ALL border and other issues were changed into BILATERAL issues. That was the huge price we paid to get back our 93,000 POWs. If both India and Pakistan agree to make progress on Kashmir, no outside power including USA or UN can stop them. Indeed, USA has been pressuring India to resolve its issues with Pakistan so that it can think bigger in the region.

Kashmir issue can not be solved bilaterally, unless there is political will on both sides. Its impossible right now.

 

[Argus Panoptes]

Kashmir issue can not be solved bilaterally, unless there is political will on both sides. Its impossible right now.

Both India and Pakistan have signed a sovereign treaty holding them to resolve the Kashmir issue bilaterally. It is up to them both to find the solution. The sooner the better. The weaker we get, the more likely is India not to talk to us. We need to build up our strength first before anything can move.