How not to hold India-Pakistan talks

[iPhone]

A very balanced article from an Indian journalist. I'm very surprised. Usually only thing you get from over there is chest thumping and hot air.

"It is tragic Pakistan still finds it worth its while to risk ruining a contact restored after more than a year for their (huriyat) sake." It is
when I read this line I automatically went, if Huriyat is that irralvent India shouldn't have any problem let Pakistan meet them. And the writer went on with this to say:
"equally disappointing India is not willing to laugh it away, saying something like, anybody who has a visa to come to India can meet any Indian citizen. But then, you have to answer prime-time inquisitions."

I just wanna add this to this entire, NSA talks. Nawaz is the most pro-India PM India will every get in Pakistan. And if they can't get find equal ground of diplomacy with him than I can't see they every finding diplomacy enough to deal with any PM in Pakistan. I mean the guy practically walked the entire length of a long corridor to meet Modi.

 

[thesolar65]

So has the talks one boarder started?..........I mean each other guns??

 

[iPhone]

. If Pakistan continues to support terrorism then we will continue to isolate Pakistan economically.

.

Really? Like you guys isolated us from China and turkey? 50 billion dollars plus deal with china. Numerous economic projects with Turkey. Defence deals with Russia. JF talks with so many countries. Economic projects with US and europe and the Gulf states.

Who do you guys think you are that you can block us off economically. It's not good to be this arrogant and conceited. Learn to be a little humble.

 

[nForce]

You don't trust us, we don't trust. You blame our media, we blame yours.
You see war is there, just around the corner.
If India could do something else, she had already in last 60 years.

Its an end less cycle. We should focus our energy elsewhere. I have decided to take a break from this forum, for its useless to talk sense here. I suggest you do the same. It's a waste of time.

Really? Like you guys isolated us from China and turkey? 50 billion dollars plus deal with china. Numerous economic projects with Turkey. Defence deals with Russia. JF talks with so many countries. Economic projects with US and europe and the Gulf states.

Who do you guys think you are that you can block us off economically. It's not good to be this arrogant and conceited. Learn to be a little humble.

I'll be not bragging if I tell you I'm among some of the most humble people here. It's not like it's me, in person, who is trying to economically isolate you. I myself would have probably gone for other options. I'm just giving an insight of how it is and going to be in near future.
Probably having the likes of Hafeez Sayed is an easier option. But some idiot in Delhi still thinks we should play by some imaginary rules.
BTW..Best of luck for your deals. I wish you all the best.

 

[!eon]

Its an end less cycle. We should focus our energy elsewhere. I have decided to take a break from this forum, for its useless to talk sense here. I suggest you do the same. It's a waste of time.
.

Agree

 

[tarrar]

India is the answer, as they don't want peace & they don't want to talk on illegally occupied Kashmir.

 

[bloo]

its because the The Kashmir issue was not presenting any critical circumstances due to Pak-India composite dialogue during the period; therefore no debate was conducted during those 3 year tenure, so for setting the agenda for next tenure it was put out of the active list that does not translate Kashmir as SETTLED or RESOLVED issue .... as some of the Indian members are portraying here on the forum & as the Indian media reported previously, this point can be understood further by the exclusion of The Palestine question (item 56) as well.

I hope you also don't want the situation in Kashmir to go critical just to make it a part of item list of Security Council meeting .... further this shows the importance of Pak-India dialogue regarding Kashmir for India ....

Nevertheless, UN has not taken up the issue even when the Indo-Pak talks have failed ever since then.
The point I am and was trying to make is that Pakistan's continuous attempts at curbing the Indo-Pak dialogue in exchange for UN intervention has failed consistently. And NO, it does not mean Kashmir is a SETTLED or a RESOLVED issue, but neither is it important enough to be in the UNSC agenda like Pak insists it should. Just like India, UN too has maintained that it is an internal issue between India and Pakistan and should be resolved between both the parties.

However, back in 2010 when 'The India & Pakistan question' & 'The Palestine question' were both excluded, 'The Palestine question' is RELEVANT NOW and is an issue NOW with the UN unlike the 'The India & Pakistan question'.

Of course not.
That's it really, the Kashmir situation is not critical enough for the UNSC to take it as an issue. During the recent press conference, Sartaj Aziz said that he would be taking dossiers about RAW's involvement and the Kashmir issue during the UN General Assembly, which again as I had said was Pakistan's attempt at skirting the talks to opt for a UN intervention, despite the fact that only Indo-Pak talks can actually thaw out the situation.

 

[HRK]

Nevertheless, UN has not taken up the issue even when the Indo-Pak talks have failed ever since then.

As said earlier the situation in Kashmir was not critical ... don't you think its a positive singe of Pakistani 'cooperation'....??

The point I am and was trying to make is that Pakistan's continuous attempts at curbing the Indo-Pak dialogue in exchange for UN intervention has failed consistently.

Pakistan has not attempted (and I really mean Pakistan has not attempt) to raise the issue at UN security council, one or two statements regarding Kashmir in General Assembly does not count in this matter & all this happened due to the initiation of COMPOSITE DIALOGUE in which foreign powers were involved behind the scene,as it was their requirement as well due to their interest in this region & one more thing to understand here is that till to date the 'global interests' are same as previous its just the degree of urgency to secure them have changed it is because of this reason they establish two basic sub-strategic objectives which they want to achieve :

• To shift Pakistan's Political & National focus towards West (AF-PAK)
• To shift Indian Political & National focus towards East (PACIFIC REGION)

Composite dialogue were more focused to one objective than the other stated objectives which was to bring the conditions in Kashmir towards normalcy but the failure of that dialogue process could change the many things, keep in mind this was (is) the BIGGEST CONFIDENCE BUILDING MEASURE from Pakistan side which India has enjoyed till to date in the history of both of our nation.

After making this thing clear you can understand that it was the price which Pakistan paid with the basic intention to buy some time for herself as well at this stage recall the Musharraf's 4 point formula.

So by this overall historic brief of the issue you should understand that whatever the achievements India has achieve in Kashmir or about the Kashmir at International forums are because of cooperation of the other side and are prone to reversal as well

And NO, it does not mean Kashmir is a SETTLED or a RESOLVED issue, but neither is it important enough to be in the UNSC agenda like Pak insists it should. Just like India, UN too has maintained that it is an internal issue between India and Pakistan and should be resolved between both the parties.

Its good to know that you agree that Kashmir is not a SETTLED OR RESOLVED issue but it has to be because its ever increase potential to become the threat to the peace of the region which will eventually have its global effects

For the point which you raised about the importance you need to understand this whole region is transforming including India what would be effect of SUCCESSFUL TRANSFORMATION of INDIA at GLOBAL STAGE ..... ??

Now imagine the impact of ACTIVE DISPUTE over this transformation ... KASHMIR IS NOT ACTIVE keep in mind .... think about it

However, back in 2010 when 'The India & Pakistan question' & 'The Palestine question' were both excluded, 'The Palestine question' is RELEVANT NOW and is an issue NOW with the UN unlike the 'The India & Pakistan question'.

Don't you think PALESTINE is still an 'ACTIVE ISSUE' .... ??

as asked earlier You also don't want the situation in Kashmir to go worst (or active again) than the current level, whatever the peace is existing now should prevail .... ??

if yes then you will also agree that we should encash whatever the opportunity is left for sustainable peace.

Of course not.
That's it really, the Kashmir situation is not critical enough for the UNSC to take it as an issue.

but is there any any guarantee that it will never go critical in future which can induce UNSC to review it... ??

During the recent press conference, Sartaj Aziz said that he would be taking dossiers about RAW's involvement and the Kashmir issue during the UN General Assembly, which again as I had said was Pakistan's attempt at skirting the talks to opt for a UN intervention, despite the fact that only Indo-Pak talks can actually thaw out the situation.

No by raising the issue at General Assembly is one thing .... & raising the issue at SC is other .... general assembly itself cant do anything so by Raising the issue in General Assembly only Pakistan or any other country can't induce UN to act or intervene in any matter .... Statements & Speeches in General Assembly are mostly drafted to strike the balance b/w World & Local audience & for your last sentence lets agree to disagree ....