Patt_polayadi
BANNED
New Recruit
- Joined
- May 21, 2010
- Messages
- 31
- Reaction score
- 0
talks or no talks...KASHMIR will be held by India..unless some great statesman comes into picture and rewrites history...
India-Pakistan Talks
- Thread starter Prometheus
- Start date
talks or no talks...KASHMIR will be held by India..unless some great statesman comes into picture and rewrites history...
Prometheus
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2010
- Messages
- 4,942
- Reaction score
- -7
- Country
- Location
Can’t afford to fail again
The difference between a statesman and a politician is that the first looks at the future while the second remains stuck in the present. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh shows such a streak at times and jettisons the deadening hand of politics.
His statement at his maiden press conference to have “good ties with Pakistan” indicated his determination to come to terms with subcontinental realities. A hostile neighbour is an irritant which you can ignore only at your peril.
I realise that Indian civil society is, by and large, opposed to having talks with Pakistan because it has allowed the territory under it to be used by militants time and again. Should we stop talking to Islamabad till it has crushed militancy or should we join the talks so as to help the country in its efforts to eliminate the Taliban who represent militancy?
No other country could be more conscious than Pakistan that its very existence depends on weeding out terrorism and radicals. There was a time when it overlooked such tendencies but doesn’t do so now as it realises that their growth lessens people’s democratic space.
There is a sea change in Islamabad’s attitude between now and when 26/11 happened. Even though belatedly, it is trying those who perpetrated the attack on Mumbai. Its Foreign Office said that after the death sentence of Ajmal Kasab it was important that the culprits face justice.
Such instances indicate that Islamabad has overcome its initial hesitancy which was perhaps for domestic reasons. It is now bringing to justice those involved in the 26/11 attack. In a country where militancy is mixed with radicalism, though confined to a segment of society, the government’s moves cannot probably be faster, nor can it do more than what it is already doing.
True, America is also putting pressure on Pakistan because some of its nationals died at the hands of the attackers in the 26/11 incident. But the advantage of Washington is that it has been sharing intelligence with Islamabad from the beginning and joining the probe. Such is not the case with New Delhi.
The Pakistani Supreme Court’s upholding the release of Jamaatud Dawa/Lashkar-i-Taiba chief Hafiz Saeed from preventive detention has evoked deep disappointment in India. Whatever our doubts, we cannot question the credibility of the Supreme Court of Pakistan because after the lawyers’ movement this is the one institution which has risen above politics and other considerations.
Probably, Islamabad did not present the case before the court properly. Probably, as is the concern at this end, all the dossiers sent by New Delhi were not produced in court. Pakistan’s own intelligence has been tardy. Hafiz Saeed’s release has no doubt given new life to the hawks in both India and Pakistan.
Yet this is what Home Minister P. Chidambaram should be discussing with his counterpart when they meet in June. A dialogue between the two countries is necessary to pinpoint what is lacking in the evidence. Maybe, they can infuse new life into the joint mechanism against terrorism.
It must be said to his credit that Manmohan Singh has gone through the top opposition from ex-bureaucrats, particularly former foreign secretaries and former high commissioners to Pakistan. They are as jingoistic as the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) which is firmly against any talks with Pakistan. Some of the ex-bureaucrats are leading participants in Track II diplomacy.
What they and the BJP do not realise is that India cannot attain its full development potential unless it has good relations with its neighbours, particularly Pakistan.
Manmohan Singh has correctly diagnosed the disease as mistrust. Since contact has been confined to the top, the emotions and the sentiment of goodwill which exists at the people’s level has not been tapped. The trust deficit cannot be made up until travel and trade take place on a large-scale between the two countries, without the intelligence agencies coming into the picture.
A suggestion that India should talk to the army in Pakistan does not gel. How can New Delhi hold talks with the Pakistani army chief? It would be tantamount to recognising an independent role for the military in a democratic setup. It is the job of the Asif Zardari government to talk so that everybody is on board. This is how democratic countries function.
France and Germany faced the same situation of hostility many decades ago. They joined hands through an economic union. India and Pakistan should attempt something like that and extend a similar arrangement to South Asia as France and Germany did.
Many years ago, when I broached the idea with the then Pakistan Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, he said: “Today we are basically producers of primary commodities and your industrial progress has been better than ours. We have also had some industrial progress but we have not reached that standard of industrial development where there can be a grand collaboration in industry because these things are very difficult to arrange and even Europe is finding it difficult regarding agriculture commodities.”
Pakistan has developed a great deal since then. But experts can find out how much burden India should bear in terms of excise and tax so that its commodities from Pakistan sell at par with those produced in India.
Subsequently, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka and the Maldives can be brought in. They are less developed and would have to heighten the wall of tariffs when they import goods from countries other than India and Pakistan. Yet the most important thing is normalcy between India and Pakistan. Saarc countries have often complained that they suffer because of confrontation between the two.
Hawks — and many in the media — in both the countries might do their best to sabotage the talks between the home and foreign ministers of India and Pakistan, scheduled for next month. Patience and a sense of accommodation need to be exhibited by both sides. We cannot afford to fail this time.
The writer is a senior journalist based in New Delhi
DAWN.COM | Columnists | Can?t afford to fail again
The difference between a statesman and a politician is that the first looks at the future while the second remains stuck in the present. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh shows such a streak at times and jettisons the deadening hand of politics.
His statement at his maiden press conference to have “good ties with Pakistan” indicated his determination to come to terms with subcontinental realities. A hostile neighbour is an irritant which you can ignore only at your peril.
I realise that Indian civil society is, by and large, opposed to having talks with Pakistan because it has allowed the territory under it to be used by militants time and again. Should we stop talking to Islamabad till it has crushed militancy or should we join the talks so as to help the country in its efforts to eliminate the Taliban who represent militancy?
No other country could be more conscious than Pakistan that its very existence depends on weeding out terrorism and radicals. There was a time when it overlooked such tendencies but doesn’t do so now as it realises that their growth lessens people’s democratic space.
There is a sea change in Islamabad’s attitude between now and when 26/11 happened. Even though belatedly, it is trying those who perpetrated the attack on Mumbai. Its Foreign Office said that after the death sentence of Ajmal Kasab it was important that the culprits face justice.
Such instances indicate that Islamabad has overcome its initial hesitancy which was perhaps for domestic reasons. It is now bringing to justice those involved in the 26/11 attack. In a country where militancy is mixed with radicalism, though confined to a segment of society, the government’s moves cannot probably be faster, nor can it do more than what it is already doing.
True, America is also putting pressure on Pakistan because some of its nationals died at the hands of the attackers in the 26/11 incident. But the advantage of Washington is that it has been sharing intelligence with Islamabad from the beginning and joining the probe. Such is not the case with New Delhi.
The Pakistani Supreme Court’s upholding the release of Jamaatud Dawa/Lashkar-i-Taiba chief Hafiz Saeed from preventive detention has evoked deep disappointment in India. Whatever our doubts, we cannot question the credibility of the Supreme Court of Pakistan because after the lawyers’ movement this is the one institution which has risen above politics and other considerations.
Probably, Islamabad did not present the case before the court properly. Probably, as is the concern at this end, all the dossiers sent by New Delhi were not produced in court. Pakistan’s own intelligence has been tardy. Hafiz Saeed’s release has no doubt given new life to the hawks in both India and Pakistan.
Yet this is what Home Minister P. Chidambaram should be discussing with his counterpart when they meet in June. A dialogue between the two countries is necessary to pinpoint what is lacking in the evidence. Maybe, they can infuse new life into the joint mechanism against terrorism.
It must be said to his credit that Manmohan Singh has gone through the top opposition from ex-bureaucrats, particularly former foreign secretaries and former high commissioners to Pakistan. They are as jingoistic as the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) which is firmly against any talks with Pakistan. Some of the ex-bureaucrats are leading participants in Track II diplomacy.
What they and the BJP do not realise is that India cannot attain its full development potential unless it has good relations with its neighbours, particularly Pakistan.
Manmohan Singh has correctly diagnosed the disease as mistrust. Since contact has been confined to the top, the emotions and the sentiment of goodwill which exists at the people’s level has not been tapped. The trust deficit cannot be made up until travel and trade take place on a large-scale between the two countries, without the intelligence agencies coming into the picture.
A suggestion that India should talk to the army in Pakistan does not gel. How can New Delhi hold talks with the Pakistani army chief? It would be tantamount to recognising an independent role for the military in a democratic setup. It is the job of the Asif Zardari government to talk so that everybody is on board. This is how democratic countries function.
France and Germany faced the same situation of hostility many decades ago. They joined hands through an economic union. India and Pakistan should attempt something like that and extend a similar arrangement to South Asia as France and Germany did.
Many years ago, when I broached the idea with the then Pakistan Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, he said: “Today we are basically producers of primary commodities and your industrial progress has been better than ours. We have also had some industrial progress but we have not reached that standard of industrial development where there can be a grand collaboration in industry because these things are very difficult to arrange and even Europe is finding it difficult regarding agriculture commodities.”
Pakistan has developed a great deal since then. But experts can find out how much burden India should bear in terms of excise and tax so that its commodities from Pakistan sell at par with those produced in India.
Subsequently, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka and the Maldives can be brought in. They are less developed and would have to heighten the wall of tariffs when they import goods from countries other than India and Pakistan. Yet the most important thing is normalcy between India and Pakistan. Saarc countries have often complained that they suffer because of confrontation between the two.
Hawks — and many in the media — in both the countries might do their best to sabotage the talks between the home and foreign ministers of India and Pakistan, scheduled for next month. Patience and a sense of accommodation need to be exhibited by both sides. We cannot afford to fail this time.
The writer is a senior journalist based in New Delhi
DAWN.COM | Columnists | Can?t afford to fail again
Prometheus
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2010
- Messages
- 4,942
- Reaction score
- -7
- Country
- Location
Krishna wants positive approach to Pakistan
WASHINGTON: Indian External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna urged on a positive approach to be adopted towards Pakistan, Geo News reported Thursday.
Talking to Indian media here, he said his country would gain access to Pakistani-American David Coleman Headley, an accused arrested on charges of abetting Mumbai attacks.
Krishna said it was imperative to improve the approach towards Pakistan with a positive turn.
He said the access to the accused Headley would be beneficial to a great extent.Krishna wants positive approach to Pakistan - GEO.tv
WASHINGTON: Indian External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna urged on a positive approach to be adopted towards Pakistan, Geo News reported Thursday.
Talking to Indian media here, he said his country would gain access to Pakistani-American David Coleman Headley, an accused arrested on charges of abetting Mumbai attacks.
Krishna said it was imperative to improve the approach towards Pakistan with a positive turn.
He said the access to the accused Headley would be beneficial to a great extent.Krishna wants positive approach to Pakistan - GEO.tv
India to break Pak ice before Kashmir talks- Hindustan Times
India isn’t being overtly ambitious about its renewed engagement with Pakistan. It views External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna’s talks next month with Shah Mahmood Qureshi as an opportunity to break the ice and build trust rather than taking up substantive issues like Kashmir that need to be backloaded in anticipation of a conducive climate.
“Since the Thimpu meeting between the two Prime Ministers, our earnest effort has been to first create trust and then slowly move on to the unresolved agenda,” a top government official here said. He said New Delhi’s dialogue strategy would factor in the Pak civilian leadership’s equations with the army and their reluctance to firmly deal with terrorist groups that are a threat to India.
“We believe in talking to the elected government, not the generals. We (also) understand their predicament (in dealing with groups like the LeT); we understand what’s happening between them and Gen. Kayani. We’ll factor that in our talks,” said the official. He was responding to suggestions that the army’s de facto clout in Pakistan’s power troika had not altered. The constitutional reforms have merely transferred powers from “a civilian president to a civilian prime minister.”
The question is relevant as India’s decision to engage Islamabad — despite its half-hearted pursuit of the culprits of 26/11 — is a test as much of Prime Minster Yusuf Raza Gilani’s ability to deliver on Indo-Pak issues, notably terrorism, in his new avatar.
Krishna’s July 15 journey to Islamabad would follow Home Minister P. Chidambaram’s June 28 visit for a SAARC conference that will afford him an interaction with his Pakistani counterpart Rahman Malik. From all available indications, the outcome of the first meeting — the focus of which will be 26/11 — will tell how far the two neighbours can go in building trust in the fight against terror.
The official said the Pakistani leadership’s “change of attitude and eagerness to engage India in a dialogue” set the basis for the understanding reached on the sidelines of the SAARC summit in Thimpu. There was synergy because Prime Minister Manmohan Singh never shut the door for talks.
Dispelling the impression of being Pak-centric, the official said equal time and energy was invested in building relations and resolving issues with other countries in the neighbourhood: China, Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.
India’s efforts are directed at safeguarding national interest in Nepal, the official claimed. On the obtaining constitutional crisis there, he said the Maoists’ anti-India rhetoric was no source of comfort.
“But we want Prime Minister Madhav Nepal to talk to Maoists so that they can write their constitution and hold elections under it.”
Channels have been kept open with all parties, including the CPN (Maoists), whose leader Prachanda lately toned-down tirades against India on Krishna’s advice.
“We don’t want in Nepal an outcome that spells chaos or instability or is inimical to India,” the official said. “We can’t tell them who’ll be their PM. Right now Madhav Nepal is the PM and we support him.”
India isn’t being overtly ambitious about its renewed engagement with Pakistan. It views External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna’s talks next month with Shah Mahmood Qureshi as an opportunity to break the ice and build trust rather than taking up substantive issues like Kashmir that need to be backloaded in anticipation of a conducive climate.
“Since the Thimpu meeting between the two Prime Ministers, our earnest effort has been to first create trust and then slowly move on to the unresolved agenda,” a top government official here said. He said New Delhi’s dialogue strategy would factor in the Pak civilian leadership’s equations with the army and their reluctance to firmly deal with terrorist groups that are a threat to India.
“We believe in talking to the elected government, not the generals. We (also) understand their predicament (in dealing with groups like the LeT); we understand what’s happening between them and Gen. Kayani. We’ll factor that in our talks,” said the official. He was responding to suggestions that the army’s de facto clout in Pakistan’s power troika had not altered. The constitutional reforms have merely transferred powers from “a civilian president to a civilian prime minister.”
The question is relevant as India’s decision to engage Islamabad — despite its half-hearted pursuit of the culprits of 26/11 — is a test as much of Prime Minster Yusuf Raza Gilani’s ability to deliver on Indo-Pak issues, notably terrorism, in his new avatar.
Krishna’s July 15 journey to Islamabad would follow Home Minister P. Chidambaram’s June 28 visit for a SAARC conference that will afford him an interaction with his Pakistani counterpart Rahman Malik. From all available indications, the outcome of the first meeting — the focus of which will be 26/11 — will tell how far the two neighbours can go in building trust in the fight against terror.
The official said the Pakistani leadership’s “change of attitude and eagerness to engage India in a dialogue” set the basis for the understanding reached on the sidelines of the SAARC summit in Thimpu. There was synergy because Prime Minister Manmohan Singh never shut the door for talks.
Dispelling the impression of being Pak-centric, the official said equal time and energy was invested in building relations and resolving issues with other countries in the neighbourhood: China, Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.
India’s efforts are directed at safeguarding national interest in Nepal, the official claimed. On the obtaining constitutional crisis there, he said the Maoists’ anti-India rhetoric was no source of comfort.
“But we want Prime Minister Madhav Nepal to talk to Maoists so that they can write their constitution and hold elections under it.”
Channels have been kept open with all parties, including the CPN (Maoists), whose leader Prachanda lately toned-down tirades against India on Krishna’s advice.
“We don’t want in Nepal an outcome that spells chaos or instability or is inimical to India,” the official said. “We can’t tell them who’ll be their PM. Right now Madhav Nepal is the PM and we support him.”
IceCold
PDF VETERAN
- Joined
- May 1, 2007
- Messages
- 19,236
- Reaction score
- 10
- Country
- Location
Mere words. Both nations are a bunch of fool dancing on the US tunes. Seriously we all know the out come of these so called meaningful dialogues initiated to reduce the trust deficit, the truth is as long as US wants, we continue to be the puppets and the US puppeteer, once there interests are gone, we'll be back to each others throats. What a shame.
Prometheus
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2010
- Messages
- 4,942
- Reaction score
- -7
- Country
- Location
Manmohan ready for talks, says Gilani
LAHORE: Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani on Saturday said Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was ready for talks on all outstanding issues.
While talking to media representatives in Lahore, Gilani said the government will take action wherever its writ was challenged and that the government had the ability to counter terrorism in an effective way.
The prime minister appreciated the remarks made by the Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry in which he said that there was no danger to the current system.
Answering a question, Gilani said he had ordered the Inter-Provincial Coordination Committee to resolve the water issue between Punjab and Irsa.—DawnNews
LAHORE: Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani on Saturday said Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was ready for talks on all outstanding issues.
While talking to media representatives in Lahore, Gilani said the government will take action wherever its writ was challenged and that the government had the ability to counter terrorism in an effective way.
The prime minister appreciated the remarks made by the Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry in which he said that there was no danger to the current system.
Answering a question, Gilani said he had ordered the Inter-Provincial Coordination Committee to resolve the water issue between Punjab and Irsa.—DawnNews
Similar threads
- Article
