LOGICAL BOSSS
BANNED
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2016
- Messages
- 521
- Reaction score
- -17
- Country
- Location
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/...ar-war-christine-fair-terrorism/1/769343.html
SOURCE: INDIA TODAY
Talking to India Today about India’s retaliation against Pakistan after the Uri terror attack, Georgetown University professor and an expert on India-Pakistan relations Christine Fair said that India shouldn’t exercise restraint fearing nuclear reprisal from Pakistan.
Criticising Pakistan-sponsored terror against India, Fair said, “I have never heard any Pakistani say they will not send a terror team because India has nuclear weapons.”
She says that India’s nuclear arsenal should in fact give it immunity and impunity to prosecute sub-state terrorism sponsored by Pakistan.
HOLES IN PAKISTAN’S NUCLEAR DOCTRINE
Fair pointed holes in Pakistan’s nuclear doctrine saying that it required Pakistan “to first detonate a nuclear tactical weapon in its air space as a warning to Indian troops and then the second level of escalation over a border transgression would call for the use of nuclear weaponry. If Pakistan bursts a weapon in its airspace, it will immediately run a risk of knocking out its commanding communication.”
“Secondly, If Indian troops transgress into a populated city like Sialkot or Lahore, Pakistan will suffer more fatalities than on Indian troops. Therefore, this battlefield calculation gives India a lot of wriggle room to retaliate than to exercise restraint,” she said.
BALOCHISTAN CARD DEMOTES LARGER ISSUE
The professor also warned India against breaching the Indus water treaty with Pakistan, arguing that it will be an unjust answer because India will end up punishing innocent Pakistanis and not those who launched the terror attack.
Fair is strongly averse to India’s plan of sending ministers to foreign countries in order to garner support against Pakistan. She says, “It is a little too much to ask others to do it,” adding that India cannot expect support unless it officially declares Pakistan a state sponsor of terror.
Asking India to focus on Pakistan seeding unrest in Kashmir and not on Balochistan, she advised – “If India plays the Balochistan card to UN, it would merely look like a ‘tit for tat’ situation, thereby demoting the larger issue of sub-state terrorism.”
WHY IS CHINA DEFENDING THE INDEFENSIBLE
Fair wanted India to pull in China into the debate as they have been defending Pakistant blatantly. It will put China in a hot seat, when India raises the terror issue in UN.
“Why is China defending the indefensible?” asked Fair.
Waging a diplomatic war is just not enough, Fair said.
“Don’t expect diplomatic isolation is going to stop Pakistan from using terror as tool for foreign policy,” she added.
SOURCE: INDIA TODAY
Talking to India Today about India’s retaliation against Pakistan after the Uri terror attack, Georgetown University professor and an expert on India-Pakistan relations Christine Fair said that India shouldn’t exercise restraint fearing nuclear reprisal from Pakistan.
Criticising Pakistan-sponsored terror against India, Fair said, “I have never heard any Pakistani say they will not send a terror team because India has nuclear weapons.”
She says that India’s nuclear arsenal should in fact give it immunity and impunity to prosecute sub-state terrorism sponsored by Pakistan.
HOLES IN PAKISTAN’S NUCLEAR DOCTRINE
Fair pointed holes in Pakistan’s nuclear doctrine saying that it required Pakistan “to first detonate a nuclear tactical weapon in its air space as a warning to Indian troops and then the second level of escalation over a border transgression would call for the use of nuclear weaponry. If Pakistan bursts a weapon in its airspace, it will immediately run a risk of knocking out its commanding communication.”
“Secondly, If Indian troops transgress into a populated city like Sialkot or Lahore, Pakistan will suffer more fatalities than on Indian troops. Therefore, this battlefield calculation gives India a lot of wriggle room to retaliate than to exercise restraint,” she said.
BALOCHISTAN CARD DEMOTES LARGER ISSUE
The professor also warned India against breaching the Indus water treaty with Pakistan, arguing that it will be an unjust answer because India will end up punishing innocent Pakistanis and not those who launched the terror attack.
Fair is strongly averse to India’s plan of sending ministers to foreign countries in order to garner support against Pakistan. She says, “It is a little too much to ask others to do it,” adding that India cannot expect support unless it officially declares Pakistan a state sponsor of terror.
Asking India to focus on Pakistan seeding unrest in Kashmir and not on Balochistan, she advised – “If India plays the Balochistan card to UN, it would merely look like a ‘tit for tat’ situation, thereby demoting the larger issue of sub-state terrorism.”
WHY IS CHINA DEFENDING THE INDEFENSIBLE
Fair wanted India to pull in China into the debate as they have been defending Pakistant blatantly. It will put China in a hot seat, when India raises the terror issue in UN.
“Why is China defending the indefensible?” asked Fair.
Waging a diplomatic war is just not enough, Fair said.
“Don’t expect diplomatic isolation is going to stop Pakistan from using terror as tool for foreign policy,” she added.
Lol! First you claim it is disputed and in the same breath you say it belongs to Pakistan. Decide before making a fool of yourself! 
