Indian troops no threat to Pak, PM told Clinton

[Roybot]

I think this is how it must have gone.

America to Pakistan: Put more troops in the NWFP and afghan border.

Pakistan to America: No can do, our troops are tied up on the eastern border with India, and India has about gazillion troops right across the border.

America to India: Move troops from Pakistani border, so that Pakistanis can free up their troops for Afghan-Pak border.

India to America: No can do, Indian troops are there for defensive purpose only. But we can assure you that we are in no mood for any offensive shenanigans.
=================================

Now wikileak picks up just the last cable(conveniently) and publishes it and we have this thread.

Anyone else think that this wikileaks business has been hijacked? Almost all the cables released recently have only one purpose, and that is to stir shyte up.

I think its time to stop taking wikileaks seriously.

 

[lem34]

I think this is how it must have gone.

America to Pakistan: Put more troops in the NWFP and afghan border.

Pakistan to America: No can't do, our troops are tied up on the eastern border with India, and India has about gazillion troops right across the border.

America to India: Move troops from Pakistani border, so that Pakistanis can free up their troops for Afghan-Pak border.

India to America: No can't do, Indian troops are there for defensive purpose only. But we can assure you that we are in no mood for any offensive shenanigans.
=================================

Now wikileak peaks up just the last cable and publishes and we have this thread.

Anyone else think that this wikileaks has been hijacked? Almost all the cables released recently have only one purpose, and this is stir shyte up.

I think its time to stop taking wikileaks seriously.

Thank you for your interpretation for which we have no evidence whatsoever. lol

 

[Roybot]

Thank you for your interpretation for which we have no evidence whatsoever. lol

Fair enough, but all am saying is, we should stop taking wikileaks as the absolute truth.

As for the evidence, am quite sure both American military's statement about needing troops on ****** border, and Pakistani military's statements about not being able to free up more troops from the eastern border, has been published in the media before.

 

[Omar1984]

Good thing Pakistan Army are the real ones with power in the country and not these puppets of Clinton and Obama.

 

[Bl[i]tZ]

But how can this be interpretad any other way. I think that some people here dont want to believe what it says and therefore are suggesting what far fetched theories that are unnecessary. Ask your leader I dont know what he had to gain perhaps he was scared.

Let me find that document - news media outlets generally summarize stuff but the original documents are generally descriptive.

---------- Post added at 03:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:33 PM ----------

Good thing Pakistan Army are the real ones with power in the country and not these puppets of Clinton and Obama.

I wish your politicians had all the powers. You'll realize that there are no military solutions to political problems.

 

[Bl[i]tZ]

Link to the article that summarized our position in The Hindu -

Link

Pertinent US Embassy Cables -

185384: Menon says India to decide on information-sharing with Pakistan

186057: Mukherjee shares concern about special envoy in Ambassador's farewell call

I hope the following clarifies Indian position -

Weeks before the Obama administration appointed Richard Holbrooke as the Special Representative to Pakistan and Afghanistan, New Delhi sent an unequivocal message to the United States that any move to include India in his brief would be “unacceptable.”

External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee registered India's strong disapproval of President-elect Barack Obama's plan to appoint a special envoy for the India-Pakistan-Afghanistan region.

During a meeting with U.S. Ambassador David Mulford on January 9, 2009, Mr. Mukherjee is reported to have said the move “smacks of interference and would be unacceptable [to India].”

The meeting took place two weeks before Mr. Holbrooke's appointment. India was conspicuously absent from his designation, suggesting that New Delhi had — as speculated in some quarters — successfully lobbied the Obama administration in ensuring that neither India nor Kashmir were included in Mr. Holbrooke's official brief.

A cable (186057: secret) dated January 7, 2009 sent by Mr. Mulford to Washington shows the speculation was not far off the mark.

“Mukherjee was deeply concerned about any move toward an envoy with a broad regional mandate that could be interpreted to include Kashmir.

“Such a broad mandate would be viewed by India as risky and unpredictable, exposing issues of vital concern to India to the discretion of the individual appointed.”

Mr. Holbrooke passed away in December 2010 and was succeeded by Marc Grossman.

Mr. Mukherjee's keenness that the U.S.-India relationship should not be viewed primarily through the lens of the crisis in the region was also reflected in his remark that “India was content that Vice President-elect [Joe] Biden [did] not extend his trip beyond Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.”

He, however, added that India would look forward to welcoming him one day to “showcase the breadth of the bilateral relationship.”

During the meeting, Mr. Mulford drew attention to the lack of an agreement on End Use Monitoring (EUM) between India and the U.S., saying he did not see why it was so difficult for the former to conclude an acceptable agreement. As it turned out, an EUM agreement — under which restrictions on use and mechanisms for monitoring may be applied to defence and other items using cutting edge technologies sold to India — was finalised in mid-2009, or within a few months of the meeting.

Another cable (185384: confidential) dated December 31, 2008 sent by Mr. Mulford to Washington records that India's Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon had expressed the country's “extreme sensitivity” on the issue of a U.S. special envoy with “a mandate to address the dispute with Pakistan over Kashmir.”

Mr. Shivshankar Menon is said to have conveyed this in a meeting with U.S. Under Secretary Bill Burns. The cable cites Mr. Menon as telling him that India is concerned about the possibility of a narrow deal in which the U.S. would tell Pakistan the Mumbai terrorist attacks will not “stick on you” as long as “you keep fighting in the West [against militants in the western region of Pakistan].”

India needed to work to “update perceptions,” the Foreign Secretary said, “because the concept of such a deal could have originated only from those with out-dated views of the reality in Kashmir.”

The cable reports Mr. Menon telling the U.S. official that “a special envoy would be deeply unpopular and could negatively affect the gains in [the U.S.-India] bilateral relationship. Menon observed that ‘we have not heard a peep' from critics of a close relationship with the U.S. about co-operation with the FBI following the Mumbai attacks, but added, ‘Kashmir is different; we do not want to feed the notion that the U.S. is messing about in Kashmir, especially in the lead-up to national elections.”

 

[Whazzup]

Here's a good idea, how about India shows some good will and pulls back its armoured and mechanized divisions and Pakistan will do the same. If India has no intentions of attacking Pakistan, whats the purpose of parking these offensive oriented forces right next to the border. As long as India maintains these force levels near the border, she has no right to ask Pakistan to withdraw her forces, its very hypocritical of India to even suggest that.

First tell me how many times have India attacked Pakistan aaaa never so this proves that our forces on our sides of border are for defence purpose while yours are bcoz of your insecurity nature.
Guys we don't even know by what context PM has said this so I don't take this BS serious .