Pakistan army: We must 'avoid conflict' with India

[GunMan]

Pakistan army: We must 'avoid conflict' with India

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan – Pakistan's army chief stressed Monday the need to "avoid conflict" with India, days after he began moving troops toward the rivals' shared border as tensions rose over last month's terror attacks on Mumbai.

Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani's remarks were believed to be his first about the strained relationship and could reassure a jittery region that Pakistan does not intend to escalate the crisis further.

On Friday, Pakistani intelligence officials said thousands of troops were being shifted toward the Indian border, though there has been no sign yet of a major build up at the frontier.

Without referring specifically to the tensions, Kayani "highlighted the need to de-escalate and avoid conflict in the interest of peace and security," a brief army statement said.

Kayani made the statement in talks with Chinese Vice Foreign Minister He Yafei, who is visiting Pakistan, the release said.

India blames Pakistani militants for the slaughter of 164 people in its commercial capital and has not ruled out the use of force in its response. Pakistan's civilian leaders have said they do not want war, but will retaliate if attacked.

Despite being under civilian control, analysts say Pakistan's army and intelligence agencies wield enormous influence on decision-making. Some say they are more powerful than the country's elected leaders.

Nuclear-armed Pakistan and India have fought three wars since 1960 — two over Kashmir, a majority Muslim region in the Himalayas claimed by both countries.

Pakistan army: We must 'avoid conflict' with India - Yahoo! News

 

[arsipk]

Well, thousand of troops were not shifted to avoid conflict but to give clear message we are ready

 

[IceCold]

Pakistan army: We must 'avoid conflict' with India

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan – Pakistan's army chief stressed Monday the need to "avoid conflict" with India, days after he began moving troops toward the rivals' shared border as tensions rose over last month's terror attacks on Mumbai.

Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani's remarks were believed to be his first about the strained relationship and could reassure a jittery region that Pakistan does not intend to escalate the crisis further.

On Friday, Pakistani intelligence officials said thousands of troops were being shifted toward the Indian border, though there has been no sign yet of a major build up at the frontier.

Without referring specifically to the tensions, Kayani "highlighted the need to de-escalate and avoid conflict in the interest of peace and security," a brief army statement said.

Kayani made the statement in talks with Chinese Vice Foreign Minister He Yafei, who is visiting Pakistan, the release said.

India blames Pakistani militants for the slaughter of 164 people in its commercial capital and has not ruled out the use of force in its response. Pakistan's civilian leaders have said they do not want war, but will retaliate if attacked.

Despite being under civilian control, analysts say Pakistan's army and intelligence agencies wield enormous influence on decision-making. Some say they are more powerful than the country's elected leaders.

Nuclear-armed Pakistan and India have fought three wars since 1960 — two over Kashmir, a majority Muslim region in the Himalayas claimed by both countries.

Somehow they just cant come out without inserting a stupid remark, rather personal opinion in the article.
Us ka bagair roti kaisa hazam ho gi.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Well, thousand of troops were not shifted to avoid conflict but to give clear message we are ready

On the contrary, thousands of troops were redeployed and other measures to heighten military preparedness taken precisely to avoid conflict, by sending a message that Pakistan was prepared to escalate if India initiated any sort of military action on Pakistani soil.

 

[Goodperson]

Pakistan army's step to mobilize troops were public exercise only for domestic consumption, It was not in response to India's mobilization as India did not amass troops at its borders unlike in year 2002. Mobilization of India's troops takes months.

 

[Jihad]

Heard it on the radio, I think the Chinese and Pakistani officials did well to calm things down.
And I agree with IceCold, the article containts 1 stupid statement which wasn't necessary at all.

 

[gpit]

We must 'avoid conflict' with India

Very wise statement, indeed!

An armed conflict is not in the interest of the region, but to the benefit of handful evil persons/politicians/terrorists.

Unfortunately, this is not a one side decision.

 

[yarmook]

Question is who was creating conflict? It was India not Pakistan. Pakistan was only and still only taking measures for own defence not aggression unlike India.

Just on the basis of statement by Parnab we can not trust India.

 

[jeypore]

On the contrary, thousands of troops were redeployed and other measures to heighten military preparedness taken precisely to avoid conflict, by sending a message that Pakistan was prepared to escalate if India initiated any sort of military action on Pakistani soil.

India did not mobilize mass troops movement toward the border, but Pakistan did just because India said other options are open on the table. This is clear sign of paranoia or just a showmanship from the army.

Despite being under civilian control, analysts say Pakistan's army and intelligence agencies wield enormous influence on decision-making. Some say they are more powerful than the country's elected leaders.

And I believe this statment is true, since the civilian gov't kept giving U turns on every sentence, it is not probable to believe that the army does have brain of it's own, and does whatever it deims necessary for there narcistic means.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

India did not mobilize mass troops movement toward the border, but Pakistan did just because India said other options are open on the table. This is clear sign of paranoia or just a showmanship from the army.

It doesn't require a troop buildup for India to conduct airstrikes in Pakistan. India's leadership maintained that 'all options were on the table', and Pakistan quite clearly sent the message that any military option exercised by India would invite an escalation from Pakistan, and that therefore India needed to back down from its 'all options' position.

And I believe this statment is true, since the civilian gov't kept giving U turns on every sentence, it is not probable to believe that the army does have brain of it's own, and does whatever it deims necessary for there narcistic means.

The civilian government has done 'U-turns' with her domestic political partners as well.

The fact is that some leaders in the civilian government announced things without deliberation or consultation, and had to retract them. In most cases th e retractions made perfect sense, including in the attempt to shift teh ISI under the IM, and the decision to not send the DG ISI to India.

No major concerns here - the retractions reflect the inexperience/ineptitude of the current political leadership.

 

[jeypore]

and that therefore India needed to back down from its 'all options' position.

Why should India back down from "all options", If Pakistan will not cooperate, then India does have a legal right of "all options". Infact, the legal right was approved by the UN.

No major concerns here - the retractions reflect the inexperience/ineptitude of the current political leadership.

Yes clearly from your perspective, but truely it shows that the political party system or even the democratic system is not working, even though Zandari is saying that democratic system is in place in Pakistan and it is time to make changes. What Changes. Political system in Pakistan is just farce, And the big father (army) knows who is ept and inept, not the people of Pakistan.

 

[Babagee57]

India will never pick a fight with Pakistan. They only talk big.

 

[ajpirzada]

Why should India back down from "all options", If Pakistan will not cooperate, then India does have a legal right of "all options". Infact, the legal right was approved by the UN.

u have got a right to keep all options open and same goes for us.
however can u please tell me how should pak cooperate with india at this point in time????
Remember:
india has not provided any evidence yet,
indian gov has said no to join investigation,
pak has already banned JuD with its officials are under arrest,
and UN is satisfied with wat pakistan has done so far.

 

[jeypore]

u have got a right to keep all options open and same goes for us.
however can u please tell me how should pak cooperate with india at this point in time????
Remember:
india has not provided any evidence yet,
pak has already banned JuD with its officials are under arrest,
and UN is satisfied with wat pakistan has done so far.

That has become a big question mark? If you carefully listen to indian defense minister, he cleraly says that the evidence was provided, but the pakistanie establishment does not want to accept it. You do not have to go so far to understand his frustration, just by looking at where Kasab and family lives, Where in that small village there are military personal. First of all this is a very big hint, why does that small village all of a sudden needs military presence, and how come that father who says this is my son not allowed to speak freely to any media. One must feel that Pakistan establishment, either the civil gov't or military does not want anyone to know.

 

[muhibbay watan]

BIG N GOOF TALK HS NO RECOMMENDATION..............YES V R HIGH ALERT N READY....BUT U GUYS KNOW?..THAT IF KHUDA NA KHASTA....war may start...it will take 30 mins for destruction of both countries but major fact is dat.....ISLAM WILL NOT DIE...IT WILL REMAIN BY OTHER 55 MUSLIAM COUNTRIES.........but india's hinduism will totally die out...its a question of theri dharam as well