Pakistan-India Relations

[Masterchief]

@batman: your reasons are pointless, there have been numerous attacks in india involving pakistan based terrorist groups but does that make me hate the pakistanis? The answer is no because terrorists have no nationality, no matter what happens i continue and shall always consider pakistanis as my brothers,its nice to involve children in peace process, they are the most innocent and beautiful creations of god,they are the future rulers of our nations so it depends a lot on us wether we want them to love or hate.

 

[RoYaL~GuJJaR]

YouTube - Nazar Me Rehte Ho (Aman ki Asha Anthem) Official Video By Sarmad

Very nice video..! I like this..!

I am 19 year old..! And i just wana say that i hope i will or i can watch good Ind/pak relationship in my life ..!

@Rabzon Thanks for starting a positive thread.

 

[Ek Aasaman]

It was Indian terroists who were shouting while shooting 'In ki nasal ko khatam kardo'

If any one living in Pakistan has illusion about Indians than he shall go work in middle-east for one year.

Simply... too much cable TV....

Pakistanis have already started speaking hindi words, next what?

Hindi aur Urdu ek Basha hein. According to linguists Urdu and Hindi are part of the same language, the divide between them is superficial and man made, just like the divide between India and Pakistan.

 

[RabzonKhan]

It was Indian terroists who were shouting while shooting 'In ki nasal ko khatam kardo'

Just wondering, how many were they….1.1 billion?!

If any one living in Pakistan has illusion about Indians than he shall go work in middle-east for one year.

I’ve been living in New York City for over a year now, and I have met many Indians, trust me, they don’t bite and have no horns.

Simply... too much cable TV....

Pakistanis have already started speaking hindi words, next what?

Urdu is identical to Hindi in its spoken form, so, what's the fuss?

Come on Batman, I think you are intelligent enough to know that there are good and bad people in every Nation, race and religion.

Let's give peace a chance, please!!!

 

[RabzonKhan]

The ties that bind

December 22, 2010

Indian delegates of Aman ki Asha's IT Committee enjoy the sights of Lahore. Photo credits: Zahid Rehman, Arif Najmi/Jang Group

By Laleh Habib
'Our's is a unique region in the world, where despite three wars between our two countries, the vibrant people to people chemistry is unprecedented,' mused industrialist Amin Hashwani, speaking in the context of Indo-Pak relations at a meeting of the Aman ki Asha IT Committee recently held in Karachi, that he moderated.

His observation about the vibrant people to people chemistry was borne out amply over the four days that the delegates of the Aman ki Asha IT Conference spent together, organised by the Jang Group of Pakistan and the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII). During these deliberations, heads of Pakistani and Indian IT companies, entrepreneurs and leaders of thought focused on exploring opportunities for cross-border projects and trade between the two countries. They also formed lasting friendships.

The IT Committee is one of six committees formed at the end of a major economic meet in New Delhi in May this year organised by Aman ki Asha. The committees, drawn from sectors identified as having the greatest potential for collaboration, have chapters in India and in Pakistan and work towards bilateral trade and investment. This was the first joint meeting of an Aman ki Asha Committee.

Most of the Indian delegates had never visited Pakistan before. Some spoke of apprehensions and misgivings that they had had, others said that visiting this country had been a lifelong dream. 'It was a trip I that I was looking forward too but did not know what to expect,' confessed Rahul Mohod, CEO of iResolvIT. But despite mixed expectations, there was absolute consensus about the end result - beyond expectations, in the best way possible.

Even the bureaucratic hurdles of visas (typically last minute) and police reporting couldn't dampen spirits. And once they were together, the close and familial ties of the delegates from the two countries trumped everything else. Reflecting upon the journey, Mohod said, ' From the moment I landed at Karachi, through to Lahore and then Moen-jo-Daro, it felt like home. '

Four days flew by in a whirlwind of economics, IT talk, food, art, culture, history and music. These are the ties that bind us, ties that cross the Radcliffe line and have proved so far to be more resilient than any visa restrictions.

The potential for synergy between the IT industries of both countries became obvious during the very first day of conferences and brainstorming. Delegates explored the many benefits of cooperation and the potential for numerous cross-border initiatives. Several initiatives were immediately identified, with Pakistani and Indian champions. An action plan was drawn up, and is already well underway.

Observing the delegates interact, it was obvious that the ties that link them go far beyond business. They stretch back into the songs they grew up listening to, the kind of architecture they see in our hometowns and the tastes their palates crave.

After productive meetings in Karachi, I flew with IT Committee to Lahore to enjoy the famous foods and architecture of this historic city. Dining at Andaaz in the Old City overlooking the Badshahi Mosque - the most surreal backdrop to a perfect evening - we reveled in how the magnificent mosque was built with indigenous clay from what is now Pakistan, then clad with red sandstone tiles from Rajasthan. These bricks and walls are indelible signs of our shared culture and history. The conversation that flowed was a mark of the spontaneous camaraderie and fraternity between people, despite hostilities at the government level.

After our wonderful meal, we toured Yusuf Salahuddin's beautiful haveli. Sitting around a fire in the courtyard, singing old Bollywood songs and tunes immortalised by Mehdi Hasan and Farida Khanum that many remembered from childhood, it was hard to tell who was Pakistani and who Indian.

The songs and friendship carried through the rest of the trip, through sightseeing in Lahore and a tour of Mohenjodaro. Delegates had come to the meeting believing that business and economic ties will bring our countries closer together, pushing the governments to develop more amicable relations. But what was really clear by the end of the four days together was that as far as the people are concerned, there is already a tremendous groundswell of fraternity, shared interests and culture and much goodwill.

We simply need opportunities to bring us together to experience it.

Laleh Habib is Coordinator,
Aman ki Asha, Pakistan.

 

[RabzonKhan]

Pakistanis, Indians want peace, friendship, says poll


By Amir Zia
January 01, 2011


KARACHI: Despite a history of conflicts, mistrust and estranged relationship, an overwhelming number of Pakistanis and Indians want peace and friendship between the nuclear-armed South Asian nations, a survey conducted on both sides of the border has revealed.

The survey - conducted by independent research agencies and sponsored by the Jang Group of Pakistan and The Times of India on the first anniversary of their joint peace initiative 'Aman Ki Asha' - showed that 70 per cent of Pakistanis and 74 per cent of Indians want peaceful relations.

Although, the process of composite dialogue between Islamabad and New Delhi remains stalled since the 2008 Mumbai carnage, 72 per cent Pakistanis and 66 per cent Indians hope to see 'sustainable friendly relations' in their lifetime. Compared with last year, the number of Indians hoping to see peace in their lifetime has surged by 17 per cent.

The optimism at the people's level appears in a stark contrast to the current bitter official positions. The Indian government accuses Pakistan of harbouring terrorists and not doing enough against the alleged sponsors of the Mumbai attack, while Islamabad says that New Delhi has been using this incident as a 'propaganda' tool to avoid talks on the core issue of Kashmir. Islamabad also blames India for instigating violence in Balochistan.

According to the survey, awareness of the Kashmir problem as being central to the state of relations between the two countries, particularly in India, has increased. The survey results show that 77 per cent Pakistanis and 87 per cent of Indians feel that peace can be achieved by settling the protracted Kashmir dispute.

The scientific survey covered 10 Pakistani cities and 42 villages, covering a cross-section of people from rural and urban areas. Pakistani cities where the survey was carried out were: Karachi, Lahore, Rawalpindi, Islamabad, Peshawar, Quetta, Multan, Faisalabad, Hyderabad and Sukkur. In India, the survey was conducted in six cities: Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, Bangalore, Hyderabad (Deccan) and Chennai. Adult population, both male and female, were represented in the survey.

This was the second survey on Pakistan-India relations. The first survey was conducted in December 2009; just before the Aman Ki Asha peace campaign was launched. Survey results show a consistent and marked improvement in perceptions about each other by people in both countries.

The survey showed that the issue of Pakistan-India relations featured in the thoughts of 73 per cent Pakistanis and 68 per cent Indians. The survey results said apart from settling the Kashmir dispute, 80 per cent Pakistanis and 91 per cent Indians think 'stronger relations and better defence' would also contribute in achieving the goal of peace.

The survey tracked the impact of the Aman Ki Asha campaign in India by asking a similar set of questions to two groups of people - one aware of this peace campaign and the other not aware of it. On all four questions asked - perceiving Pakistan as a high threat to India, as a sponsor of terror, desire for peace and being hopeful for achieving sustainable peace - there was a marked difference in the responses of the two groups. The group that was aware of the Aman Ki Asha initiative had a much better perception of Pakistan.

Around 77 per cent of Pakistanis and 87 per cent Indians consider that international pressure may help in bringing peace, while 71 per cent Pakistanis and 72 per cent Indians pin hopes on greater people-to-people contact to pave the way for friendly relations. Eighty-one per cent Pakistanis and Indians see people-to-people contact as an effective 'instrument of peace'.

An increase in business has also been tipped as a vehicle of peace by 67 per cent Pakistanis and 69 per cent Indians, the survey said. Among other steps needed to promote peace, 32 per cent Pakistanis pinned hopes on sports, 28 per cent on business, 22 per cent on tourism, 20 per cent on travel for health treatment and 13 per cent each on culture and higher education. The data from the Indian side regarding this questionnaire was not available.

For 51 per cent of Pakistanis, business can help bring peace, while 46 and 45 per cent of respondents said that it can also be done through sports and tourism respectively.

AMAN KI ASHA: The first of its kind peace drive 'Aman Ki Asha' was seen by a vast majority as articulating the aspirations of the people. Around 87 per cent Pakistanis and 74 per cent Indians were of the view that this sustained campaign 'developed tremendous awareness about the Indo-Pak relationship'. Around 85 per cent Pakistanis and 61 per cent Indians said Aman Ki Asha communicated 'peoples' desire for peace to their governments, while 80 per cent Pakistanis and 86 per cent Indians said it 'helped bring the people of the two countries together'.

The Jang Group and The Times of India have held a series of events over the last 12 months that involved a broad section of people, including students, intellectuals, artists, businessmen, doctors, information technology experts and ordinary citizens in an attempt to boost people-to-people ties.

In Pakistan, the recall of the 'Aman Ki Asha' campaign has been around an impressive 92 per cent. Shahrukh Hasan, Group Managing Director of the Jang Group, said this media-led civil society movement had made a huge contribution for peace at a time when tensions remained high between the two countries.

"The survey results should lay to rest any misgivings or apprehensions people may have had about the objectives or chances of success of the campaign," he said. "The survey results show that Aman Ki Asha has brought about a sea change in perceptions in India about Pakistan. Every negative perception has decreased and every positive perception has improved. The Jang Group feels vindicated and is delighted that we have helped put across Pakistan's point of view through honest dialogue, seminars, people-to-people contacts and cultural events."

According to the survey, the terror perception in India about Pakistan is down to 42 per cent from 75 a year ago, of bomb threats to 29 per cent from 54 and awareness about the Kashmir dispute rising to 17 per cent from a mere four per cent. Hasan hoped that the Pakistani and Indian governments would continue to facilitate the Aman Ki Asha peace campaign and take advantage of the access to the hearts and minds of the people of the two countries that the Jang Group and the Times of India provided.

 

[RabzonKhan]

A breakthrough

Dawn
Feb 12 2011

THE words ‘composite dialogue’ are not there. However, for all practical purposes Pakistan and India have agreed to pursue the peace process that began so hopefully in January 2004 but fell victim to the rude shock that Mumbai was. On the whole, it is a dollop of good news because the agenda leaves out none of the contentious issues that have bedevilled relations between the two countries since independence. The joint statement issued simultaneously in Islamabad and New Delhi on Thursday shows both sides have conceded ground. Mumbai is no more the stumbling block it has been since November 2008, and New Delhi has agreed to talk on all issues, including — to Islamabad’s satisfaction — Jammu and Kashmir. The “Mumbai trial” finds mention in the statement but as part of talks on “counter-terrorism”. The foreign minister, it has been agreed, will visit New Delhi before July, preceded by a meeting between the two foreign secretaries, to whom credit goes for quietly working out in Thimphu on Feb 6 a mutually acceptable agenda.

But — we have been here before. If Pakistani and Indian officials and ministers meet, it would not be the first time in their torrid history. Just as there is a history of conflict between the two countries, so also has there been a long tradition of bilateral troubleshooting. Not all powwows failed. Ignoring Simla, which took place after the 1971 war, there has been an agreement on not attacking each other’s nuclear installations besides many subsidiary agreements, like the rail and bus services and cultural exchanges flowing from the composite dialogue.

What is it that has prompted them to undertake the momentous task of restarting the peace process pregnant with possibilities? First, it is common sense. Geography and geopolitical realities cannot be wished away. Peace and stability are in their mutual interest, and the two have realised after more than two years of ‘no war, no peace’ that the status quo is not in their mutual interest. Second, foreign advice, if not pressure from common friends, is obviously there. Third, terrorism continues to be a real challenge to both and cannot be rooted out without sincere cooperation. An act of terror, whether in Mardan or Mumbai, has disastrous economic effects and no one notes it more than foreign investors. Will the talks proceed smoothly? The question is justified, because the India-Pakistan relationship is accident-prone and full of mistrust. Why not go straight for a Siachen pullout as decided way back and clinch a deal on Sir Creek on whose joint survey they agreed in 2006?

 

[jayron]

Thanks Rabzon for your single handed effort to show the positive news about Indo-Pak relationship.

 

[ajtr]

India-Pakistan talks: read between the lines
Analysis: It's official. New Delhi lost the stalemate.​

By Jason Overdorf - GlobalPost
Published: February 11, 2011 12:33 ET in Asia

NEW DELHI, India — Nominally, India and Pakistan agreed to resume high level peace talks Thursday.

But in reality, New Delhi bent over backwards to give in to Islamabad before the proposed negotiations even begin — by granting the Kashmir dispute equal status on the agenda with the 2008 terrorist attacks on Mumbai.

So how did India go from refusing to talk to begging for talks?

New Delhi believes that it has no choice but to talk eventually and surmises that the anger over the Mumbai attacks has faded enough over the past two years to make a resumption possible. Meanwhile, with the expected drawdown and eventual withdrawal of U.S. forces in Afghanistan on the horizon, India may believe that a magnanimous stance today could help it to negotiate a stronger post-conflict role for itself in Kabul.

"I think it was necessary for us to discuss Afghanistan ... ," Indian foreign minister S.M. Krishna told reporters in New York Thursday, according to the Times of India newspaper. "India has been playing a very positive role in trying to build Afghanistan in terms of our volunteers who have gone there for capacity building and so I think Afghanistan had to be included," the paper quoted Rao as saying.

Unfortunately, what's more likely is that resuming the dialogue will just give Islamabad — which is wary even of India's limited present role in Afghanistan — another chance to run circles around India's negotiators.

Already, India has agreed to discuss a whole range of issues, including Pakistan's claims to territory in Indian-administered Kashmir, which will inevitably remove the focus from Pakistan's alleged support of terrorist groups that attack India.

At a 90-minute meeting between Indian foreign secretary Nirupama Rao and her Pakistani counterpart Salman Bashir on the sidelines of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation meeting in Thimphu, Bhutan, on Sunday, the two countries agreed to a series of secretary-level meetings to discuss, among other issues, confidence-building measures like cross-border bus services, the dispute over Sir Creek (between India's Gujarat and Pakistan's Sindh province) and Pakistan's desire to redraw the borders of Kashmir.

"The reality is that India and Pakistan cannot afford to turn their backs to each other, that they must engage in dialogue which is, as I said, serious and sustainable and comprehensive," Rao said in a televised interview on Thursday, when the substance of the Sunday meeting was disclosed.

It's taken two years, but that's a pretty big flip-flop.

Once, India claimed it would not resume normal diplomatic relations until Islamabad cracked down on terrorist groups operating with impunity in Pakistan and began a vigorous prosecution of the alleged perpetrators of the November 2008 terrorist attacks on Mumbai. That vigorous prosecution never happened, of course. But as the United States proved unable to exert any pressure on Pakistan and instead began pressuring India to return to the negotiating table, New Delhi swiftly went from refusing to talk to begging to talk.

To make matters worse, China stepped up to back Pakistan's military shadow government. And events like the assassination of Punjab governor Salman Taseer for opposing Pakistan's blasphemy laws — which suggest that Pakistan's radicals are gaining ground — have convinced India that it has no choice but to backpedal. Playing hardball, the logic runs, will only give Pakistan's hardliners more room for saber-rattling — and more credibility on the street. If it wasn't clear before, it is clear now: India has lost the stalemate.

"Any rational observer would say this is not the time to nourish much hope on moving forward on substantive issues," said former Indian foreign secretary Kanwal Sibal. "But on our side they feel that vacuum is not in our favor and by not talking we would be giving up whatever little hope there is ... of stemming the rise of these radical forces and giving some backing to those who wish to normalize relations with India — especially Pakistani civil society."

But preventing Pakistani hardliners from playing the India card comes at a cost. The presumption that Qureshi will visit India in July to review the progress made by the two countries' foreign secretaries over the intervening months underscores the impression that India must woo Pakistan, even to merit a visit from its foreign minister. And it's far easier to make friendly noises now — when Indian-administered Kashmir enjoys a predictable winter lull in separatist protests — than it will be when Srinagar inevitably heats up for the summer.

At the last meeting between Indian and Pakistani foreign ministers last July, for instance, when Srinagar was rocked by bloody riots over the killing of civilian by Indian security forces, Qureshi sandbagged during meetings with Krishna in Islamabad. Then Qureshi undermined any possible gains at the post mortem press conference by equating a top Indian official with Hafiz Saeed — the Pakistani radical whom India believes masterminded the 2008 Mumbai attacks, and whose continued freedom and influence in Pakistan is a major impediment to better relations.

Indeed, if past talks are any indicator, nothing is likely to emerge from more dialogue. Though talking with Qureshi does grant Pakistan's democratically elected government an added stamp of legitimacy, in order to make progress India needs to negotiate with the real center of power in Islamabad — Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, who heads the Pakistani army.

Moreover, Manmohan Singh's government is in a weakened position domestically, and recent revelations about the involvement of Hindu terror cells in the bombing of a "Friendship Express" train between Delhi and Lahore — in which 42 Pakistani citizens were killed — has undermined India's previous position of moral superiority.

"The jury is still out on these talks," said Indiana University professor Sumit Ganguly. "Any progress, will necessarily be extremely slow and incremental. The level of distrust in India is too great and the PM is too weak with the opposition in an uproar about multiple [corruption] scandals."


By caving into Pakistan's demands up front and allowing Kashmir and "all outstanding issues" back on the table, India has essentially admitted that it has nothing to negotiate with. The threat of war is an empty one (thankfully), and generous aid from an opportunistic China and a fearful United States renders India's economic clout meaningless.

"The stick we have we can't use, and the carrot that the Pakistanis want [Kashmir] we can't give them," said Sibal.

 

[twoplustwoisfour]

@ajtr: what's the purpose of that article on this topic? Nice try to steer the conversation off course.

@mods: Please make this thread a sticky

 

[RabzonKhan]

Connecting the dots: Pune to Delhi to Karachi

By Urvashi Butalia
February 12, 2011

Earlier this week, I had two friends from Pune staying with me. They were on their way to Lahore — via a few days in Delhi — for the Faiz centenary celebrations. A writer and a professor of film studies, for both this was their first visit to Pakistan and their excitement was palpable. Faiz is a familiar figure to many Indians, particularly in the literary world and in the world of civil society — in fact, one of the most popular slogans in processions in northern India is Faiz’s famous line, bol ke labh azad hain tere — and my friends were excited to be going for the celebrations. But as much as Faiz, it was Pakistan that caught their imagination. What would it be like? What should they take? Were people hostile to Indians? What was the public transport system like? And how should one — more accurately how should women — dress? And I was reminded once again of how little we know about each other, and how much we want to know.

Every morning, over masala chai and biscuits, as we talked, the conversation inevitably turned to Pakistan. I told them, jokingly, that the questions they were asking were the exact mirror image of questions my Pakistani cousins had put to me when they wanted to come to India. How would Indians react to them, they wanted to know. What was it like for Indian Muslims? What should they take as gifts?

The week before my friends were to go to Lahore, I was meant to go to Karachi for the Karachi Literature Festival. But I had to cancel at the last minute because the visa did not come through. “But you’ve been there so many times,” my friends said, “what were the authorities worried about?” I found myself explaining that with India and Pakistan, the immigration authorities were not concerned so much about people going and settling in the other country (as, say, the US or the UK might be), as they were about things like terrorism and perhaps, infiltration.

And yet, I had to ask the question, as they did, why was there this quite irrational concern? Surely those who want to create trouble will hardly take the legal route, and if they do, they’ll have done enough preparation to get through regardless. Is the security of nations really threatened by ordinary people wanting to cross borders for perfectly harmless reasons — most people who travel from Pakistan to India or from India to Pakistan do so to meet families, to visit homes or places of religious pilgrimage, to attend events, or to participate in cultural and other meetings. It’s just the odd one somewhere whose motives may be different, why should the majority be penalised for this one individual?

These questions have no easy answers. Our two countries have, for six decades now, maintained a distance and a hostility towards each other. If there’s anyone who has ruptured this broad discourse of hostility, it is ordinary people who have, despite the obstacles, persisted in their efforts to maintain relationships and friendships, believing that there is so much we have to learn from each other, and there is no reason why we should be denied the opportunity.

This is why it is heartening to see that the two countries have started to talk again — or, at least, have indicated that they are willing to talk, and that no issue is beyond the pale of discussion. The dialogue may not be composite, but it will, we are told, be comprehensive. This isn’t the first time of course. Previously, too, dialogues have happened, and then broken down, they’re resumed, and then they stop again, and so on. For each step forward in normalising relations between the two countries, it seems as if we take two back.

But hope refuses to die. And now that the two countries have expressed their intention to continue to keep the dialogue open and to discuss all issues — ranging from confidence-building measures, to water issues, to political issues such as Jammu and Kashmir, to action on the Bombay attacks, to action on the Samjhauta attacks, and more, there’s further reason for hope.

Indeed, one of the interesting things about the discussions between our foreign secretaries in Thimphu this week is that, apart from agreeing that all outstanding issues between the two countries need to be addressed, there’s been a move to look at issues that affect the region as a whole, in particular Afghanistan. And there’s no reason why this should not happen, for it is in the interest of both countries to address regional issues, separately and together.

But it’s important to remember that any time there’s a flicker of hope that things will normalise between our two countries, there is also a note of caution. The unfortunate truth is that it takes so little to destroy the good intentions and derail the dialogue. This is why it becomes essential, I believe, for civil society actors to keep their level of dialogue open. For no matter how small the scale of civil society interactions, whether they be cultural or political or humanitarian, they help to keep up the pressure.

My friends who are currently in Lahore celebrating the Faiz centenary are doing precisely that. They’ve gone with enormous quantities of goodwill, and, no doubt, have been received with the same and more — Pakistani hospitality is famous after all. And in the interactions, the discussions, the music and celebration that they will see there, lie the seeds of many friendships that will sustain us all, and help us to build up pressure for peace between our countries.

And that’s not all for here, too, preparations are afoot to celebrate Faiz’s centenary and the return of the delegation that went from here is anxiously awaited, so that a second set of celebrations of our shared cultures and literatures can begin. Dare I say it? The politicians could learn a thing or two from ordinary citizens.

Published in The Express Tribune, February 13th, 2011.


The writer is director of Kali for Women, India’s first feminist publishing house, and author of several books including The Other Side of Silence: Voices from the Partition of India urvashi.butalia@tribune.com.pk

 

[ajtr]

Peace process with Pakistan

On The Spot​

By Tavleen Singh

As someone who believes that India has no choice but to reopen dialogue with Pakistan I applauded when our Foreign Secretaries met last week and decided that it was time to begin talking to each other again. In retrospect it was not a wise decision for the Government of India to have broken off dialogue after 26/11 because it achieved nothing. Had we continued the process of dialogue we might have been more successful in forcing at least the civilian half of Pakistan's government to acknowledge that the ISI played a role in the attack on Mumbai. Even if Pakistan's civilian leaders had hesitated to acknowledge this publicly they may have been an important source of information in sessions of private dialogue.
This did not happen and in the end the fault line between civilian and military aspects of Pakistan's ruling establishment were obliterated and today more than two years after the worst terrorist act on Indian soil Pakistan remains as far from punishing the men who did it as it was in November 2008.

Meanwhile, what we like to think of as 'civil society' in our neighbouring Islamic republic has shrunk to a frighteningly small collecting of frightened people. In Davos this time I met many old Pakistani friends and, inevitably, we talked mostly about the change that has overcome their country. They were defensive. The daughter of an old friend who was in Davos as a TV reporter said that she worked for an Urdu channel and that whenever she expressed her 'liberal' analysis of a particular event she noticed that the TRPs were good. An old army man, who had once been close to General Pervez Musharraf, said that he did not think it was possible to understand what was happening in Pakistan from the safety of India. Yet another friend blamed the Americans for everything that had gone wrong. He said that if the Americans left Afghanistan he had no doubt at all that Pakistan would go back to being that happy, optimistic country that I had seen when I first took that short flight from Delhi to Lahore on a balmy evening in 1980.

It made me sad to listen to my friends because it confirmed that the people who could make a difference and help retrieve Pakistan from the brink of Islamist hell remain in denial about what has happened to their country.

I first noticed this in the summer of 2001 when I went to Lahore and Karachi to do a series of stories for Aaj Tak called 'Safarnama'. My going was a last minute decision on the part of Aroon Purie. The Pakistani government was being stingy with visas because General Musharraf was coming to Agra to talk to Prime Minister Vajpayee and they did not want any adverse advance publicity. It happened that I already had a visa to attend a friend's daughter's wedding and so it was decided that I should go.

There was no time to make hotel reservations so I stayed in Lahore with a friend and used a Pakistani television crew because there was no time to bring an Indian one. All day I wandered about the streets of Lahore with my Pakistani crew interviewing ordinary people and everywhere I went, including in some neighbouring villages, I met people who spoke the language of radical Islam. They objected to my not covering my head, to my working with strange men and to my wearing a sleeveless kameeze. It was mostly women who berated me for not 'respecting Pakistani culture' and the rules that had been made for Muslims by the Prophet of Islam. In Lahore's most famous 'nihari' restaurant I got into an argument with the owner, whose family were migrants from Delhi, because he said that television was forbidden in the Koran. When I asked him how this could be possible since television did not exist in the time of the Prophet he said, 'The Koran forbids the creation of images of human beings. Only Allah has this right.' When I came home in the evenings and told my friends the stories I had heard they did not believe them.

Since then whenever I have met them in Delhi or London or Davos I have noticed their determination not to acknowledge that their country was changing beyond recognition. And, that it was changing because of Islam. All the institutions of government including the police, the army, the judiciary, legislature and the executive are now manned by people born long after 1947. They believe that if Pakistan was created in the name of Islam then Islam has to be the solution to all their problems. They have been bred in schools that have taught them to hate India, to think of Hindus as evil and sly and to believe that there can never be peace between their 'land of the pure' and our land of happy infidels. The hostility against India runs deep and manifests itself in the violence of the jehadi groups that attack us on a daily basis online verbally and in more violent ways in real life.

Only last week Hafiz Mohammed Sayeed, who we believe was the mastermind of 26/11, announced that Pakistan would take Kashmir from India even if it meant a nuclear war.
So should we talking to him instead of General Kayani or President Zardari? Our Foreign Secretary has dismissed him as a 'man of no intelligence' but he is a man who wields enormous power. He started the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba, with the help of the Pakistani Army, and he now runs an Islamic charity called the Jamaat-e-Dawaa which everyone knows is just a Lashkar front. If General Kayani cannot control him from making hate speeches is there any point in talking to General Kayani? Yes, there is but we must find out who else we should be talking to.
The stalemate since 26/11 has achieved nothing so we have nothing to lose by dialogue. But, we need first to establish the groups in Pakistan who really matter and not waste time talking to those who do not. What is even more important is that we state in the clearest terms what it is we seek to achieve from this new process of dialogue. An important achievement of this new peace process could be just to find out who really controls Pakistan today.

 

[Desert Fox]

InshaAllah this BS aman ka tamasha will fail!!!

 

[RabzonKhan]

Aman Ki Asha concert in Ajmer

The Times of India
Feb 14, 2011

The location, revered by Hindus and Muslims alike, was among the most anticipated aspects of the concert by Fareed Ayaz Abu Mohammad Qawwal and Brothers from Pakistan, and qawwali singer Munawwar Masoom from India. The Mehfil-E-Sama Khana at the dargah looked spectacular in readiness for the concert, and soon after, it was resonating with the dhamaal of the qawwals'. Aman Ki Asha is a joint initiative by the Times of India and the Jang group of Pakistan.

Padharo mharey desh

The qawwals created magic at the dargah, and the response from the crowd that morning demonstrated how easy it is to bring people together with the madness of music. After the recital of the shahi qawwal by a qawwal group from Ajmer, Munawwar Masoom stole the audiences' heart with his stimulating performance. After that, he requested the Pakistani qawwals to join him, and what followed was simply magical. The audience, which included directors Rakeysh Omprakash Mehra and Imtiaz Ali, were floored by their performance. Afterwards, a happy Masoom said, "Qawwali woh sandesh hai jiske zariye log ek saath baith kar ek rang mein rang jaate hain." The high point of the concert was when Fareed Ayaz Abu Mohammad Qawwal and Brothers presented "Padharo Mharey Desh", and it was no surprise, sitting in the heart of Rajasthan, that the audience gave them a loud, long applause.

Wah, kya mehfil hai!

The presence of the Bollywood directors proved to be something of a headturner at the concert. Right from start to finish, the directors were present throughout. Coming to the dargah for the third time, Imtiaz, who was there with his wife Preety, said, "I'm here to endorse the Aman Ki Asha initiative." When asked about the concert, he said, "It is an attempt to combat any kind of violence. The concept of showing creativity through spirituality is remarkable."

Mehra, however, was not so prosaic. When asked how often he visits the dargah, he replied, "Whenever I am called, I come." Abhay Aima, who was also there, found the qawwals' performance enthralling. Arif, a musician from California who's been in Ajmer for four months as part of the Sufi Festival, made sure that he attended the concert. "I simply love their music — I feel that it brings me closer to the divine," said Arif.

 

[jayron]

InshaAllah this BS aman ka tamasha will fail!!!

I think Allah will support peace don't you think?