Pakistan must not be used for terror, Singh tells Zardari

[PeacefulIndian]

PM bluntly tells Pak not to allow terrorism against India - Yahoo! India News

PM bluntly tells Pak not to allow terrorism against India

Tue, Jun 16 03:39 PM
Ajay Kaul Yekaterinburg (Russia), June 16 (PTI)

"My mandate is to tell you that Pakistani territory should not not be used for terrorism against India," was the blunt message Prime Minister Manmohan Singh conveyed to President Asif Ali Zardari here today. The message, conveyed in front of television cameras when the two leaders shook hands before their closed-door meeting on the sidelines of a multilateral-forum deliberations, was so sharp that the President was apparently embarrassed.

"Please let them go," Zardari remarked to Singh, wanting the journalists to leave before they could carry on with their conversation in the first top-level contact between the two countries after the Mumbai terror attacks in November. PTI.

 

[s90]

Just like Indians "bluntly" summoned ISI cheif to India

 

[qsaark]

PM bluntly tells Pak not to allow terrorism against India - Yahoo! India News

PM bluntly tells Pak not to allow terrorism against India

Tue, Jun 16 03:39 PM
Ajay Kaul Yekaterinburg (Russia), June 16 (PTI)

"My mandate is to tell you that Pakistani territory should not not be used for terrorism against India," was the blunt message Prime Minister Manmohan Singh conveyed to President Asif Ali Zardari here today. The message, conveyed in front of television cameras when the two leaders shook hands before their closed-door meeting on the sidelines of a multilateral-forum deliberations, was so sharp that the President was apparently embarrassed.

"Please let them go," Zardari remarked to Singh, wanting the journalists to leave before they could carry on with their conversation in the first top-level contact between the two countries after the Mumbai terror attacks in November. PTI.

And Zardari couldn’t reply back to him "My mandate is to tell you that Indian territory or its consulates in Afghanistan should not be used for terrorism against Pakistan". Shame on this person and shame on us who bring these type of people into power again and again.

 

[haawk]

WHAT ELSE WOULD HE SAY !!!!! THAT'S THE ONLY THING INDIA WANTS FROM PAKISTAN

 

[haawk]

And Zardari couldn’t reply back to him "My mandate is to tell you that Indian territory or its consulates in Afghanistan should not be used for terrorism against Pakistan". Shame on this person and shame on us who bring these type of people into power again and again.

HOW DID YOU GUYS VOTE HIM TO POWER !!!!! I WONDER .....

BESIDES - HE COLUD NOT SAY THAT FOR A REASON !!!!!! MY REPLY MIGHT COULD GO OFF TOPIC SO AM NOT POSTING!!!!

 

[PeacefulIndian]

And Zardari couldn’t reply back to him "My mandate is to tell you that Indian territory or its consulates in Afghanistan should not be used for terrorism against Pakistan". Shame on this person and shame on us who bring these type of people into power again and again.

So doesn't the body language sum up everything? Confidant Indian PM sends a strong message to Pakistan in front of the journalists. But Zardari simply can not backfire, requests journalists to leave. So what does one make out of this? Who's the bad guy here?

 

[jeypore]

And Zardari couldn’t reply back to him "My mandate is to tell you that Indian territory or its consulates in Afghanistan should not be used for terrorism against Pakistan". Shame on this person and shame on us who bring these type of people into power again and again.

Mr. Qsaark, just saying it over and over without any proof makes one feel more and more dumb.

Atleast India is backed up by numerouse countries on allegations it has about Pakistan. And what does Pakistan have regarding Indian Consulates, bread crumb think tanks that thinks India is creating mischief.

On the other note it is good to reiterate how India is serious about these camps and there hanchos that are running it. Until this problems are not solved India should not start any dialogue. It is important for Pakistan to solve these problems because it is important for India's growth.

"India cannot realize its development ambition or its ambition of being a great power if our neighborhood remains disturbed," Mr. Singh told the upper chamber of India's Parliament. "I sincerely believe that it is in our vital interest, therefore, to try again to make peace with Pakistan."

India, Pakistan Leaders Meet - WSJ.com

 

[dabong1]

On the other note it is good to reiterate how India is serious about these camps and there hanchos that are running it. Until this problems are not solved India should not start any dialogue. It is important for Pakistan to solve these problems because it is important for India's growth.

You wanted "cross border terrorism" before any dialogue could start and now you want individual peoples linked to the kashmir freedom fight to be put in jail before any dialogue can start.
You will want pakistan not to mention kashmir ever again and accept that it belongs to india before any dialogue can happen and it goes on and on until pakistan agrees that IOK is a integral part of india.
In a strange way its working out alright with indian excuses on kashmir getting less and less.......the excuse of cross border terrorism has gone and maybe throwing the ball in the indian court by calling for a demilitarized kashmir or other policies that make the indians look even worse on the kashmir issue then they do at the moment.

 

[Spitfighter]

You wanted cross border terrorism before any dialogue could start and now you want individual peoles linked to the kashmir freedom fight to be put in jail before any dialogue can start.
You will want pakistan not to mention kashmir ever again and accept that it belongs to india before any dialogue can happen and it goes on and on until pakistan agrees that IOK is a integral part of india.
In a strange way its working out alright with indian excuses on kashmir getting less and less.......the excuse of cross border terrorism has gone and maybe throwing the ball in the indian court by calling for a demilitarized kashmir or other policies that make the indians look even worse on the kashmir issue then they do at the moment.

Who said cross border terrorism is a thing of the past? does 26/11 ring a bell?

 

[Contrarian]

I think PM's message sums things aptly. India doesnt want any terrorism emanating from Pakistan.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

‘I am happy to meet you but my mandate is to announce that the territory of Pakistan must not be used for terrorism,’

Its actually a much better statement than has come to be the norm out of Delhi.

Gone are the 'state support' accusations, for now (rightly so, given the lack of evidence on that count). Instead Singh focuses on making an argument that Pakistan itself has accepted, that the Mumbai attacks were planned from its soil, and he woudl like Pakistan to ensure that its territory is not used for such attacks.

 

[Contrarian]

Its actually a much better statement than has come to be the norm out of Delhi.

Gone are the 'state support' accusations, for now (rightly so, given the lack of evidence on that count). Instead Singh focuses on making an argument that Pakistan itself has accepted, that the Mumbai attacks were planned from its soil, and he woudl like Pakistan to ensure that its territory is not used for such attacks.

Lack of evidence? While there maynot be concrete evidence that the Mumbai attackers had or availed state support, i think its well documented how Pakistan has consistently patronized the Kashmiri militants. How your intel agency has been in cahoots with these 'militants' for the longest of times.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Lack of evidence? While there maynot be concrete evidence that the Mumbai attackers had or availed state support, i think its well documented how Pakistan has consistently patronized the Kashmiri militants. How your intel agency has been in cahoots with these 'militants' for the longest of times.

There is little to no evidence that there was any state support for the militants in planning or perpetrating the Mumbai attacks.

Continuously harping on that will not make it reality.

And the Kashmiri freedom movement in internationally recognized disputed territory is not terrorism - it can be called terrorism when the US and India accept the fact that they supported terrorism when they supported rebel groups against governments in sovereign nations in Latin America, Asia and East Pakistan.

Let me repeat - no evidence that there was any institutional support in planning or carrying out the Mumbai attacks. If there is then present it, otherwise stop harping about it.

 

[jeypore]

the excuse of cross border terrorism has gone and maybe throwing the ball in the indian court by calling for a demilitarized kashmir or other policies that make the indians look even worse on the kashmir issue then they do at the moment.

On the contrary, it is not making India look bad, but Pakistan. Why would US organially put "stopping cross border and harbouring terrorism" clause with the aid package. Pakistan had to fight for that clause to be remove from the paper only, not the minds of the people.

Currently the issue of Kashmir is off the table until Pakistan finds a way of controlling these so called state actors. If this is done in a successful manner, GoI is willing to talk, which I find nothing wrong in these stance, since the US and UN are aspecting it currently.

 

[wtf]

Lack of evidence? While there maynot be concrete evidence that the Mumbai attackers had or availed state support, i think its well documented how Pakistan has consistently patronized the Kashmiri militants. How your intel agency has been in cahoots with these 'militants' for the longest of times.

While India sees Pakistan as having supported Islamic terrorists, Pakistan makes a bunch of distinctions (in the increasing order of popularity within Pakistan, as far as I can make out).

1) Taliban (Afghan and Pak) - Nowadays most of the opinion seems to be "Kill all Taliban". The earlier Afghan/Pak Taliban divide seems to have vanished. Pakistani Taliban are seen in a slightly more favorable light than the Afghan variant.

2) LeT/JeM - They were Kashmir oriented and were funded earlier, but now they are seen as putting Pakistan in a bind when they expanded their operations. Their involvement in Lal Masjid is also questioned. The term for them is now "non-state actors", signifying, I think the idea that they have no state support. There might still be people's support.

3) Assorted Kashmiri terrorists who were earlier funded, but no longer are. There is some disagreement in Pakistan about whether they are good guys or not. Earlier statements used to say "we provide political support to freedom fighters" but nowadays it is "We hate terrorists, but have issues with India over Kashmir". They may still have camps in Pakistan territories.

4) Gangsters, spies etc. who were Indian but now are in Pakistan (the older Mumbai blast, counterfeiters) - The military establishment atleast in Pakistan seem to view them as not-terrorists or as extensions of the secret service.

5) The extremists in the establishment, in ISI and the Nuke scientists - Absolutely seen as Pakistan's own.


Pakistan is offering to act on first two. India seems to want commitment that the people on items 3&4 will never act against India.