Pakistan Wants Kashmir Central to Talks With India

[ameer219]

Pakistan Wants Kashmir Central to Talks With India

By Khalid Qayum

Feb. 11 (Bloomberg) -- Pakistan wants a meeting of foreign secretaries proposed by India to plot a way back to wide-ranging talks halted by the 2008 Mumbai terrorist attack, with the future of divided Kashmir center stage.

“There are reports that India wants to start talks but it doesn’t want to talk on Kashmir,” Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani told reporters in the capital, Islamabad. “The composite dialogue is the only way forward,” he said, referring to five years of peace moves derailed by the November 2008 assault that killed 166 people.

Pakistan hasn’t decided yet on when to send its foreign secretary to India for talks, Foreign Ministry spokesman Abdul Basit told reporters today, according to GEO television.

Troubled relations between India and Pakistan are a concern for the Obama administration as it seeks to defeat a Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan aided by militants in Pakistan’s northwest. Regional security will be on the agenda during a visit to Pakistan by U.S. national security adviser James Jones, Agence France-Presse reported.

India “took a conscious decision to start talks with Pakistan even though we are not fully satisfied with the steps Islamabad has taken to control terrorism,” Indian Defense Minister A.K. Antony told reporters in New Delhi.

India blamed the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba militant group for the raid by 10 gunmen on its financial capital. The government in New Delhi demanded the perpetrators be brought to justice. Pakistan said the attack had been planned on its soil and says it has begun a trial of some Lashkar members.

‘Terror Groups Intact’

While Pakistan “has taken some steps,” India remains dissatisfied “because terrorist organizations are intact and there is no attempt on the part of the government Pakistan to dismantle them,” Antony said.

India has proposed Feb. 18 or Feb. 25 for talks between top foreign ministry officials, the Times of India has reported, citing officials it didn’t name. India wants the discussions to focus on security guarantees, the paper said.

Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi said Feb. 25 “is not a bad date” for talks, according to a report in the News newspaper. Gilani said the foreign secretaries will work out an

“It is wise for both India and Pakistan not to attach any pre-conditions to the resumption of talks,” said Rashid Ahmad Khan, a senior analyst at Islamabad Policy Research Institute. Accepting India’s offer is likely to lead to a resumption of the composite dialogue, he said.

Three Wars

Pakistan wants talks to include economic and commercial cooperation as well as security and Kashmir, the Himalayan region the nuclear-armed neighbors have twice gone to war over.

Leaders of the two countries have met on the sidelines of regional summits in recent months, signaling a desire to return to more comprehensive talks.

India rejects Pakistan’s allegations that it is backing an insurgency in its southwest Baluchistan province. The two countries have fought three wars since independence from Britain in 1947.

To contact the reporter on this story: Khalid Qayum in Islamabad at kqayum@bloomberg.net

agPakistan Wants Kashmir Central to Talks With India (Update3) - Bloomberg.comenda for future meetings.

 

[PAFAce]

It shouldn't be just Pakistan. India, too, should consider Kashmir the primary issue. Is it not the only thing holding the two countries away from peaceful coexistence? You can't keep turning a blind eye towards this beast of an issue.

why not talk on full kashmir *** and freedom of baluchistan

Because then we'll talk about freedom for Assam and you'll throw a hissy fit as you always do. Don't talk about things you know nothing about, stick with the "disputed" issue.

 

[karan.1970]

It shouldn't be just Pakistan. India, too, should consider Kashmir the primary issue. Is it not the only thing holding the two countries away from peaceful coexistence? You can't keep turning a blind eye towards this beast of an issue.

Because then we'll talk about freedom for Assam and you'll throw a hissy fit as you always do. Don't talk about things you know nothing about, stick with the "disputed" issue.

Both India and Pakistan will have different issues as primary focus. But you are right that the hope for any success is possible only if both sides give enough importance to other's primary issues..

Fingers crossed but I will be surprised if these last for long...

 

[Storm Force]

India will never tal;k seriously on Kashmir.

They just make unreasonable demands and bully all in the region.

PAKISTANIS are banging their heads on a wall

 

[Gazzi]

India will never tal;k seriously on Kashmir.

They just make unreasonable demands and bully all in the region.

PAKISTANIS are banging their heads on a wall

I agree with you there.......unless the very reason why "terrorism" or freedom struggle exists isn't discussed then what the hell is the point of these talks, like what the Pakistani FM had said, India is only interested in a photoshoot....window shopping if you ask me......Pakistan should use its PR better

 

[Peshwa]

It shouldn't be just Pakistan. India, too, should consider Kashmir the primary issue. Is it not the only thing holding the two countries away from peaceful coexistence? You can't keep turning a blind eye towards this beast of an issue. (/QUOTE)


What makes you think Pakistan is looking for peace?....Dont you think that the Pak Army...the largest stakeholder in this issue has vested interests to keep this issue boiling? If not Kashmir, then water dispute, Sir Creek and a host of other "non-issues" will take the forefront....Peace is but a distant memory until the fabric of Pakistani politics is controlled by the army......
Lets be honest for once instead of making it seem like India is the only villain in this movie......

Obviously I cannot deny that India has "zero" intentions of solving Kashmir.....
a) Being in a place of "relative" strength, India has only to lose through any compensation....land or otherwise
b) By keeping the issue alive, it justifies a massive arms buildup....thus securing other agendas such as Power status, nukes, UN Security council ambitions etc.....

My point is, unless and until a "status quo" deal with no border shifting is agreed upon, India has no incentive to "make peace".....
This is my opinion/analysis of events from my POV.....feel free to disagree....

This coming to the table is nothing more than an eyewash......The borders are not changing at least in my lifetime I feel....

 

[dabong1]

Obviously I cannot deny that India has "zero" intentions of solving Kashmir.....
a) Being in a place of "relative" strength, India has only to lose through any compensation....land or otherwise
b) By keeping the issue alive, it justifies a massive arms buildup....thus securing other agendas such as Power status, nukes, UN Security council ambitions etc.....

My point is, unless and until a "status quo" deal with no border shifting is agreed upon, India has no incentive to "make peace".....
This is my opinion obviously.....feel free to disagree....

This coming to the table is nothing more than an eyewash......The borders are not changing at least in my lifetime I feel....

I agree with the above and thats the reason why many people in pakistan champion restarting the training camps in AKJ and fully back the military side of the freedom struggle......why should we make life easy for you guys in IOK?

 

[Peshwa]

I agree with the above and thats the reason why many people in pakistan champion restarting the training camps in AKJ and fully back the military side of the freedom struggle......why should we make life easy for you guys in IOK?

Obviously it seems 60 years of barking up a wall has taught you nothing.......

I dont think a man lying on a bed of thorns is scared of a needle....
Maybe something creative other than terrorism should be conjured up.....besides....by reopening militant camps....expect nothing more than deaf ears from an India that becomes increasingly more powerful and arrogant.....

Also....please dont conviniently ignore the first part of my post....unless its a closet acceptance of my views....

 

[dabong1]

Obviously it seems 60 years of barking up a wall has taught you nothing.......

I can the same about you.

I dont think a man lying on a bed of thorns is scared of a needle....

Who said you where scared?....the cost ratio of sending a few hundred freedom fighters to pin down hundreds of thousands of indiana is good enough reason.

Maybe something creative other than terrorism should be conjured up

Tried the ballot box and talks but they seem to have failed due to the indians.

.....besides....by reopening militant camps....expect nothing more than deaf ears from an India that becomes increasingly more powerful and arrogant.....

You have always been deaf when to comes to kashmir.........a burst of an AK47 might bring your hearing back.

 

[Peshwa]

I can the same about you..

Unfortunately...in the last 60 years....we managed to get more land than we originally had...what have you achieved?

Who said you where scared?....the cost ratio of sending a few hundred freedom fighters to pin down hundreds of thousands of indiana is good enough reason..

And as I mentioned, arming ourselves to the teeth to counter "terrorism" and in the process becoming a potent military force in the world is good enough for us....

"Chuhay ko marnay ke liye Bofors gun nahin lagti"

The cost analysis should be done on the Pak side where world opinion of being a "terror hub" keeps increasing daily....accusations of proliferation...a bad reputation followed by being blackballed world over including allies except by China....a slumping economy.....along with the pressure of being in an arms race.....to top it all, the dogs you trained and fed have now turned on you.....
Seriously the "final balance" does not tally up....
The best attack is one where you dont even have to lift a finger.....
I think we just need to keep chilling and dragging our feet until Pakistans burdens become too much for them to carry on Kashmir......Like I said....we have no incentive to resolve this issue!!!

Which is why it is NOT in Pakistan's interest to support terrorism...whether you define it as a "freedom struggle" or "strategic alliance"

Tried the ballot box and talks but they seem to have failed due to the indians..

Are you referring to the rigged elections or harping on UN resolutions again?

You have always been deaf when to comes to kashmir.........a burst of an AK47 might bring your hearing back.

That AK-47 alarm has been ringing for 20 years now.....trust me we hit the snooze button a long time ago....Maybe its time we pullled the plug.....

 

[Peshwa]

I agree with the above and thats the reason why many people in pakistan champion restarting the training camps in AKJ and fully back the military side of the freedom struggle......why should we make life easy for you guys in IOK?

Why have you ignored my question about the Pakistani army?....

Keeping Kashmir burning legitimizes Islamabad's need to keep a standing army...and procure nukes etc..
Much like the Indian army....the PA is funded by the money that allocated to the "security" of the nation and one of the richest publicly funded organizations because they can demonize India and create an artificial "threat"....
So as much as its India's fault on dragging its feet to resolve this issue, it is as much the PA fault for wanting to keep this issue on the forefront.....
Case and point...."Kargil"....when such progress was being made with our "Hindu Nationalist" PM visiting Lahore...CBMs such as bus service, increased people to people contact.....What was the need for the army to indulge in this covert ops?....and as expected....the army did take control of the nation right after......

Surprised no one sees this......

 

[t-birds]

Indian offer of limited talks dismays Pakistan

India's offer of a limited dialogue with Pakistan on terrorism has dismayed Islamabad, where officials and analysts believe only full-blown peace talks can foster regional stability.
By Nasir Jaffry, in Islamabad for AFP
Published: 11:33AM GMT 11 Feb 2010

Pakistan's former foreign secretary, Riaz Khokhar, right, and Indian former foreign secretary Shashank shake hands before a meeting in New Delhi in 2004 Photo: EPA

New Delhi's call for talks between the top foreign ministry civil servants in the two countries was welcomed last week as indicative of a major breakthrough in relations that have been frozen since the 2008 attacks in Mumbai.

But India and Pakistan have yet to announce a date for their first direct talks in 15 months, and are still haggling over the framework of the dialogue.

The tension between the nuclear rivals, which have fought three wars since British partition of the sub-continent in 1947, has increased instability on their border and in Afghanistan.

India's overture was interpreted as a result of pressure from the United States, keen to keep South Asia trouble free while throwing tens of thousands more troops into battle against the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Defeating al-Qaeda and beating back the Taliban is a priority for the US, but is considered impossible without engagement from Pakistan, which is accused in the West of still supporting the Taliban and other al-Qaeda-linked militants.

Regional security is likely to be a focus of talks between US national security adviser James Jones and Pakistani officials this week in Islamabad.

Shah Mehmood Qureshi, the foreign minister, chaired a meeting of Pakistani officials that emphasised Pakistan's commitment "to enter into a meaningful and result-oriented composite dialogue process with India in the interest of peace, development and stability in South Asia," his ministry said.

But a Pakistani government official said that there was disappointment with India's more limited scope for the talks.

"India says terrorism is their main concern and that the talks should focus on this issue," he said on the condition of anonymity.

India and Pakistan started peace talks, or composite dialogue, on eight main topics, in 2004 that significantly helped to ease tension - notably over the disputed Himalayan region of Kashmir, the focus of two wars.

India broke off the dialogue after blaming the Mumbai carnage on Lashkar-e-Taiba and "official" agencies, agreeing on a return to talks only if Pakistan were to bring the perpetrators to justice and dismantle militant groups.

An Indian government source said that while Pakistan had taken the "few small steps" needed for talks to resume, it had not gone far enough to merit a return to a full dialogue.

"We have said the talks would include all relevant issues from our side and issues that will contribute to creating an atmosphere of peace and stability between the two countries," said the Indian government source.

"Maybe these talks would lead to the resumption of the composite dialogue. Let us not prejudge the issue," the source added.

Analysts believe that talks between foreign secretaries will eventually get off the ground as neither side wants the blame for sabotaging the process and hampering international efforts in Afghanistan.

India is a massive investor in Afghanistan, fanning Pakistani fears over what the military traditionally regards its own playground to offset India's emerging superpower status by forging ties with the Taliban and other groups.

The US defense secretary, Robert Gates's, recent visit to India, where he gave warning that an al-Qaeda "syndicate" could trigger a fourth Indo-Pakistan war, was a major factor in the New Delhi talks offer, Pakistani analysts believe.

"India was clearly told that if this relationship is not established, [the] Taliban would become a major player in Afghanistan and keep receiving support from Pakistan," said Talat Masood, a Pakistani security analyst.

Pakistani officials have sought to deflect some US pressure to do more in the fight against al-Qaeda and Taliban, by claiming that the perceived threat from India limits its military capacity to fight militants.

But Pakistani political analyst Hasan Askari cautioned that dialogue only about terrorism would be "a non-starter".

"There will be no result if India talks about terrorism and Pakistan talks about its concerns in Afghanistan. There has to be composite dialogue and terrorism is one of the eight issues," said Askari.

Indian offer of limited talks dismays Pakistan - Telegraph

 

[Storm Force]

i GENUINELY believe India is VERY HAPPY to keep tensions high...

It has made Indian military strong and TOTALLY uneffected India rising economic clout.

Terror groups coming out of Pakistan in support of Kashmir has made Pakistan hughly unpopular in the west and INDIA despite being the regional bully plays the victim card quite well

 

[Hellfire]

i GENUINELY believe India is VERY HAPPY to keep tensions high...

It has made Indian military strong and TOTALLY uneffected India rising economic clout.

Terror groups coming out of Pakistan in support of Kashmir has made Pakistan hughly unpopular in the west and INDIA despite being the regional bully plays the victim card quite well

Totally agree there with you

By this offer of talks, we have allowed the Pakistani Politicos to make a fool of themselves publicly.

Bear with me. But picture this. US wants talks on and has been angling for the same, India finds it convinient to accomodate US and does so, knowing full well that Kashmir will be core issue and India will stress on all inclusive of Kashmir to stress on the fact its sincere(how much we know)

We have played a smart game here. Pakistani FM goes public about Pakistan not bowing down and Indian bending down etc etc which came out sounding bad and was taken in bad taste in west and signalled lack of sincerity on behalf of GoP (by indulging in such rhetoric the credibility of any Pakistani approach is under cloud in western nations) and by demanding kashmir only .... inflexibility was shown

This may actually work very well in favor of India as western nations may be inclined to side with India more with such an apparent "insincere" approach being exhibited

Also since India facilitated US, US may be more inclined to India in terms of military sales etc and more favorable in terms of high tech transfers ....

And you rightly pointed out, we suffer the least, talks can be dragged on, blame put on Pakistan .... and economically and militarily we continue to grow stronger

 

[Contrarian]

There's no point in discussing Kashmir. Siachen can be solved provided Pakistan agrees to the Actual Ground Positions of the current troops-which it wont do, as it would indirectly be accepting Indian claims to Siachen.

Sir Creek is the only issue that can be resolved. Lets see what happens there.
India stands to gain from a status quo in Kashmir.