What's new

Featured Time to bury the past and move forward: COAS Bajwa

How can we forgot all our Kashmiris sisters and brothers ?

a general telling he wants peace.... is simply afraid of war !

he is too much tired with the extension he got !

Pakistan should never give extensions to generals !!!!
Yes for the first time, I sense fear. This is completely opposite to Musharraf doctrine which we adopted even during raheel Shariff era. Anyway why all these peace offers by pakistan? Actually India will do something again. They will bomb us again and I don't think that they will miss this time. Target hits means no face saving for us. All in all, we are behaving like palestine. After reading this statement, I can only pray for the safety of pakistan. Looks like India is planning something very very big.
 
.
Let the Indian side celebrate this on Internet & media. What Pakistan said, will not be accepted by India despite efforts for peace. These offers will continue until the day. Remember that it was the same team asking India to come to senses post Pulwama drama. India mistook the same call of peace as a weakness and rest is well documented. So conclusively, here is yet another offer for peace again. India under Modi has the choice or Delhi can change the rule and talk sensibly.
Its not a call for peace but a surrender. Lasting peace in the sub-continent? Really who is he kidding. Its a fallacy to believe that is possible and history is a judge of that.
 
. .
Very good and welcome move from Bajwa. Well, no one in India thinks that Pakistan is weak and surrendering. Slow conflict between India and Pakistan is not helping anyone. No one has capability or guts to change the status quo. Everyone needs some peace and stability.
 
.
Bury the past means bury kashmir. It's clear to me that pakistan has accepted abrogation. So basically after indian abrogation, pakistan is willing to listen to India. Listen to what? To end imaginary terrorist camps in Pakistan or to hand over Azad Kashmir to India?

Bajwa was clear and precise about Kashmir...

Quote:

"The Kashmir issue is obviously at the heart of this. It is important to understand that without the resolution of Kashmir dispute through peaceful means, [the] process of sub-continental rapprochement will always remain susceptible to derailment due to politically motivated bellicosity."
 
. .
Bajwa was clear and precise about Kashmir...

Quote:

"The Kashmir issue is obviously at the heart of this. It is important to understand that without the resolution of Kashmir dispute through peaceful means, [the] process of sub-continental rapprochement will always remain susceptible to derailment due to politically motivated bellicosity."
read the part in bold again. the dude doesnt want to do the job he is paid to do, he should resign or must be removed, he is no different from civil servants who enjoy all the perks and privileges of their position, yet do next to nothing.
This is completely opposite to Musharraf doctrine
nope, this is the final result of mushi doctrine. he was the one who wanted to be friends with vajpayi, and finished off the support for Kashmiri liberation fighters, on USA's pressure of course.
 
Last edited:
.
I would say that train is missed to discuss on Kashmir by Pakistan a long ago. Pakistan doctrine was different before early 2000s. During the time, Pakistan used to think that Militancy sponsoring from 1989 would be better option and it will surely lead to victory as same same against Soviet union in Afghanistan.

India was always wanted to discuss with Pakistan on all pending issues including Kashmir. They used to give open statement as well:

Both Morarji Desai and Atal Bihari Vajpayee, when in power, had told Pakistan that they were willing to hold discussions on Kashmir “whenever you want, wherever you want” according to Agha Shahi, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister.

Indian PM used to give such statement's:
Vajpayee: no possibility of war with Pakistan
He said that India was ready to discuss the 50 year dispute with Pakistan over the control of Kashmir, but emphasised that Pakistani prime minister General Pervez Musharraf needed to create the right atmosphere for this kind of dialogue.



I am old enough to remember all previous years. Actually, Pakistan establishment made the wrong assumptions during the old time, specially during 1980s and 1990s.
---------------------------
Now, after 26/11, everything is changed! Now most of the Indians do not want any talk with Pakistan. If they are ready to bury Kashmir issue and ready to work on other pending issues then might it will be break-through.

Otherwise, stance is very clear at our end. We will not discuss anything about on Kashmir and will never take back 370s A or anything . Now, ball is in Pakistan's court:

1. If Pakistan wants to maintain the same status quote - (Indians are happy)
2. If Pakistan wants a WAR - (No issue -we are ready)
3. If Pakistan wants to burry past and move forward on Kashmir. - (it is a welcome decision, we are more happy and wanted to move forward and resolve the other pending issues)

Now unsure, what Pakistan government is expecting from Indian government? If they think that Indian government is going to remove article 370 from Kashmir then it will be a foolish thought.
 
Last edited:
.
The ground reality seems to percolating into the Paksitani leadership after their initial cacophony on 370's abolition.
370 has nothing to do with this, after August 5th Indian state went total south in their efforts to subjugate Kashmiris as is evident from human rights reports and recent debates in the British parliament.
 
.
Addressing the audience on day two of the first-ever Islamabad Security Dialogue, Gen Bajwa noted that stable Indo-Pak relations were the key to unlocking the potential of South and Central Asia by ensuring connectivity between East and West Asia.
East Asia connected to west Asia well through Central Asia, India and South Asia are connected to West and Central Asia through waters and both in turn are integrated to Southeast Asia. Pakistan connects to middle east through Iran and East Asia through China but doesn't produce anything significant.

And as far as I know, Pakistan has put far more harsh and stricter tariffs and bans on Indian goods except essential things like medicines than India has ever done. Nor Indian sanctions ever affected Pak as Pakistani exports to India were significant. Pak doesn't produce any high-end products capable of budging Indian markets. India can flood Pakistani markets and even can wipe out Chinese and Japanese firms in manufacturing of boilers, power plants, automobiles, basic electronics like headesets and chargers and 4G internet services.
"The Kashmir issue is obviously at the heart of this. It is important to understand that without the resolution of Kashmir dispute through peaceful means, [the] process of sub-continental rapprochement will always remain susceptible to derailment due to politically motivated bellicosity."
Undue importance given to Kashmir quagmire is the mother of all problems. Territorial disputes take decades for resolution, prioritising them in speeches simply states that this statement is just a mouthjob. Probably because India became a net creditor like China, Germany and Japan last month from being an indebted economy like US, France & UK earlier and may invest.
Or probably economic and military gap between India and Pak is larger than ever before or probably because India was included in Afghan peace talks and US forced Pakistan to give such a statement.

Pak made it India vs Pak. When India had grown too big and was expanding to a position where it could ignore Pak, Pakistani establishment started to make its believe that India was some sort Nazi Germany type country and started to call upon "international community" to "play their role".
Article from Mowed Yusuf.


And next day, this statement for burying past comes.
There is no reason not to believe that India's foreign ministry considers Pakistani diplomats as hell of a joke who have to eat their own words in discussion cause Pakistani establishment changes stances swifter than clothes.

Both Indian and international diplomats understand the vanity of such statements very well. Indian government brutally ignores and doesn't even respond to Pakistani statements, no matter if Pakistan speaks in favour of or against India. Kashmir isn't a simple dispute to be solved in an year or two.
It's better that Pakistani fanboys stop jumping about their own illusion of righteousness. They just passed on a vain statement which doesn't mean anything. Optics before Afghan dialogue.
"We feel it is time to bury the past and move forward," he said, adding that the onus for meaningful dialogue rested with India. "Our neighbour will have to create a conducive environment, particularly in occupied Kashmir."
Republic of India doesn't regard Indian Kashmir as a a part of dispute. For government, it's an Indian Union territory now like Andaman islands since 370 abrogation and any status change will come only in 2031 when Indians from other parts would have settled in Kashmir and Kashmiris would have been sent to other parts of India to live in. It will become a normal state like Haryana and Punjab with own CM and legislation then.
Commenting on national security challenges, the army chief said: "The world has seen the ravages of the world wars and the Cold War, wherein polarisation and neglect of virtues blighted the future and brought catastrophic consequences for humanity.
Cold war wasn't really catastrophic. It brought lot of technology to world.
In this environment, developing countries like Pakistan face multi-dimensional challenges which cannot be be navigated single-handedly, he said, adding that a similar situation was being faced by other countries in the region.
Not really others. Rest in South Asia are growing very fast. Except Pak and Afghan, none of South Asian countries are classified as underdeveloped and have high growth rates of human development indicators.
"It is sad to know that even today it [South Asia] is amongst the least integrated regions of the world in terms of trade, infrastructure, water and energy cooperation.
Doesn't mean anything either since all South Asian countries don't share border. So called South Asia is just a broken India where all pieces share border with the remaining giant fossil of that old India called Republic of India. This fossil has 81% of South Asian economy and most of industrial and technological output. Rest of countries are nil and don't have any significance in world of their own.
"On top of it, despite being impoverished, we end up spending a lot of our money on defence, which naturally comes at the expense of human development."
Not really, except Pak, all other countries in region have quite low defence budgets with respect to their economies.
He also noted that "despite rising security challenges, Pakistan has been one of the few [countries] that has resisted the temptation of involving itself in an arms race", citing a decreas.
Pakistan was left behind and never involved in race because didn't have money, technology or research, not because of any goodwill. It was always a self appointed competitor to India who had shifted to focus to becoming like west and China after getting rid of Pak in 1971. Pak was never a major military threat to India after 1971 war.
Is India interested in dialogue with Pakistan, keeping in view that Pakistan has been unable to change the status quo after 1948.
India's aim isn't to maintain status quo but change it in its own favour.
2 - Indian current stance is that there shouldn't be any dialogue on Indian held Kashmir, how would Pakistan expect to start dialogue when there is no discussion on Indian held Kashmir?
Unless Pakistan accepts that trade talks and territorial disputes shouldn't be intervined, there wouldn't be any trade. Per capita income of Pakistani people is just half of Indians and Bangladeshis and per adult wealth is less than 1/4th. And since Pakistanis are likely to boycott Indian products, it isn't something to be bothered with.
Pakistan is a fragile economy with no certainties. India may be somewhat useful for Pakistan but vice versa isn't true.
3 - What if India proposes to convert LOC into a permanent border and terms it the only condition of peace with Pakistan.
South block isn't stupid enough to axe its own foot for no reason.

Having good relations with Pakistan isn't a necessary thing for India. Having Pakistan on Indian side or against India in a world war doesn't make that much of difference. Pak is a pawn, not a player.
How can u Bury the past with constant Indian support to separatists and terrorism?
State sponsored terrorism from Pakistan is the reason for most of conflicts. Everything India did thereafter was a response to it.
 
Last edited:
.
There you go guys, first time in history Pakistan's political and Military leadership officially surrender the Kashmir to Indians, So i hope now Bajwa sahab will be joining morning show at GEO in their Aman ki Asha.
 
.
East Asia connected to west Asia well through Central Asia, India and South Asia are connected to West and Central Asia through waters and both in turn are integrated to Southeast Asia. Pakistan connects to middle east through Iran and East Asia through China but doesn't produce anything significant.

And as far as I know, Pakistan has put far more harsh and stricter tariffs and bans on Indian goods except essential things like medicines than India has ever done. Nor Indian sanctions ever affected Pak as Pakistani exports to India were significant. Pak doesn't produce any high-end products capable of budging Indian markets. India can flood Pakistani markets and even can wipe out Chinese and Japanese firms in manufacturing of boilers, power plants, automobiles, basic electronics like headesets and chargers and 4G internet services.

Undue importance given to Kashmir quagmire is the mother of all problems. Territorial disputes take decades for resolution, prioritising them in speeches simply states that this statement is just a mouthjob. Probably because India became a net creditor like China, Germany and Japan last month from being an indebted economy like US, France & UK earlier and may invest.
Or probably economic and military gap between India and Pak is larger than ever before or probably because India was included in Afghan peace talks and US forced Pakistan to give such a statement.

Pak made it India vs Pak. When India had grown too big and was expanding to a position where it could ignore Pak, Pakistani establishment started to make its believe that India was some sort Nazi Germany type country and started to call upon "international community" to "play their role".
Article from Mowed Yusuf.


And next day, this statement for burying past comes.
There is no reason not to believe that India's foreign ministry considers Pakistani diplomats as hell of a joke who have to eat their own words in discussion cause Pakistani establishment changes stances swifter than clothes.

Both Indian and international diplomats understand the vanity of such statements very well. Indian government brutally ignores and doesn't even respond to Pakistani statements, no matter if Pakistan speaks in favour of or against India. Kashmir isn't a simple dispute to be solved in an year or two.
It's better that Pakistani fanboys stop jumping about their own illusion of righteousness. They just passed on a vain statement which doesn't mean anything. Optics before Afghan dialogue.

Republic of India doesn't regard Indian Kashmir as a a part of dispute. For government, it's an Indian Union territory now like Andaman islands since 370 abrogation and any status change will come only in 2031 when Indians from other parts would have settled in Kashmir and Kashmiris would have been sent to other parts of India to live in. It will become a normal state like Haryana and Punjab with own CM and legislation then.

Cold war wasn't really catastrophic. It brought lot of technology to world.

Not really others. Rest in South Asia are growing very fast. Except Pak and Afghan, none of South Asian countries are classified as underdeveloped and have high growth rates of human development indicators.

Doesn't mean anything either since all South Asian countries don't share border. So called South Asia is just a broken India where all pieces share border with the remaining giant fossil of that old India called Republic of India. This fossil has 81% of South Asian economy and most of industrial and technological output. Rest of countries are nil and don't have any significance in world of their own.

Not really, except Pak, all other countries in region have quite low defence budgets with respect to their economies.

Pakistan was left behind and never involved in race because didn't have money, technology or research, not because of any goodwill. It was always a self appointed competitor to India who had shifted to focus to becoming like west and China after getting rid of Pak in 1971. Pak was never a major military threat to India after 1971 war.

India's aim isn't to maintain status quo but change it in its own favour.

Unless Pakistan accepts that trade talks and territorial disputes shouldn't be intervined, there wouldn't be any trade. Per capita income of Pakistani people is just half of Indians and Bangladeshis and per adult wealth is less than 1/4th. And since Pakistanis are likely to boycott Indian products, it isn't something to be bothered with.
Pakistan is a fragile economy with no certainties. India may be somewhat useful for Pakistan but vice versa isn't true.

South block isn't stupid enough to axe its own foot for no reason.

Having good relations with Pakistan isn't a necessary thing for India. Having Pakistan on Indian side or against India in a world war doesn't make that much of difference. Pak is a pawn, not a player.

State sponsored terrorism from Pakistan is the reason for most of conflicts. Everything India did thereafter was a response to it.
Congratulations. You have earned the most deluded Indian title on this thread. Your response is so laughable that we don't even want to debate anything.
 
. .
East Asia connected to west Asia well through Central Asia, India and South Asia are connected to West and Central Asia through waters and both in turn are integrated to Southeast Asia. Pakistan connects to middle east through Iran and East Asia through China but doesn't produce anything significant.

And as far as I know, Pakistan has put far more harsh and stricter tariffs and bans on Indian goods except essential things like medicines than India has ever done. Nor Indian sanctions ever affected Pak as Pakistani exports to India were significant. Pak doesn't produce any high-end products capable of budging Indian markets. India can flood Pakistani markets and even can wipe out Chinese and Japanese firms in manufacturing of boilers, power plants, automobiles, basic electronics like headesets and chargers and 4G internet services.

Undue importance given to Kashmir quagmire is the mother of all problems. Territorial disputes take decades for resolution, prioritising them in speeches simply states that this statement is just a mouthjob. Probably because India became a net creditor like China, Germany and Japan last month from being an indebted economy like US, France & UK earlier and may invest.
Or probably economic and military gap between India and Pak is larger than ever before or probably because India was included in Afghan peace talks and US forced Pakistan to give such a statement.

Pak made it India vs Pak. When India had grown too big and was expanding to a position where it could ignore Pak, Pakistani establishment started to make its believe that India was some sort Nazi Germany type country and started to call upon "international community" to "play their role".
Article from Mowed Yusuf.


And next day, this statement for burying past comes.
There is no reason not to believe that India's foreign ministry considers Pakistani diplomats as hell of a joke who have to eat their own words in discussion cause Pakistani establishment changes stances swifter than clothes.

Both Indian and international diplomats understand the vanity of such statements very well. Indian government brutally ignores and doesn't even respond to Pakistani statements, no matter if Pakistan speaks in favour of or against India. Kashmir isn't a simple dispute to be solved in an year or two.
It's better that Pakistani fanboys stop jumping about their own illusion of righteousness. They just passed on a vain statement which doesn't mean anything. Optics before Afghan dialogue.

Republic of India doesn't regard Indian Kashmir as a a part of dispute. For government, it's an Indian Union territory now like Andaman islands since 370 abrogation and any status change will come only in 2031 when Indians from other parts would have settled in Kashmir and Kashmiris would have been sent to other parts of India to live in. It will become a normal state like Haryana and Punjab with own CM and legislation then.

Cold war wasn't really catastrophic. It brought lot of technology to world.

Not really others. Rest in South Asia are growing very fast. Except Pak and Afghan, none of South Asian countries are classified as underdeveloped and have high growth rates of human development indicators.

Doesn't mean anything either since all South Asian countries don't share border. So called South Asia is just a broken India where all pieces share border with the remaining giant fossil of that old India called Republic of India. This fossil has 81% of South Asian economy and most of industrial and technological output. Rest of countries are nil and don't have any significance in world of their own.

Not really, except Pak, all other countries in region have quite low defence budgets with respect to their economies.

Pakistan was left behind and never involved in race because didn't have money, technology or research, not because of any goodwill. It was always a self appointed competitor to India who had shifted to focus to becoming like west and China after getting rid of Pak in 1971. Pak was never a major military threat to India after 1971 war.

India's aim isn't to maintain status quo but change it in its own favour.

Unless Pakistan accepts that trade talks and territorial disputes shouldn't be intervined, there wouldn't be any trade. Per capita income of Pakistani people is just half of Indians and Bangladeshis and per adult wealth is less than 1/4th. And since Pakistanis are likely to boycott Indian products, it isn't something to be bothered with.
Pakistan is a fragile economy with no certainties. India may be somewhat useful for Pakistan but vice versa isn't true.

South block isn't stupid enough to axe its own foot for no reason.

Having good relations with Pakistan isn't a necessary thing for India. Having Pakistan on Indian side or against India in a world war doesn't make that much of difference. Pak is a pawn, not a player.

State sponsored terrorism from Pakistan is the reason for most of conflicts. Everything India did thereafter was a response to it.
Why are you trying so hard to prove it right the other thread running, "indians have the smallest brains in the world"...Hyderabad university survey.

And it also points to the fact that small brains have big egos.

Or people who have thin skin and big chip, as indians are described by one esteemed Dawn writer.
 
. .

Latest posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom