India, Pakistan and the Kashmir dispute

``Here is an opportune time for New Delhi to initiate dialogue with Pakistan for solution of the “core issue” of Kashmir instead of raising “cross border terrorism.” Tomorrow will be too late. Tomorrow when Kabul will fall to Taliban – the situation that seems imminent at present - its impact will be felt in Kashmir. Then it will be hard for New Delhi to find anyone in Jammu and Kashmir with whom it could initiate dialogue.``


From greaterkashmir.com. In other words, the Kashmiri separatists will go more pro-jihadi when Musharraf succeeds in putting his stooges in Kabul with the help of jihadi organisations. In other words any `settlement` India reaches will be short-lived because Musharraf is keeping the jihadi infrastructure in Pakistan alive and well. All he is seeking is a temporary reprieve on his east so he can concentrate on winning the conflict on his west.

Re: # 121

I don`t think your countrymen will agree with you... but your sentiments are appreciated... from a civilization point of view - mother india may be ``incomplete`` without all its parts, but given the ground situation - it ain`t a big deal... I mean - the ``truncated`` india, if it can be called that, still has a billion souls... we have everything we need at this point in time... all we have to do is make it work...

Sentiments are all good - but we also have to be practical... ``reunification`` cannot happen simply based on noble sentiments ... there are too many groups who will never pull in that direction...

So ``reunification`` is simply out of question - in any foreseeable future... we can definitely have US-canada or India-nepal kind of setup... I am all for that, given proper re-orientation in paki mindset and ground situation... there are quite a few pakis who have the desire to be part of indian culture, economy, opportunities... it could be a win-win...

Happy holidays...

Mohar, Anil, Harry, and HD

Undoing partition is not going back to the past. It is simply an acknowledgement of past mistakes and an earnest desire to rectify horrible consequences. Of course, it goes without saying that a unified and Pak India has to be secular, modern, democratic, and just society with the same universal rights, rules, and responsibilities for ALL citizens. Education, technology, and free enterprise have to be the foundation upon which we can build a Hindustan that we can all love and share as we lead our people out of misery, violence, backwardness, disease, and illiteracy.

I will not apologize for my hopes and dreams. At this point, Pakistanis need reunification much more than Indians, but the undoing of partition will benefit both countries. India is incomplete without ALL of Bengal, Punjab, Sindh, Kashmir, Baluchistan, and Sarhad. Religion-based politics have given us sectarian violence, dictatorship, suicide bombings, Taliban, UBL, Thackeray, and Modi.

In the second para. in #119, that should be ``on this board`` and not ``on your board`` - I dont want to send you looking for another board when you can read the garbage written by your countrymen on this very board. :-)

#102 ranjit: Last time I checked, Kashmir was already ``shared`` between India and Pakistan. And last time I checked, there was a military stalemate between the two countries. But you may have more up-to-date news based on which you are telling me that India will not share Kashmir with Pakistan anymore. :-)

As for your views on Pakistani posters on chowk, I invite you to read the gibberish and plain filth written by your countrymen on your board then come and talk to me about Pakistani posters.

Anyway, it is good to have some intelligent posters like yourself on chowk who do not have the need to talk big on chowk like too many of your countrymen.

Re:ferozk#117

[..The situation is too fluid to make any long lasting conclusions and it will remain as such till the next elections scheduled for the end of 2007....]

Feroze, if Musharraf gets assassinated tomorrow, what do you think will happen in Pakistan? Will the army continue to rule or not? If it continues, will it follow the same policies?

re: Ranjit

The answer to your questions is very difficult because the situation inside Pakistan does not lend itself to any firm conclusions.

Politically speaking, there is movement towards liberalization, but the opposition is coming from the conservative wing of the PML-Q, which opposes all ideas of a government rapprochment with PPP. The government will not oppose an alliance with PPP, but the condition is that Benazir Bhutto will have to give up the prime minister`s chair. MMA is fragmented over the issue of Women Protection Bill and Musharraf is seeking new alliances minus MMA.

The situation is too fluid to make any long lasting conclusions and it will remain as such till the next elections scheduled for the end of 2007.

Ciao

Re: # 111

Salim bhai:

You should look into future and not the past. Partition is a view of the past just as political independence accomplished by British trained lawyers. Economic independence is the vision of the future. Technologies are the tools, technologist and entrepreneurs are architects who, not British trained lawyers will deliver the future. There is something wrong when an alumni of NED University (I am told here that it is one of the best technical university in Pakistan) claims becoming thekedar of jamadars cleaning sceptic tanks in Austin, after obtaining them thru affirmative action program is part of some $8 billion business.

There is something wrong with this dream. There is something wrong in the dream of undoing the dreadful past, leave it buried.

honestly pakis...it`s easier to rename the country to paistan than actually wrestle Indian Kashmir from India...

In Pakiland, it`s more like ``I can`t believe you called yourself muslim``...


ROFL..

arjun:
you should think about getting all your quotes in one place. It would be fun..

Ref Salim_Chauhan #111

[Blame the incompetence and cruelty of the ruling British for the terrible consequences and move on to catch up to where we could have been had our leaders had the foresight and foreskin to compromise.]

I hate to point this out but the fact is that only one party to Partition lacked foreskins.

`undoing partition`

Unlikely, but what a nice thought.

Speaking more practically, since both countries are sport crazy, I think fielding joint teams for cricket/hockey at world/asia cups will bring tremendous `togatherness`.

What a thrill it would be to watch akhtar steaming in with `Greater India` emblazoned on the chest!

If only he would straighten that arm a bit :)

Re: # 111
[....had our leaders had the foresight and foreskin to compromise. :)..]

ha ha... good one...

I am not for undoing partition... may be US-canada type arrangement - if and only if pakis completely give up jihad, islamism, ``la illah hila hila``.... they commit to secularism, pluarlism, reinstate rights of minority, ahmedi rights with an constitution drawn up accordingly...

Otherwise, it won`t work...

Aparna,
Thank you for a well-written article that presents each country`s position quite succinctly. What I would like to add is that the two main antagonists, India and Pakistan, share a lot more in common with each other than either one does with Kashmir. Within this context, I believe that the solution to Kashmir begs for a resolution of the animosity between India and Pakistan. The incomplete outcome of the Kashmir conflict depends on the undoing of the completed business of partition.

There is nothing wrong with the admission of mistakes, taking responsibility for the faux pas, and then moving carefully to undo the consequences. There was no need for partition in the first place and the events of 1971 negated whatever justification that may have been hanging around due to the twin conveniences of tradition and habit.

Let`s be bold. Declare partition to be the problem. Blame the incompetence and cruelty of the ruling British for the terrible consequences and move on to catch up to where we could have been had our leaders had the foresight and foreskin to compromise. :)

Ref harimau #108

Read [Terrorism in Western Sinkiang? You mean Eastern Turkestan, don`t you? And those Uighurs are non-pork-eating Muslims. right? So, how come they are not freedom fighters but terrorists? What gives? In Chechnya, Bosnis, Dagestan, Ingushetia, Kashmir, etc., you refer to them as terrorsits and now all of a sudden you call these fellow-Muslims terrorists? ]

as

[In Chechnya, Bosnis, Dagestan, Ingushetia, Kashmir, etc., you refer to them as freedom-fighters and now all of a sudden you call these fellow-Muslims terrorists?]

Morning cuppa is just beginning to take effect.

Re shishapa #84

[So here is a question, if Mohammad Ali Jinnah had not died in 1948 but
say lived long after Independence like Nehru did and if
MohammadDas KarimChand Gandhi was not assasinated, would
Kashmir problem ever occurred or would have been resolved and how?]

Mohammad Ali Jinnah was very much alive and kicking when tribal Irregulars invaded Kashmir under the leadership of Pak Army officers who were given ``leaves of absence``.

Read up on ``The Great Divide`` by HV Hodson and you will find that this was one of Jinnah`s strategic plots: get Junagadh to accede to Pakistan and then, no matter how Junagadh is decided, use that precedent in the case of Hyderabad and/or Kashmir.

In the end, Jinnah`s scheme backfired on him. Just like his demand for Partition led to the partition of Bengal and Punjab as well.

According to that dear boy Yasser Latif Hamdani, Jinnah was a giant all those who came after him were pygmies in comparison.

Jinnah was a pea-brained idiot.

That ought to tell you a whole lot about the Pak leadership that came after him.

Ref tahmed32 #59

[I wonder what chowk strategic thinkers think of this development. Connect this dot to the naval facilities the Chinese get at Gawadur and you get the picture: In addition to fighting terrorism (a concern for China too in its western sinkiang province), this also provides China with a short-cut to the middle east.]

Terrorism in Western Sinkiang? You mean Eastern Turkestan, don`t you? And those Uighurs are non-pork-eating Muslims. right? So, how come they are not freedom fighters but terrorists? What gives? In Chechnya, Bosnis, Dagestan, Ingushetia, Kashmir, etc., you refer to them as terrorsits and now all of a sudden you call these fellow-Muslims terrorists?

Take your time getting the Chinese dick out of your mouth before you answer. We are willing to wait.

Most Chowkies think that Pak strategic thinkers rent out their moms by the hour at Heera Mandi. That time (an hour) is about the longest they can focus on.