Pervez Musharraf and India Pakistan Rapproachment

Ref Mullah32 #4

[trouble with indians like you is that you are obsessed with the slap in the face you received in 1947.]

The fcuker who got a slap in the face was Jinnah-bhai whose dream of a Great Pakistan was dashed b the partition of Punjab and Bengal.

The next fcuker who got a slap in the face was Bhutto whose ambition to become Prime Minister was thwarted by Mujibur Rahman winning a majority of the seats in Pakistans parliamentary election.

The next fcuker who got a slap in the face was Nawaz Sharif who was told to get out of Kargil or else.

The next in line to get a slap in the face was Jarnail-sahib Pervez Musharraf who was told to get behind the US or be prepared to be bombed back to the Stone Age.

The only thing wrong with that last one was, it has been Stone Age for a long time in the Land of the Pure, what with The Book to End All Books being the Constitution.

[60 years later you are defining your entire existence on chowk as "slamming islam". you people are pathetic.]

You are the pathetic people who are defining your country as "Not India" But all of a sudden, you found out that the Green Passport might get you into Islamic jannat but not into most civilized countries without a body cavity search.

By the way, congratulations on parsing my name correctly after so many months.

In response to the now famous US line "you are either with us or against us" and facing the threat of Pakistan being bombed out, the great "statesman" in uniform started shitting bricks and overnight decided to dump the Talibs and present his backside to the Mricans, the only condition for his total capitulation being that India be left out of any operations to be carried out in Afganistan.

Re: # 80

the 'Treaty of Hudaibiya'.

Indeed, that was the message that the entire nation of Pakistan could easily understand. Mush thought that it was the essence of his position- and part of the Islamic warfare tactics of strategic compromise that takes inspiration from Mohammad.
Infact, most Pakistanis are brought up on this concept of veiwing compromises with India on the basis of 'Treaty of Hudaibiya' since ages. Even Shimla Agreement was one such treaty that Pakistanis think becomes non binding when they are strong.
I feel that unless and until PAkistani state gets out of its Islamic view finder and views India diplomatically as a modern day neighboring nation state it would remain struck up in the rut it is now!!

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#79 so..when being shown the mirror, pandit-hate gets abusive. ha! ha!

Dost Mittar:

I read your article carefully (twice!). You were careful to not directly praise Musharraf for the changed relations between the 'two twins separated violently at birth'. But, you undoubtedly implied that the change is due to Musharraf when you write, 'But what one can say, with some degree of certainty, is that another leader could not have made a complete about-turn in his policies towards India as Musharraf did…Musharraf’s personality, especially his penchant for taking quick decisions and decisive actions under the changed circumstances in which Pakistan found itself following the US “war on terror” undoubtedly played a significant part in changing the direction of Indo-Pak relations.'

Your assessment of Musharraf is half true - the other truth is that India-Pakistan relationship nosedived with Musharraf's ascent. Nawaz Sharif and even Bhutto had cultivated better relationship with India. This omission is a serious one. You did not pin blame on Musharraf for reckless adventurism, without which any analysis of his impact on neighborly relations is incomplete.

You also gloss over the decay of Pakistani civil society and the systematic erosion of Pakistani institutions that Musharraf presided over - this alone has a tremendous negative impact on neighborly ties.

Last, but not the least, you did not analyze Musharraf's mindset for the Pakistani turnaround on the Taliban in his 'India - Lay Off!' speech after 9/11. Specifically, Musharraf alluded to the ultimatum that Richard Armitage gave him - "Pakistan is facing a very critical situation and I believe that after 1971, this is the most critical period. The decision we take today can have far-reaching and wide- ranging consequences. The crisis is formidable and unprecedented. If we take wrong decisions in this crisis, it can lead to worst consequences... The negative consequences can endanger Pakistan's integrity and solidarity."

This speech is also interesting because it clearly illuminates his thinking about India as a 'threat' and 'competitor', not a 'partner'.

If plainspeak about the US ultimatum was not enough, then Musharraf went one step further by referring to the 'Treaty of Hudaibiya'. This reference is critical. The Treaty of Hudaibiya was signed by Prophet Mohammed with the 'non-believers' of Mecca and brought temporary truce with his enemies while he focused his attention on the Jews. By referring to this treaty, Musharraf was highlighting the need for expediency over shared values (which the Prophet did not share with 'non-believers').

So, in sum, Musharraf as a statesman is a pretty short one. Don't be fooled, and worse, do not talk him up by ignoring the expedient shifts in position that he is capable of.

Source of Musharraf's 9/11 speech:
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/pakistanpresident.htm

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

HP #70 What you say is quite reasonable. Please dont be cruel to our islam-obsessed hindu pandit-hates..you know their allergy to reason and facts and they start sneezing uncontrollably like Allah-mian and arjun below.

#75 First IslamIslam, now ALlah mian himself - another indian clown defining his entire presence on chowk with his hindu-chauvinism!!

the monkey show goes on..present a little bit of reality to the monkeys and watch the monkeys hop in horror!! ha! ha!

Actually, when I ask the most important question about the "Jazba-e-Jehad" of the Pakistanis now they are feeling better after elections- one can see the shrug as if it is a foregone conclusion.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Musharraf is the Gorbachev of Pakistan, who is hell bent on dismantling the geographical as well as ideological borders of state of Pakistan - not to mention the culture, values, history, and livelihood of Pakistanis. Therefore, Musharraf is important to all those forces that have been and are enemies of state of pakistan. Enough said.

Dost Sahib:

Musharraff has been a catalyst for change in Pakistan. He did not create conditions for change between India and Pakistan. Almost all visible conditions were external.

Internal changes in India, and Pakistan (HP’s travelogue) are very significant.

Today’s India, and it seems today’s Pakistan also, have little interest in war making.

This to me is a generational change. Aspirations and dreams are different. Shell-shock, hatred, anger etc. are replacing in the generation of grand kids of parition, with adversary yes, enemey may be not.

Middle class is now sizeable and quite vibrant in both countries. It is ready to compete without being a cannon fodder. I read somewhere here that now Shahid Afridi is treated as part of the family by Yuvraj's father. This demonstrates adversary not enemy spirit.

According to my personal experience in India, and my readings of Pakistani viewpoints mainly here at Chowk, middle class in India is busy in acquiring consumer products, education, and wealth.

IT has given many Indians new success models and role models of success through entrepreneurship. I know for fact fashion design (30% of Victoria's Secret production comes out Sri Lanka), automobile and healthcare services are well in line.

Pakistani middle class is in no mood to support their Army. Middle class there now seems to blame Army for impeding progress and now bringing the nation to the brink. Once the blame game is over in Pakistan, you will find younger Pakistanis to be as keen to discover their magic bullets, as today's India.

A few Pakistani success stories tied to India connection need to happen next to put this equation between the two countries to the next orbit. Can anyone stop this from happening? I do not think so.

I cannot believe Shoaib Akhtar, and other Pakistani players with their riches coming from Indian Premier League will want to go back and fight in Kashmir to compete. Indian Kashmiris are not blind they too will see and read about them. Barrier to entry is their own talent and capabilities, much as in IT.

The competition needs to change from competing with India to competing in India, or for better marketing competition in South Asia.

I can see this handwriting being written on the wall as we debate.

Shoaib Akhtars are not just performers, they are star performers. In today's world star performers are not limited within a nation-state. Bill Gates & co proved it a generation ago, and are the role models for these start performers.

Their successes have potential to become talk of the town, and drown, Ganesh mutant and mother burner rants of HP mians of Pakistan. If this older generation does not have to the new tune, HP Mians run the risk of being dumped in a dumpster. Younger south asians of the middle class have no patience for such rants.

These trends are called secular trends. They produce changes which are phenomenal. These changes do not happen all the time, but when they start, they change the landscape so completely and in the process produce new leaders and new stars. Romair may not realize, but he is in a similarly unique position with regards to integrated services (not IT) phenomena that is unstoppable in south asia.

Adversarial spirit is still alive and going strong. Hopefully this spirit will bring a new competition among South Asians. Musharraff is a mere catalyst. The changes that forced his hand may soon be responsible for his demise too.

D-M sahib,

"When was the last time that we had so many confidence building measures taking place?"

And what do "confidence building measures" do? Have they they decreased violence? Why can't a peace process not be reversed? How many people use the trains etc. to cross the border, and how does it reduce the propensity of states to induce violence in each other's countries? Who cares as to now much Punjabi traders make in carting goods over the border? (Perhaps the customs people do because now they get lesser bribes).

D-M sahib, the dictator does not matter. Holding candles does not matter too. The US or Pakistan will not solve the problem of "terrorism" for India. Indians will have to do so by themselves. Furthermore, to do so effectively we do not need to become a global power. We can start by small effective steps: (i) Increasing the budget of the IB; (ii) Cracking down on corruption in the Border Security Force; (iii) Cracking down on the cowboys in the Indian army and rewarding "intelligence" both in the army and police; (iv) discard socialistic land laws and introduce genuine property rights; (v) revitalize democracy in panchayats; (vi) force politicians to demand a law whereby MPs, MLAs etc. can be recalled before their term ends.

These measures will help India much more than the dictator and candles in the border.