Pervez Musharraf and India Pakistan Rapproachment

anil sahib #230 I think the PML (leading party in the Panjab) has no problem with greater provincial autonomy in principal. Also note that Zardari who of course has his power due to his position in the PPP, and the latter too has its majority due to support from the Panjab.

I personally would prefer to see devolution of powers not stopping at the provincial level, but going down to the local level. but let us see what they come up with in the NA. Needless to add - the paramount issue at this time in all three major parties is to take control away from the dictator and put it where it belongs - the elected reps of the people.

Re: # 220

Tahmed sahib:

Punjab should vigorously push for such autonomy, irrespective of what happens with the East Punjab. An enterprising West Punjab will be a magnet for other provinces, instead a pariah.

Re: # 211

DMji

I truly appreciate your articles and views.I was surprised to know that u n your family suffered such horrendous treatment at the hand of Muslims and still u harbour no illwill towards them.My effort towrds posting of these articles is that to say todays generation of never to forget the history and realise how Pakistan solved its minority problem .

BTW the writer of abv artcle MR giansarup is in US and can be contacted at gsarup@verizon.net
His site is bhera.com

#227 so what brings you to chowk? i mean if yoh see nothing in common with Pakistanis? (jay thakeray has been claiming the same for years - and in fact he is obsessed to the point of insanity with Pakistan). so be honest at least, even if you cant help being spiteful.

DM ji,

Your disputation with Jayp on the commonalities of Indian and Pakistani values holds good only for the North Indians. Pray tell us, what does a Madrasi, plain maddus in Majumdar's parlance, have in common with Pakistanis? We are vastly different from the North Indians.

This should not be construed as anti North Indian stance. I don't believe in parochialism.

gibbering arjun #224 this is chowk - english spoken here, not monkey-gibberish.

Re: # 213 HP

“…First, the reported Pakistan warning to India was delivered in response to Indian military build up along the international borders in 1984 and not in the 90s…”

I don’t disagree with that, and the above is fully consistent with my assertion that, ‘Pakistani threats of using the bomb in case India escalated a conventional war were delivered privately to Indian leaders and considered credible (to PM IK Gujral, in particular, comes to mind), but not publicly’. Recall, I said that ‘Gujral comes to mind’ – I could have also mentioned Rajiv Gandhi’s government. This does not change my findings.

“…So if there was any possibility of nuke escalation, it was from India and not Pakistan…”

I was referring to conventional escalation by India to be responded to by a Pakistani first-use policy, not a ‘nuke escalation by India’.

“…Why India could not do what it did in 1965 was due to the nature of the insurgency in Kashmir…”

I meant that India could not escalate a conventional war like it did in ’65 by opening a new front outside Kashmir (e.g. Sind/Punjab in ‘65). India had the option, but chose not to for reasons well known.

“…On top of that the Indians had already been given an earful of Pakistani nuke capabilities so the chances of Indian crossing the international borders were minimal and no Indian government was willing to take the chance…”

Precisely my point!

“…Before the BJP Gambit, India did try to test the nukes but was thwarted by the US…”

Yes, this was when Rao was the PM. And the BJP subsequently ran an election based upon reversing this policy and they did so! You prove my point.

“…Indian test were greeted with condemnation right away throughout the world…”

Yawn. What matters is acceptance by the Nuclear Suppliers Group and the IAEA for FULL civilian nuclear cooperation. That offer is on the PMs of India’s desk awaiting his signature. In other words, give India the benefits of NPT and a nuclear-weapon state by making an exception, but DENY the same to Pakistan. Why do you think that the Pakistan government has been clamoring for equal status and being repeatedly denied? Even the Chinese have not warmed up to the idea of offering a similar deal to Pakistan.

“…If the world had accepted the Indian tests, then why the prerequisite of the recently proposed treaty between the US-India calls for a complete nuke test ban from India?...”

Read the draft text of the civil nuclear agreement carefully! The language states that ‘They further agree to take into account whether the circumstances that may lead to termination or cessation resulted from a Party's serious concern about a changed security environment or as a response to similar actions by other States which could impact national security.’ In plain English, this means that should India test in response to a changed security environment, the any unilateral termination of the agreement by the US (or India) should consider the reasons why this testing was necessary – in other words, it won’t be a slam dunk.

“…Proliferation was a non issue at that time…”
Precisely my point! Proliferation had been going on, but the US was not sensitive to it throughout the ‘80s and most of the ‘90s. Remember, Reagan looked the other way and even Bush senior (GHW Bush) looked the other way until the Afghan war was pretty much over and the utility of Pakistani support went down in the early ‘90s. Indian complaints were falling on deaf ears. Not so any more. In fact, proliferation is now a US problem, not an Indian one – this is something that testing achieved.

“…The Pakistanis have made it very clear that they would not hesitate to use the nukes if they faced a perceived disaster in any conventional war…”

Yes, but they are no longer actively supporting the Kashmir insurgency like they were in the ‘90s under a nuclear umbrella with a first-use threat when their possession of nukes could be plausibly denied. Not so any more. The world simply will not have any of that any more. You see, if one party (India) is not interested in the status quo through conventional war, then a first-use threat by the other (Pakistan) decreases in utility.

“…Indian government was forced to offer more concessions to the Kashmiris including putting Musharaf’s picture smack in the middle of Srinagar….the real PM of India Sonia Gandhi, had to come down to Kashmir to start the Bus service”

I have even seen a picture of Musharraf on India’s Parliament House :)! And the buses are running on time! This one really made me chuckle!

prophet tahmed: if morpheus stops by and offers you the red pill that will free you from your paki echo-chamber of self-delusions, take it..

of course, given that you're a paki...you'll likely take the blue pill and continue to enjoy your self-delusionary worldview...

pandit arjun: did you take the blue pill today?

#219 Posted by tahmed32 on February 29, 2008 3:06:56 am


were effectively lifted via the Brownback Amendment that followed of July the same year as the explosions.


prophet tahmed: the brownback amendment gave bubba the authority to waive sanctions for a year...that's soo not the same as lifting sanctions...

of course..don't let the facts get in the way of a good cold morning delusion...

#213 Posted by HP on February 28, 2008 8:33:06 pm


Kashmir story has not ended yet and in fact Indian government was forced to offer more concessions to the Kashmiris including putting Musharaf’s picture smack in the middle of Srinagar.


You couldn't force India to stop building the baglihar dam but you "forced" India to put up musharraf's picture?

wow...kashmir must really be out of reach..pakis are clutching at non-existent straws...

anil #207 That is an interesting point you make about the combined population of east and west panjab being over 100 million. And furthermore, both are among the richest provinces in their respective countries, blessed with a rich agricultural soil and an energetic and enterprising population.

What would be interesting to see is how Zardari's call for greater provincial autonomy in Pakistan combined with his unprecedented (but potentially very powerful) steps towards bringing together every group within Pakistan translates in practice. The one time a few years ago that I had the opportunity to hear BB speak in person at close quarters, she was asked what three things she would do differently if she became prime minister a third time - and she had listed improving relations with India as one of them. She had then gone on to say that in her first two terms she had made the mistake of overcompensating for her being a woman and thus appearing too soft on India. Once things settle down in Pakistan, it therefore seems very likely that Zardari and Nawaz Sharif will see re-starting the peace process with India as a priority item.

dost mittar #212 you write "Vajpayee thought that in the post-explosion atmosphere and also to reduce the pariah status in which the two countries found themselves after their nuclear explsions "

Far from being put in a pariah status, the historical record is clear that the opposite happened: the Pressler Amendment which had imposed economic sanctions on both countries (although in practice hurt Pakistan far more than India) were effectively lifted via the Brownback Amendment that followed of July the same year as the explosions.

you continue "..it was necessary to cool the temperature between the two countries"

Exactly my point, sir. :-) The temperature had been heated by India itself when it conducted the nuclear explosions and Advani and co. then started making public statements.

Anyway - there is a nuclear stalemate now, and has been ever since 1998. And this stalemate then serves as the launch pad for peace and economic prosperity in the entire region. And for that to happen on a broad-based and irreversible manner, it is much better to have a democratic government in Pakistan than a military dictatorship.

Dost,

In any case if you can find commonality, with pakistan, well that is your perception.

Let me give one example related to trade. I have read so many articles in pak news papers, even on chowk that it is the trade surplus that india has got is impeding bilateral trade. I recall that this surplus is nearly 2 billion dollars. The trade surplus that china has got with pakistan is about 8 billion and no one talks about it. Infact pakistan has no trade surplus with any country.

This I cite as a good example of the educated and the professionals following the TNT logic. One should not forget that it is jinnah who said that hindus and pakis are two nations, one worshipos the cows while the other eats them. This legacy of the TNT concept has pervaded even the economists approach to the other nation.

A missile attack from a predator in pakistan and see what the a major general had to say. from dawn of today

Lying through the teeth, a training must in the pak military officers training academy , of course other than surrender ceremony. Cry my dear pakistanis...cry..cry for some truth in the pak society.
////////////////////////

Six foreigners among 8 killed in Waziristan: Locals suspect missile strike from across border



By Our Correspondent


WANA, Feb 28: Eight suspected militants, four of them Arabs and two from Central Asian states, were killed and three others wounded in a missile attack on a house in Kalosha area of South Waziristan after Wednesday midnight.







Pakistan’s chief military spokesman Maj-Gen Athar Abbas told AFP that information from the area indicated the deaths were caused by explosive material stored in the house.

“As per our information it was an explosion caused by explosive material in a house,” he said, adding that the blast reportedly killed 10 to 12 people. Their nationalities were not known, he said.

Priority in Karachi where crime is the law, is getting rid of the beggers in streets so that the ilks of YLH and other pakistanis can claim that there are no beggers in pakistan. From dawn of today

KARACHI: Drive against beggars ordered


KARACHI, Feb 28: The Capital City Police Officer, Niaz Ahmed Siddiqui, has ordered all the police officials to take action against beggars under the Vagrancy Act in their respective areas.