Advertise! You fools!

pease sir dont say anything about indian people if you dont have proper information. dont believe what your millitary rulers make you believe and have some brain to write articles like this.and if you have never heard of what democracy is dont blaim democracy for that

DUSHANBE, September 27 (Itar-Tass) - President Burhanuddin Rabbani`s lawful government of Afghanistan has ``undeniable proofs`` that Pakistani armed forces are fighting on the side of the Talibs and it is ready to submit this evidence to the world community, Military Attache of the Afghan Embassy in Dushanbe Muhhamad Soleh Registani told Itar-Tass on Wednesday. He said that ``there are undeniable facts, proving that several hundred Pakistani servicemen from the 1,500-man contingent now deployed on the Pakistani-Afghan border, had attempted the other day, jointly with the Talibs, to invade Afghani Badahshan, which is controlled by troops of the Northern Alliance, but were driven back to the Pakistani border town of Chitral``.

The 197th regiment, commanded by captain Mumin, which is a unit of the 9th division of the Pakistani armed forces, as well as special regiment 998, had fought against units of the Northern Alliance in Takhar province, trying to advance towards Talukan, Registani stressed. As many as sixty Pakistani officers and more than one hundred privates were killed in the course of the fighting. Found on them were documents proving that they were servicemen of the Pakistani armed forces. The military diplomat of the Afghan embassy in Dushanbe noted that hundreds of mercenaries from several foreign countries, including Saudi Arabia, Bangladesh and the Philippines, were now fighting on the side of the Talibs. There are also some Chechen fighters, which proves undeniably that foreign states are directly interfering in the intra-Afghan conflict.

A top Afghan envoy today called on the international community to apply sanctions on Pakistan, accusing Islamabad of providing military aid to the ruling Taliban militia. Abdul Rahim, an envoy of ousted Afghan President Burhanuddin Rabbani said that Pakistani warplanes had been bombing northern territory in Afghanistan. ``The (UN) Security Council has reinforced sanctions against the Taliban but this will not be effective. You need sanctions against Pakistan,`` he told a news conference in Moscow. Pakistan strongly denies providing military backing to the Islamic militia.

NO PLAGIARISM,

FROM NATION OF TODAY,

Anti-two nation theory drive

It is gratifying to note the editorial comments under the title ``Balderdash``! You have very rightly pointed out that some political elements in our country in tune with our enemies are maliciously engaged in crying down the Two Nation Theory by taking advantage of the existing economic imbalance between the different provinces.

In this connection one is constrained to point out that a foreign country has become the den for anti-Two Nation Theory propaganda. Pakistan is not only a sovereign country, but it is also a member of the Commonwealth. The normal international practice is that no one is allowed to indulge in vituperations against a sister country sitting within the protection of another country. But this particular country, i.e. the United Kingdom, did all its could to be inimical to the interest of Pakistan at the time of partition of the Subcontinent in 1947. Even later, during the 1971 crisis ship-loads of armaments were dispatched from the shores of UK to the insurgents in the then East Pakistan. When I made a verbal complaint to the then Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs of UK, Sir Douglas Home, he ordered an inquiry with, of course, no tangible results.

/// It is time for 3NT, to provide some sense of direction for pakistan, before it is torn apart by the competing neighbours.

There is a verse for Jay Thackeray written by the poet of loathed Urdu.

``Dhanpa Kafan Ne Dagh-e Euyoob-e Barhangi``

Mein Varna Harr Libas Mein Nang-e Wajood Thaa``

http://famulus.msnbc.com/FamulusIntl/ap09-25-100214.asp?reg=ASIA

ASIA`S ISLAM: Mysticism, militancy, melting pot



ASSOCIATED PRESS



LAHORE, Pakistan, Sept. 25 — Amid echoes of the wailing summons to prayer, a mother shoves her young son, his tattered clothes black with grime, into a compound guarded by men with Kalashnikov rifles.

She pleads with the principal of the religious school: ``Take him. Make him study. Keep him safe.``





Bibi Jan has five older children at home. She tells the principal she cannot feed the children she has. She begs him to take the youngest boy. He accepts.

It is in the tens of thousands of religious schools like Jamiat-al-Manzoor-Al-Islam where the fierce militancy that has come to characterize Islam in Pakistan and neighboring Afghanistan is perpetuated.

And that militant Islam has created ``a real image problem`` for Pakistan, says Information Minister Javed Jabbar.

It overshadows the reality that the overwhelming majority of Pakistan`s 140 million people — at least 95 percent of them Muslim — live in harmony with their brethren and desire similar accord with the rest of the

world.

Carved off India`s two flanks 53 years ago as a homeland for Muslims of the subcontinent (East Pakistan eventually broke away and became Bangladesh), Pakistan has Islam at the heart of its identity.

Decades later, however, it still struggles to determine what path that heart will take: striding toward a progressive Islamic state or embracing the dictates of conservatives who seek a harsher Islam, akin to Taliban rule in Afghanistan.

Most analysts and intellectuals think radical Islamic clerics have the upper hand, strengthened by a succession of corrupt governments that have catered to

the rich and ignored the poor.

And the poor are everywhere. Pakistan`s average annual income is $400. The work force includes 3 million children younger than 15. Clean water and adequate health

care are luxuries. Most Pakistanis cannot read or write; the official literacy rate is 30 percent and for women is probably no more than 5 percent.

Pakistan has more poor today than 10 years ago, according to a government economic survey released in June, and the deprivation has allowed fundamentalism to flourish.

In a country whose 110,000 government-run schools stagger to accommodate 80 million school-age children, where the rich and middle class can opt for private schools, the poor are turning to religious schools.

Here they learn about ``jihad`` — holy war. Here they are taught that to die fighting for Islam is to go straight to heaven as a martyr.

At the Jamia Faiz-ul-Aloom school in Lahore, a 10-year-old boy is asked what he wants to do when he grows up.

``I want to kill kafirs (unbelievers). I want to fight in jihad in Kashmir and Afghanistan.``

What about becoming a doctor or lawyer, he is asked. ``I think I would like to be a doctor, but first I want to fight in the jihad.``

As wide as is the gap between rich and poor is the chasm between progressive and conservative.

In Karachi, a cosmopolitan port on the Arabian Sea coast, loud music booms from clubs and restaurants with names like Cafe New York, Nacho Nanas and TGIF. Teen-agers in Western clothing hang out in shopping plazas, sipping soft drinks.

At one Karachi plaza, a girl is accosted by a veiled woman who demands to know why she is wearing jeans and a T-shirt.

``I was very angry,`` says the girl, identifying herself only as Maria. ``I knew what she wanted to hear, so I said, `I want to look sexy,` and I walked away. Who is she to ask me this?``

But in Pakistan`s conservative, intensely tribal northwest, women don`t challenge the command to cover themselves head to toe, men and women socialize publicly only in family groupings and Islamic clerics set the rules.

Recently, clerics ordered Muslim men to forcibly wed any woman found working with international aid organizations and keep her ``within your four walls for

the rest of her life.``

The order for foreign women who work for the relief groups was even harsher: Kill them, the clerics said.

Enter Pakistan`s year-old military government.

The regime`s leader, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, says he is committed to a modern, tolerant and progressive Islamic Pakistan.

``I have been saying there is a misperception of our religion, a misperception that our religion stands for some kinds of extremism, militarism, fundamentalism,`` Musharraf says. Seen as a moderate Muslim when he seized power from Pakistan`s corrupt civilian government last October,

Musharraf has since been criticized even by some allies for giving in to the religious right. The critics say he was trying to head off right-wing protests that would discourage the investment Pakistan sorely needs for economic recovery.

After pressure from the Islamic right, Musharraf reneged on a promise to tighten Pakistan`s blasphemy statutes, which now permit unchallenged jailing of the accused on unsubstantiated complaints.

He also restored to the constitution Islamic laws governing the testimony of women in court. In financial cases, for example, the testimony of two women is required to counter that of one man. And in rape cases, a

woman`s accusation is discounted unless four devout Muslim men say they witnessed the assault.

Pakistan also supports Islamic guerrillas in the Indian portion of Kashmir, a Himalyan region where Muslim separtists have fought Indian soldiers for 11 years seeking independence or merger with Pakistan.

Analysts in Pakistan say that as long as the Kashmir dispute lingers, the Pakistanti government will be unable to rein in the Islamic extremists operating at home.

Out in the country, local bureaucrats take their lead from the government in Islamabad, siding with Islamic clerics who oppose any challenges to their influence.

In the rugged hills of Dir, part of the

conservative northwest, women draped in oversized shawls have for two years moved quietly through the villages, encouraging women to send their girls to school.

Thirty-seven new schools for girls, some just humble wooden shacks, have enrolled 1,500 students.

``People so want to send their girls to school. Everything is done by the villagers. They supply the electricity, the building,`` says Ghazala Bibi, a rare local woman who left her village to get a college degree as a teacher. ``It is the mullahs who don`t want it. They are afraid.``

Instead of receiving protection from the local

government, she and her colleagues are warned to stay home and mothers are told to keep their daughters away.

Pakistan`s police also take their cue from the military leaders, enforcing the codes of behavior prescribed by hardline clerics rather than curbing their excesses.



Addressing a graduating class at a girls college, Islamabad`s police chief issued this warning: ``Don`t smile or laugh while in the market because it might give the wrong impression to young boys, and it would then be your fault if they misbehave.``

Karachi police recently stopped a teen-age couple. Their crime: being unmarried.

``The police asked us our relationship and when we said we were just friends, they said, `This is an Islamic country and it is a crime for boys and girls who are not married to mix together,``` Kamil Bhatti recalls.



``We were really afraid,`` he adds. ``When I graduate, I will leave Pakistan because I am afraid of what my country is becoming.``

jay #254:

A PATHETIC SIGHT

Yes indeed!

Don`t forget to take your medicine orally, jay thackeray;)

--t

A PATHETIC SIGHT,

In almost every paper is the sight of some pakistani, complaining that he has not bee given the visa to go to us, canada, any where. Why cant these people accept that it is up to the americans to decide whome they want in. Thses pakistanis appear to be upset, they appear to be demanding justice, my foot a country sending killers accross the borders in the name of religion, what is there to complain about, go as jihadists, take the pathe of the moulana Asghar, get around by hijacking. From nation of today,

Visa rejection

Almost every Pakistani wants to go to the developed countries with the dream of a better future. Some of them do not want to come back, but some do not entertaining the idea of staying on permanently after getting the visit visa. I am certain that my case falls in the second category.

My son Wajid Ali Malik is a Canadian citizen. His wife is expecting a baby in October and he wanted me to be there in accordance with our family traditions. He completed all the requirements of a visitor`s visa and sent the papers to me in Lahore. On the basis of these papers, I applied for a visa on September 18. But on September 20, I received a letter (File No. V000900720, handwritten) from the Canadian High Commission which elaborated the `standard` reasons for declining the visa. Obviously it was a big disappointment as I fulfilled all the requirements. Interestingly, I feel that the letter of the High Commissioner is a kind of permanent document which is sent to all to whom a visa is declined. This can be substantiated by the fact this `Permanent Document` is photocopied and not personally addressed. I believe that the concerned officer did not thoroughly examine my papers and rejected my application without realising that I am not going to Canada on my own. Rather I had been invited by my son who is bearing all my expenses not only for this visit but in Pakistan as well.

Bangladeshis demand shut down of Pakistan embassy

DHAKA, Sept 24 (Reuters) - Bangladeshi war veterans demonstrated near the Pakistan High Commission in Dhaka on Sunday demanding an apology for alleged crimes during the 1971 war of independence in former East Pakistan, now Bangladesh.

Police stopped the 200 veterans blocks away from the High Commission where they had planned to hand in a protest.

Muntasir Mamum, a leader of a Committee for Elimination of the Killers and their Collaborators in Bangladesh Liberation War, read out the memorandum.

It demanded a trial of war criminals, an apology from Pakistan, resistance against the alleged activities of Pakistan`s ISI intelligence agency and the immediate repatriation of thousands of Pakistani families stranded in Bangladesh since 1971.``

The memorandum also said Pakistani soldiers killed three million people and raped 400,000 women during the nine-month war in then east Pakistan.

The protesters asked the Bangladesh government to ``shut down`` the Pakistani diplomatic mission.

The protest followed deteriorating relations between Dhaka and Islamabad after Pakistani military ruler General Pervez Musharraf cancelled a scheduled meeting with Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina at the U.N. Millennium Summit.

Musharraf said he refused to meet Hasina after she ``interfered in Pakistan`s internal affairs`` by criticising military takeovers in her speech at the summit.

Hasina maintained her stance and demanded that Pakistan apologise for alleged 1971 war crimes.

``Definitely Pakistan should apologise for its heinous war crimes in 1971 against Bangladesh and also punish the army generals who led the massacre of our people,`` Hasina told parliament.

NOT FOR ADVERTISEMENT,

REPRODUCED FROM ANOTHER THREAD,

Between 1984 and 1997, there have been over 3,000 cases against the Ahmadiyas under the law of blasphemy - the largest number, about 750 being under Section 295B. These 750 accused have been

prosecuted for displaying the Kalima - the tenet which says, ``There is none worthy of worship except Allah, Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah``. A hundred and forty were prosecuted under the blasphemy Section 296C.

In 1989, the entire population of Rabwah, the Ahmadiya headquarters in Pakistan, was charged under the Pakistan Penal Code Section 298C which is a special anti-Ahmadiya law. During 1997, three Ahmadiyas were killed because of their faith; three others were sentenced to 25-year imprisonment and Rs 50,000 fine on a charge of blasphemy which was added six years after they were initially charged with preaching Ahmadi- yat; 32 were charged under anti-Ahmadiya and

blasphemy laws, and 59 cases were registered on religious grounds (Source, HRCP Annual Reports 1996 and 1997).

re # 247 ntakley

dear takley

please grow some hair.

regards

aakar

BOOK: THE SRINAGAR CONSPIRACY

Anyone wants to REVIEW it..

Kashmir is a land of daily tragedy, bitterness and war. But above all, it is the home of the conspiracy theory.

A supercharged atmosphere of confrontation and frequent bloodshed, fuelled by the geo-political aims of India, Pakistan and other countries, gives the status of truth to bazaar rumours and renders reality irrelevant.

The stories I couldn`t tell on TV just had to be used somehow



Vikram Chandra

On this tumultuous backdrop, Indian broadcaster Vikram Chandra has chosen to write his first novel titled, appropriately, The Srinagar Conspiracy - probably the first serious thriller written about Kashmir in modern times.

``I`ve been covering the place for years,`` Chandra told BBC News Online, ``and the stories I couldn`t tell on TV just had to be used somehow.``

Chandra is referring to those conspiracy theories and rumours that abound in Kashmir - the probable half truths that don`t make the news, but set the heart racing and the imagination working overtime.

Racy plot

The ``Great Game meets Bollywood`` is one way to sum up The Srinagar Conspiracy.

Vikram Chandra has covered Kashmir for years



The plot revolves around two friends, a Muslim and a Hindu, both Kashmiris, who are raised as brothers along with a young orphan who rapidly grows into a love interest.

War and rebellion rip them all asunder.

Into this, stumbles an ambitious but well meaning Indian TV journalist trying to shed light on the Kashmir imbroglio.

Chandra hastens to say the novel is not autobiographical.

The early Kashmiri movement was based on firmly held convictions



Vikram Chandra

``No, it`s not me in the novel. None of the characters are based on real people, except famous militants and politicians.

``You can`t just drop people into a topic as explosive as this. I had to keep some secrets.``

Sympathetic

The novel, published by Penguin India, steams along at a frantic pace and is firmly based in recent history.

It portrays its Kashmiri characters sympathetically, even some of the militants, suggesting that their grievances with India have had some justification.

The Kashmiris are portrayed sympathetically



``Let`s face it,`` Chandra says, ``the early Kashmiri movement was based on firmly held convictions - people were sincere.

``These days, and I tried to bring it out in the book, foreign militants from across the Line of Control, have hijacked the movement. A lot of Kashmiris resent that.``

In the end, the book does fall broadly in line with India`s view of Kashmir.

The ``conspiracy`` of the title unfolds in a spectacular manner like some blockbuster of a Hindi film.

Establishment line

Makarand Paranjpe, professor of literature at Delhi`s Jawarharlal Nehru University, says pop culture in India has always had a complex relationship with establishment thinking on the emotive issues of the day.

The problem is solved by a good man in a bad system, thus saving the system as well as the situation



Prof Makarand Paranjpe

``Take Bollywood movies,`` says professor Paranjpe.

``They often challenge authority very vigorously early on in the plot, but tend to come around in a torturous manner to the official view, or at least conclude in such a way that doesn`t throw the establishment into complete disrepute.

``The problem is solved by a good man in a bad system, thus saving the system as well as the situation,`` he says.

Whatever the academics or critics might say, Chandra just hopes people enjoy his book and accept they are reading fiction, however well informed by journalistic experience.

``Everything in The Srinagar Conspiracy is fictional except the march of the events,`` he says.

``You don`t write a thriller to make a political point, you do it to entertain, and I hope I`ve done that.``

scout :

Well now the premission is granted for shooting films in kashmir this has been announced by the Indian Govt. what do u think of that.. is that right or wrong ?

i think its good for indian`s rather than going to any other states for the hillstations seen`s . bareing wiht high expenses. now its so good for indian`s they need not spend much money .. and also good for kashmiri people`s who can relly work and earn some money during the shooting of the film they may get certain job .. it is very good chance for kashmiri`s. as we know most of them are troubled for the food there in kashmir.

vitu..

re:246

Much obliged, Arun.

I find Salman Lodhy pathetic !12 out of 200 peaks ! Are there 200 of them ,unless he counts hillocks !Apologise for Goa (with 65 % Hindu majority )Junagadh and Hyderabad all with 90 5 + hindu majority !

As for the Indian Army killing sikhs in Chattisingpora ! The Paki record in B`desh is proof enough of its timidity and islamic character!

Take your 2000 and put it up you know where !

We are waiting to see Pakistan break-up into 4 pieces ! then the fun will really begin !

Only the Pakis can welcome a dictator !

The third part of Pankaj Mishra`s article can be found at

http://www.indiaserver.com/thehindu/2000/09/17/stories/13170611.htm

-arun gupta

PAK TRAGEDY,

Readers Column

IT development

According to a recent survey of e-readiness, among the 42 countries, Pakistan is at the bottom in terms of infrastructure, high tech, information security, and trained personnel. Meanwhile, India has maintained a high standard in IT despite having the same problems of poverty and over population as that of Pakistan. At present Pakistan has just 200,000 subscribers to Internet which is low for a country with a population of 140 million people. The government has formulated a new IT policy to bring the country into IT age and the aim is to increase software export by 200 per cent by 2002 and compete with India. But even after achieving this target Pakistan would still be far behind India`s software export earnings which are around US $3 million a year. So we can well realise that in terms of IT development India is far ahead of Pakistan. Therefore, we need serious efforts to achieve our IT export target.-FAIZA SHAFIQ, Karachi, via e-mail, September 16.

///The above letter to editor from nation, the last sentence sums up the tragedy of pakistan,....indis is far ahead. There fore we need...Yes my dear Faiza, there is an alternate method, lower the indian IT earnings, take the real TNT and head for Kashmir.

Pakkipaki!

You are very wrong.

Labelling the whole people for the crime of few is injustice.

In Karachi and outside Karachi, majority of common Punjabi, students, businessman, worker are very good human. What you might be referring as Chowpaya may be related to their Rural behaviour.

I can tell from my experience that I will trust a Punjabi and have good time with him, as they are more open minded in human relationship.

Their character is different than Mohajirs of Karachi but I found them to be very humane in relationship.

Now my theory is that, Punjabi elite, for their own benefit create a mentality of ``Punjabi Gardi`` or it might be a reaction to oppression in past and common bond.

Just look around. Iqbal, Faiz, Faraz, Ahmed Nadeem Qasmi, Irshad Ahmed Haqqani etc and you will realize. Even in leftist movement in Pakistan, you will find so.

PakkiPaki

`I am not a racist but...`

`I have nothing against other religions but...`

`I think that other skin colours are okay, but...`

Oh dear oh dear oh dear.

shankar #239,

Yeah, I`m dealing with it :).

vitu #240,

NY

pakkipaki #241,

Please refrain from posting hateful things about groups of people, especially when no one has provoked you.

Regarding Punjabis, you wrote: ``All they know how to do is ``peet par churah ghopna``.

I`m sorry kid, this type of back stabbing is common amongst all desis. You`ve probably just had a bad experience with a Punjabi, thus you are suffering from the repurcussions. I hope you recover from it real soon, before it invades your mind and lays eggs.

In the stage show Neelam Ghar (in Pakistan), Tariq Aziz once asked a young man, ``Name the wild animal that is found all over the world.``

The man, wihout having to think at all, answered ``PUNJABIS``.

I am not a racist but during the last couple of years i think that i have realized that it is true. very very true. And let me specify please, that by Punjabis I mean only the ones in Pakistan. I have actually found indian punjabis to be much nicer than their pakistani counterparts. Although I do hate Altaf Hussain as a person and leader, i would agree with him when he said that Punjabis will be the ruin of Pakistan as they have been for the last 50 years or so. All these wild animals know what to do is create problems for everybody else. If they see a friend of theirs doing good, all they can think about is pulling his leg back and making sure that the other person does not succeed. All they know how to do is ``peet par churah ghopna``. I know that being a Pakistani, this kind of thinking is traitorous, but it has to be said that people of other ethnic backgrounds should seriously consider living separetly from Punjab. Peace out.

hi scout .

what`s up ! yaa i really enjoy to contribute on chowk but as i told you that i am new to chowk .

I need some time to get experiance..and offcourse i go to collage daily so that i could not spend more time on net. but i came to know that there is more to know whta`s hapening around the world . by the way whare are U from?

Scout,

I know your stand on Kashmir & it is the same as mine. Was`nt trying to change it. I know better than trying to provoke your wrath:) You sherni you.

Just a futile attempt to inject some sarcastic humor. Whatevever anybody`s stance may be, the rest of the world`s response to Kashmir is just like post #224. Deal with it.

absurd to absurd,

A country was created as a geographical absurdity, two parts seperated by more than a thousand km of another country. It took another 25 years for india to remove that absurdity. In the next 25 years another has been created, a nuclear power with a begging bowl, the equivalent of a command and control system, operated by foreigners. The IMF and the WB operate the controls of pakistan through the begging bowl. Another absurdity, and the world hopes that it wont remain for 25 years before being removed.

Absurdities have to be removed swiftly, like expose on the one who tried to pass of as Oscar Wilde.

shankar #235,

Before you get too excited, my post #224 was not in regards to any political agenda. It was an expression of my utter boredom with the current state of arguments on Chowk.

My stand on the Kashmir issue remains the same.

The place belongs to tthe Kashmiris and they deserve the right to choose for themselves their fate.

case closed

not saying more on this topic

sincerely

scout

vitu,

That ``blah blah`` was for all the people on Chowk who do the ``blah`` when the posts hit above 200.

How do I feel interacting on Chowk?

(I feel like a celebrity)

No, it feels good vitu. You should try it more often. Sometimes after a hard day at school/work/ clinic it`s nice to sit back and type what you really think about something.

scout

Re post#224

FINALLY--there is at least one Pakistani who understands how the rest of the world responds when Pakistan gripes about Kashmir!!!

1 down, 139,999,999 to go.

hey scout

what`s that blah blah blah blah ? heehhe

hey u the only person welcomed me to the chowk as i gave a message to chowk that i am new to it

so how do feel contributing on chowk?

vitu.

Couldn`t Chowk make a separate place where people could cut and paste their favorite propaganda and what not articles there?

I thought this was an INTERACT area, not a CUTNPASTE area.

Please Chowk employees, give it a thought.

Just an idea: Alongside the Interact button make

another button for Related Articles or something to that extent.

sincerely

scout

Partition of India was a huge mistake: Pakistani leader Hussain

http://www.mqm.org/

London: The division of the Indian sub-continent was the biggest blunder in the history of mankind, Altaf Hussain, leader of Pakistan`s Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM), said at a meeting in London on Sunday. (September 17, 2000)

The dramatic statement marked the first time that the leaders of the Mohajirs - who did the most for the partitioning of India from Pakistan - have said that the creation of Pakistan was a mistake. Mohajirs are Muslims who migrated from India to live in an Islamic state.

The dramatic statement was backed by Sindh, Baluch and Pakhtoon leaders who all gathered at the London meeting to signal a united opposition to Punjabi dominance within Pakistan.

``The Titanic of the Islamic `ummah` (community) is now sinking,`` Hussain said. ``It`s time for everyone to play their role.`` Hussain took the Titanic analogy further. ``Do you know the sinking process of the Titanic? Did you see that film? The Titanic did not sink suddenly. It sank slowly. They shot off distress flares. But nobody came. In the end it sank. And this is not a film, it is a fact.``

For the first time Hussain took on the founder of Pakistan, Mohammed Ali Jinnah. Dismissing suggestions that the Mohajirs were carving out a province for themselves to be called Jinnahpur, Altaf Hussain said, ``If we break the country, we will never name it after Jinnah.``

Hussain told the packed hall in London that there are more Muslims in India than in Pakistan. ``So far I have been writing to Pakistan leaders,`` Altaf Hussain said. ``My next letter will be to Indian Muslims. I will tell them what is happening to us in Pakistan, come and see.``

The MQM leader said that ``we did not want to hear the truth in 1971 (when Bangladesh won independence from Pakistan), and Pakistan broke. Now if you want to treat us like slaves, a time will come when we will get independence, and you will be without slaves.``

Altaf Hussain even proceeded even to sing the first line of ``Sare jahan se achha, Hindustan hamara`` twice. He sang it when journalists from Jang newspaper asked him to name his favorite poet. The song by Iqbal, who became Pakistan`s national poet, was Altaf Hussain`s reply.

Altaf Hussain said, ``None of us want to dismember Pakistan; we want to strengthen Pakistan and make a prosperous Pakistan, so please try to save Pakistan.`` But Pakistan cannot be saved under the present dominance by the Punjabi elite, he said. ``There cannot be a Pakistan where Punjabis are considered faithful and Sindhis, Mohajirs, Baluchis and Pakhtoons are considered traitors.``

Hussain said that ``if Pakistan breaks, then it is not Sindhis, Baluchis and Pakhtoons who will be the losers; the loser will be Punjab, the loser will be Punjab, the loser will be Punjab.``

The meeting was addressed also by Sardar Attaullah Mengal, convenor of the Pakistan Oppressed Nations Movement (PONM) and also president of the Baluchistan National Party, by Mahmood Khan Achakzai, chairman of the Pakhtoon Khwa Milli Awami Party, and by Sindh leader Syed Imdad Mohammed Shah. ``This assembly is a warning to those committing crimes against humanity with brute state force,`` Altaf Hussain said.

Altaf Hussain said, ``There is still time.`` But the rulers must immediately ``make a new constitution and stop treating Baluchis, Sindhis and Pashtuns as traitors.`` When speaking of Sindhis he meant also the Mohajirs. Altaf Hussain said there will be no differences among Urdu-speaking people and Sindhis, and that ``I myself will learn Sindhi.``

Speaking of earlier differences with Sindhis, Altaf Hussain said: ``Whatever had to happen has happened. If we join forces, we have 70 per cent of the wealth of Pakistan, and then we can keep our money and even feed Punjab.``

Re: Nameless # 230

Washington Post not withstanding, the people of Pakistan have bigger worries to deal with than debating Pakistan`s international isolation!

Pakistan`s isolation will only impact the middle classes with their dollar accounts and will not hurt the poor of the country, who still eek out a meager living! It is the middle class who is worried about the Talibanization of Pakistan; and not the poor segements of Pakistani society. The middle class has more to lose and is more about Pakistan`s international image.

If the Taliban come, then let them come, because the live of an average Pakistani will not change! He/she will still be penniless, hopeless and foresaken! One whip being replaced by another will make no difference, because the back it will lash at will be the same!

Pakistanis should hope for the best and prepare for the worst!

Ciao!

Some more food for thought

from the W.Post http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/commentary-200091711412.htm

a few quotes

{Pakistan`s expansionist policy was conceived at a time when

India was allied with the Soviet Union while Washington was

closer to the counter Beijing-Islamabad axis. The collapse of

Cold War alliances has ushered in a period of Indo-U.S.

cooperation, leaving Pakistan in the uncomfortable position of

having to rely evermore on China. This relationship, too, has

been stymied by U.S. efforts to control the transfer of missile and

nuclear technology between these states. Pakistan has rarely

been as alone as it is today.}

Note the words `expansionist policy`

Quote 2

{n free and fair elections, the ``Islamists`` do not manage 5

percent of the vote - and yet in Pakistani politics they are as

influential as if they had a majority. Much of that is due to their

infiltration of the military, especially the intelligence services,

which they have controlled since one of their sympathizers, Gen.

Mohammed Zia ul-Haq, ruled Pakistan from 1977-88. During

that period, Islamists were placed in such positions as to make

any government not of their liking end in chaos.}

Note: the figures electorally but the influence they weild - that is the perception.

Quote 3{

he Islamists tell him every day what

they expect him to do and what not: Intensify fighting in Kashmir,

do not force the Taliban to hand over Osama bin Laden.}

quote 4

{Given the choice, more Pakistanis would advise Gen.

Musharraf to follow the course of Mr. Ataturk rather than that of

Osama bin Laden and his cohorts in Kashmir. The recent

collapse of a cease-fire agreement in Kashmir supports the

notion that Pakistan`s Islamist rulers will maintain their hard line

in regional relations. Ultimately, it will be up to the citizens of

Pakistan, who suffer the brunt of the country`s isolation, to

demand a moderate stand from their government, both externally

and internally.}

The last quote is worth noting. It is the most important thing. Indeed if all of us not heed it we are surely facing an uncertain future.

http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/commentary-200091711412.htm

Musharraf`s options

Khalid Duran

Since the creation of their state in 1947, Pakistanis have rarely felt the recognition they believe due a nation of their size and strategic import. In 1971, they lost East Pakistan, which, with the help of India, became the independent state of Bangladesh. Ever since, many in the military establishment are all the more determined to win control of the predominantly Muslim state of Jammu and Kashmir. ``What was taken from us in the East [Bangladesh] we must take from India in the West [Kashmir],`` they argue.

Many Pakistanis envision a state consisting of Pakistan plus Kashmir and Afghanistan. This large Muslim power would seek close links with the former Soviet republics, considered to be a vast market for Pakistani products and a recruiting ground for Islamist militants.

Believing in a ``next round`` of conflict with India, Pakistan`s military has long been on the lookout for ``strategic depth`` in the region. During the 1971 war some of Pakistan`s air force was given shelter in Iran, well out of the Indian reach. Relations with Iran, however, have soured as a result of Pakistan`s efforts to turn Afghanistan into a client state. Today, the Afghanistan of the Taliban provides that hinterland where ``Jihadists`` can train for their war in Kashmir without fear of direct Indian reprisal. (Some of these camps that were the target of a U.S. cruise missile attack last year intended to destabilize Osama bin Laden`s terrorist network).

Pakistan`s expansionist policy was conceived at a time when India was allied with the Soviet Union while Washington was closer to the counter Beijing-Islamabad axis. The collapse of Cold War alliances has ushered in a period of Indo-U.S. cooperation, leaving Pakistan in the uncomfortable position of having to rely evermore on China. This relationship, too, has been stymied by U.S. efforts to control the transfer of missile and nuclear technology between these states. Pakistan has rarely been as alone as it is today.

For these reasons, a section of the educated class is in favor of a reorientation of their country`s policy, requiring a mending of fences with India. In other words, Islamabad would abandon its irredentist claims to Kashmir and adventurism in Afghanistan and accept the role as a junior partner in relations on the subcontinent. Such a limited role would allow the country to pare its military spending and devote more of its scarce resources to reviving its ailing education and economy.

Already in the early 1970s many regarded military rule as the root cause of their misfortunes. A generation later Pakistanis ask ``what is wrong with this country that only gets from bad to worse?`` The problem is to be seen in the totalitarianism that here goes by the name Islamic Movement. A tiny cadre party of ultranationalists uses religious trappings to appeal to the masses.

In free and fair elections, the ``Islamists`` do not manage 5 percent of the vote — and yet in Pakistani politics they are as influential as if they had a majority. Much of that is due to their infiltration of the military, especially the intelligence services, which they have controlled since one of their sympathizers, Gen. Mohammed Zia ul-Haq, ruled Pakistan from 1977-88. During that period, Islamists were placed in such positions as to make any government not of their liking end in chaos.

Former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif made an attempt to get out of the Islamist spider web and drastically change the direction of his country`s foreign policy. After withdrawing troops from forward positions in Kashmir last year, Mr. Sharif was quickly brought down by the military`s Islamist stalwarts, thus heralding the arrival of Pakistan`s fifth military government. From Pakistan`s current ruler, Gen. Parvez Musharraf, have come conflicting signals. The Islamists tell him every day what they expect him to do and what not: Intensify fighting in Kashmir, do not force the Taliban to hand over Osama bin Laden.

The general has cunningly risen through the ranks of the military`s Islamist machinery without being a party man. Now every side doubts that he may be at heart a man of the other party. The big question is whether he himself realizes what a definite choice between moderation and Islamism is facing his nation. If Gen. Musharraf continues the confrontation with India, using an international legion of ``Jihadists`` in Kashmir, there can be no improvement of relations with the United States and Europe. The same applies to the continued application of the infamous ``Blasphemy Law`` (to terrorize religious minorities) and the public justification of ``honor killings`` of women as ``Islamic.``

With such barbarity, Pakistan risks isolating itself even from its Muslim friends. Gen. Musharraf has been rebuked by Islamists for having praised Kemal Ataturk, the founder of modern Turkey. Mr. Ataturk consolidated his rump state by forswearing Turkish irredentism and seeking to ameliorate relations with all neighbors. To this end, he outlawed the ``Islamic Movement.``

Given the choice, more Pakistanis would advise Gen. Musharraf to follow the course of Mr. Ataturk rather than that of Osama bin Laden and his cohorts in Kashmir. The recent collapse of a cease-fire agreement in Kashmir supports the notion that Pakistan`s Islamist rulers will maintain their hard line in regional relations. Ultimately, it will be up to the citizens of Pakistan, who suffer the brunt of the country`s isolation, to demand a moderate stand from their government, both externally and internally.

Khalid Duran, a professor of Middle East and South Asian studies, is the editor of the journal TransIslam.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14245-2000Sep15.html

Pakistani Losing War of ImagesBy Pamela Constable

Washington Post Foreign Service

Saturday, September 16, 2000; Page A15

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, Sept. 15 –– The images that lingered from President Clinton`s visit to India and Pakistan in March were lopsided enough: the grinning U.S. president being showered with petals by Indian village women, then arriving grimly in a camouflaged plane in Pakistan under heavy security.

In recent days, as the leaders of Pakistan and India visited the United States, the contrasts again were sharp: Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee was cheered as he addressed a joint session of Congress, while Pakistan`s military chief, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, was forced to delay his flight home because of a bomb threat.

Despite Musharraf`s efforts to portray his U.S. visit as a success, highlighted last week by a brief handshake and chat with Clinton during the U.N. Millennium Summit in New York, the spotlight clearly belonged to Vajpayee, who was received with warmth and pomp during an official state visit to Washington.

U.S. officials took pains to stress that they will ``work with`` Pakistan`s military government on such contentious issues as Islamic terrorism and the dispute between India and Pakistan over Kashmir, rather than endorse India`s efforts to isolate its adversary and tar Pakistan as a country that supports terrorism.

``President Clinton is concerned about what is happening in Kashmir, and he is trying his best to resolve the issue,`` Musharraf told reporters when he landed in Karachi early this morning. ``We will maintain relations with the United States, independently of India`s relationship with them.``

But Musharraf was not granted any formal meetings with U.S. officials during his stay, an indication of Washington`s arm`s-length attitude toward his government, which seized power in a coup d`etat nearly a year ago. Vajpayee`s official welcome, in contrast, highlighted the increasingly warm relationship between the two democracies, which have pledged to increase both business and strategic ties.

Musharraf also failed to garner much sympathy at the United Nations for Pakistan`s stance on Kashmir, despite his repeated pleas for international mediation and his offers to meet with Indian leaders and make a ``no war`` pact with New Delhi.

Moreover, in various speeches and news conferences, he and Vajpayee slung belligerent barbs at each other, creating a strong impression that the military rivalry between these two nuclear states is becoming even more intractable. Vajpayee called Pakistan the major ``source of terrorism`` in South Asia, while Musharraf charged that Indian democracy is undermined by human rights abuses and the country`s caste system.

Pakistan and India both claim Kashmir, a Himalayan border region, and they have fought two wars over it. Pakistan supports a guerrilla insurgency there, composed of some Kashmiri groups that seek political independence and others based in Pakistan that view their mission as an Islamic holy war against India, which is overwhelmingly Hindu.

``It is strange that the authors of a vicious terrorist campaign . . . were offering a dialogue after sabotaging an historic peace initiative,`` Vajpayee said in a U.N. speech, referring to his 1999 peacemaking visit to Pakistan that was undermined when Pakistan-based guerrillas invaded the Kargil mountains in Kashmir. ``Terrorism and dialogue do not go together.``

Musharraf has depicted himself as tolerant of domestic dissent and press freedom, and yet during his New York visit he lashed out at critics in the media who have increasingly portrayed his government as inept and unable to deliver on its promises of reform.

``There was very little Pakistan could do to keep itself from being overshadowed`` by Vajpayee`s visit, wrote columnist Tahir Mirza in The Dawn newspaper today. But he suggested that Musharraf had made things worse by ``engaging in a war of words with the Indians over Kashmir`` and by ``ridiculing the concepts of democracy and secularism`` while on a visit to the United States.

In New York, Musharraf also drew an unexpected and humiliating snub from Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, who condemned dictatorships and demanded prosecution for Pakistani abuses during the 1971 war with Bangladesh. The Pakistani leader reacted harshly, criticizing Hasina for intervening in Pakistan`s affairs and canceling planned talks with her.

``Musharraf went abroad hoping to build international goodwill, but he came back having slighted one of the most important members of the South Asian alliance,`` said one Pakistani political analyst. ``Instead of gaining new friends, he lost one.`` Then, in a final blow to Musharraf`s foreign image, his flight home Thursday on a Pakistan International Airlines jet was marred by a telephoned bomb threat, which forced the plane to return to New York for five hours.

Even before his visit to the United States, Musharraf`s claim that he seeks a peaceful resolution to the Kashmir dispute was weakened by the abrupt collapse of a brief cease-fire there. A Kashmiri insurgent group, Hizb ul-Mujaheddin, announced the truce in July, but two weeks later it was withdrawn by the group`s Islamabad-based leaders. Indian officials said the halt to the cease-fire proved that Pakistan was not serious about ending the conflict, which has claimed more than 50,000 lives in a decade of fighting. Guerrilla leaders said India had undermined the truce by setting impossible conditions for peace talks, but Musharraf said he hoped New Delhi would not rule out future negotiations.

``The Hizb ul offer was a window of opportunity,`` Musharraf told reporters in Karachi today. ``I hope India will show some statesmanship and take the Kashmir issue toward some practical solution.``

Hhhhm, here is something worth advertising (spend your hard earned dollars on this)

There is an article titled:

Another massacre of innocents on college campus

In todays Nation

A quote

{We have another disaster to mourn. Of the 21,000 students that took the Intermediate (Humanities)

examination this year, 13,003 failed to clear it. If this is not a massacre of innocents, what is it? It has

been revealed that 15 colleges scored `zero pass` result. Of these six were government colleges.

Another 13 colleges had pass percentage at ten or less. }

Available at http://www.syberwurx.com/nation/opion2.html

To salman,

The following is from nation of today. At last the reality seem to have dawned on the CE, the rag tag jihadists are not going to secure kasmir for him, `kashmir banega pakistan` is only a chant of the brain dead, pakistan will continue to sink with the jihadists. This is worth advertising. The CEs rule might be coming to an end, the army of god is ready to take over, the bearded generals are on march.

from nation ....

A brief meeting between General Pervez Musharraf and Kashmiri leader Molvi Omar Farooq in New York last week has also sent green signals to the APHC leadership that they need not worry about Islamabad`s reaction, if talks with New Delhi are resumed. Musharraf has reportedly assured Omar Farooq, a former chairman of the APHC, that whatever is decided by the people of Kashmir about their political future, Pakistan shall accept that decision voluntarily.

///it is time for the next coup.

GHOURI AND OSCAR,

Pakistan is not a country wellknown for industrial development. In the field of engineering and technology, it hasnt got ant institution of international repute. In terms of pulished articles, it is no match for even a country like india.

However, in the realms of missiles, pakistan seem to be at par with india. Many allege that pakistan has copied from north korean and chinese. But pakistan denies this and point out that their missile is called Ghouri, uniquely pakistani.

After reading responses 1 to 4 on john joss thread, I have to agree with this line of argument. If a famous quote by Oscar Wilde can be so openly appropriated, what to talk of secret technologies.

blah blah blah blah blah? blah blah blah?

BLAH!

sincerely

scout

SameerJB

Interesting article

{{The best policy available to Pakistan is to pursue a neutral foreign policy by rapidly improving its ties with India, Russia and the US. This can be achieved through:

*De-escalating the military tension with India and to start a meaningful dialogue with New Delhi aimed at finding a negotiated settlement to the issue of Kashmir;

*Applying pressure on the Taliban to end the civil war in Afghanistan and to form a broad-based government in Kabul. This step would also help improve the strained relations with Russia.

*Taking strict actions against the terrorist and fundamentalist groups through a cleanup operation against them to retain the original face of liberal Pakistan as envisaged by the founder of the nation, the Quaid-i-Azam. This step would not only improve ties with the US and the regional states but would also qualify Pakistan for foreign investment.}}



If Pakistan would ever adopt the above policies--I guarantee you that the adverserial relationship between Indo-Pak will turn to genuine attempts of friendship.

However, the author is dreaming. Mushy does`nt have the guts to start a cleanup operation against the terrorists groups. He couldnt do a damn thing about the blasphemy law. It goes to prove that the fundoos have a strong control over him.

The ``core issue`` is his stand on Kashmir.I think Mushy is trapped from all sides,he needs the ``freedom fighters`` to be cannon fodder. The catch-22 is that makes him very unpopular in the West & Russia.

His trip to NY was a complete failure. Its amazing how his spin doctors are loudly proclaiming success. The ``27 leaders`` he shook hands with are either small potatoes or were just being polite to him. I cant believe he got pissed at the Bangladeshi PM! He went to the extent of cancelling his meeting with her! Then he gets pissed at the Pakistani press & called them unpatriotic. Peter Jennings just stopped short of calling him a liar. The US press is constantly comparing Vajpayee`s diplomatic successes to Mushy`s failure.

As far as his plea to the UN to get invovled in Kashmir!!I mean the guy tried his best to sound dovish & compared Kashmir to E. Timor. Do you think anybody took him seriously?! Did his speech galvanise any country or the UN to pressure India?!

Most Pakistanis have the same position on Kashmir as Mushy does. Is there a lesson to be learnt here? I hate to sound blunt, but whether Pakistanis like it or not, the world doesnt care/ doesnt believe/ or doesnt listen to you.

So go ahead & take that pious high ground about Kashmir. Pakistanis are the only ones who believe that; the rest of the world doesnt believe you. Pakistan`s hands in Kashmir as just as dirty as India`s. All your howling in international forums is a pitiful storm in a teacup.

UN and Kashmir,

Our leaders have long insisted that Kashmir is at the centre of the world stage. During the Millennium Assembly of the 189 member states of the United Nations, the largest single gathering of heads of states ever, there were only two leaders who cared to mention the word ``Kashmir`` in their speech. First, His Royal Highness Crown Prince Abdullah Bin Abdul Aziz Al-Saud who used ``Jammu and Kashmir`` twice in his 4,000-word address. Second, General Pervez Musharraf.

/// well, well what happened to the UN resolutions, swept away by Simla agreements.

Here is something I found very interesting; Dr. Jassim Taqui is saying exactly what I said in my lasy post regarding futuristic scenarios and how to counter them. This is from Sunday Magazine Section of Nation daily, Lahore.

I am sorry for cutting and pasting this article.

US elections and Pakistan

Dr. Jassim Taqui

Pakistan stands today between the devil and the deep blue sea in matters pertaining to the outcome of the US elections on South Asia. Whether the Democrats win or the Republicans, there seems to be no net gain in store for Pakistan. In fact, the grim situation is derived from the fact that the military establishment in the US has decided to change its erstwhile Cold War era`s policy in dealing with this region.

Without the overriding enemy, the Soviet Union, and the struggle of the Cold War, the Clinton administration has been able to pursue a foreign policy free of the intrigues that previous presidents have used abroad. Instead, the Clinton years have seen the US pursue collective security and set new thresholds for the use of military force. Vice President Al Gore, in his campaign for the presidency, is the heir to this foreign policy. With a stable political and sound economic situation at home, Gore is expected to continue with the Clinton legacy, which is strengthening the security and military ties with India at the expense of both Pakistan and China. The US expects that China will emerge as a major regional power in the next two decades. It perceives China as a threat to ASEAN, Japan and Korea. Therefore, it has decided to strengthen India to stop the rising star of China.

The US thrust is directed towards building up India as an economic giant by ensuring, through foreign investments, a growth of 7-8 percent in the Indian economy in the next two decades. Ultimately, Washington wants India to emerge as a major naval power to stop the future Chinese advance towards the Indian Ocean and the Arabian Sea. Pakistan stands in the way of this strategic planning. Hence, Pakistan is offered the choice of either to be a puppet of the Indo-US scheme or to face the music. And since other regional and Islamic powers are either embracing the US planning directly, or indirectly through cementing ties with India as in the case of the regime in Iran. Pakistan is left with only one choice, which is cementing its ties with China, since it is the ultimate target of the US and India.

If George Bush jr. wins the elections, things would be much more complicated since Bush has quickly identified himself with the military establishment and the `star wars`. George Bush would act quickly to regain a sound footing in South Asia since if he failed to do so, China would dominate by opting for Asianism as a contrast to Americanism. In this case, China would find itself closer to the Russian Federation to undo the Indo-US game.

Therefore, Pakistan has to quickly improve its relations with Moscow especially when the Russian interests would be best served in making a Sino-Russian axis to confront the US-Indo axis. For Pakistan, certain policy changes have to be adopted to ensure its survival in a region, which is going to witness tremendous confrontation in the next two decades.

The best policy available to Pakistan is to pursue a neutral foreign policy by rapidly improving its ties with India, Russia and the US. This can be achieved through:

*De-escalating the military tension with India and to start a meaningful dialogue with New Delhi aimed at finding a negotiated settlement to the issue of Kashmir;

*Applying pressure on the Taliban to end the civil war in Afghanistan and to form a broad-based government in Kabul. This step would also help improve the strained relations with Russia.

*Taking strict actions against the terrorist and fundamentalist groups through a cleanup operation against them to retain the original face of liberal Pakistan as envisaged by the founder of the nation, the Quaid-i-Azam. This step would not only improve ties with the US and the regional states but would also qualify Pakistan for foreign investment.

Pakistan has to be ready to face a changed US foreign policy whether Al Gore or George Bush wins the next presidential elections. The new era would be one of free trade and internationalism. The US might opt for a direct military intervention instead of using the United Nations, NATO and other agencies to carry out interventions.

To cbd,

All that I was trying to say was that the socio cultural context set the backdrop in which education can flourish. It is said that all that is to learn is in the koran. Well, in pakistan it is taken literally, in the madrassas children are encouraged to by-heart the koran, not `learn` it. I have read that in medical a schools a person can be failed for not being able to recite koran.

There is a similar view in hinduism also, all that is to learn is in the scriptures. But it is interpreted differently. The `learning` of the scriptures gives you the concentration, the mental decipline so that one can learn anything else in a short time. It is alleged that one of the indian swamies, Vivekanada was asked about this, how come scriptures have everything, including moderen medicene. Vivekananda is supposed to have asked the person to bring two books on anatomy, he spent an hour reading them, and asked the person to question his knowledge. It is alleged that the swamy answered all the questions on anatomy. May be all that the scriptures say is that the religion prepares you to learn what ever one chooses to learn.

In pakistan to interpret the book in the hindu way will be blasphemy, especially that a hindu has said it. At some stage the educated of pakistan have to confront the mullahs, provide an alternate interpretation.

An atmosphere of hatred, enshrined in K for kafir is not conducive to the flowering of intelectual persuits. Where is the space for science if the the birds fly due to `` khuda ke kudrat``.

The problem of pak education is not lack of funds, it is in the wrong direction. Salman, dont waste the 2000 bucks.

To quote bilal, I have empathy for your concern, your concern for the people, at an individual level. But collective pakistan has no hope. The educated have refused to accept the reality, the `power of two percent``.

regards and best wishes.

Jay.

Re: Organization of Pakistani Entrepreneurs

of North America (OPEN)

Temporal #199

Thanks for the welcome. Your example of the lobbying group is definitely a great example.

Here`s a Pakistani organization that`s having their first meeting this weekend (in Boston). Their agenda is right on target and hope we all can support such groups in our regions.

On behalf of the Organization of Pakistani Entrepreneurs

of North America (OPEN), we`d like to invite you to attend

our first quarterly networking meeting and luncheon.

About the Networking Luncheon



Our kick-off luncheon, to be held on Sat, Sept 16th, 2000 in the

Burlington Marriott in MA, is the first of what we hope becomes

a quarterly event. Our aim is to bring together high-tech Pakistani

entrepreneurs, executives, financiers and students in an

informal setting which encourages communication and

interaction leading to many successful partnerships and

beneficial associations. Our goals in this first meeting are:

A. To introduce OPEN, our 12 Directors, and the successful businesses

that they`ve created, and invite attendees to become members.

B. Launch our first Annual Business Plan competition for Pakistani-

American entrepreneurs. This competition awards $100K in total cash

and services and is sponsored and judged by some of the leading

Venture Capitalists in the US.

C. Facilitate the exchange of information between attending

entrepreneurs,financiers, and service-providers.

D. Profile a successful Pakistani entrepreneur and provide a roadmap

that others can follow.

Agenda

------

The event begins promptly at 12 pm on Sat, Sept 16th, 2000 at the

Burlington Marriott.

12-12:30 pm: Registration

12:30-1:30: Lunch with guest speaker Hassan Ahmed, CEO of

Sonus Networks talking about how to build a world-class high-tech

company. With an $12B+ market-cap and one of the most successful IPOs

in 2000, Hassan is uniquely qualified to talk about his road to success. For

more information about Hassan Ahmed and Sonus

Networks, pls visit www.sonusnet.com.

1:30-2:00: Introduction of OPEN by Imran Khan, President, including

membership information. Launch of the OPEN business plan competition.

2-3: Brief introductions of attendees.

3-4: Drinks and general networking.

Registration and Directions



Onsite registration (including lunch) is $45 for the general public

and $10 for students with IDs. There is a $5 discount for

pre-registration. To pre-register, pls send a check

made out to OPEN and sent to Khurram Afridi,

Techlogix,Inc, 800 West Cummings Park, Suite 1925, Woburn, MA 01801.

Directions to the Burlington Marriott can be found at

http://marriotthotels.com/BOSBU/. or by calling 781-229-6565.

About OPEN



The Organization of Pakistani Entrepreneurs of North America is

a non-profit, non-political organization that serves to enhance business

opportunities for entrepreneurs sympathetic to OPEN goals or of Pakistani

origin living in North America or Pakistanis involved in the technology

based enterprises.

Our Goals are:

· To help facilitate and encourage the growth of Pakistani

entrepreneurs in the technology field.

· To act as a catalyst for Pakistani entrepreneurs hoping to succeed

in the

technology business.

· To draw attention to and promote Pakistani hi-tech entrepreneurs

within the greater non-Pakistani technology community.

· To provide funding help and mentorship through programs such as the

business-plan competition and monthly business-plan critiques.

· To develop an ongoing events through which Pakistan`s technology

executives can meet and network, not only, amongst themselves but also with

other influential individuals in the area.

· To recognize accomplishments by Pakistanis entrepreneurs and

executives in the technology field.

sac (from the Jinnah board)
Just for fun, take this as a lighthearted TGIF frolic, please:-):

Bertrand Russell/Katherine Whitehorn adapted to our times(as mithuna said sometime ago, Indians and Pakistanis get to the maximum degree in the second person itself, no need for the third person :-))

I am principled, you are obdurate
I am sagacious in shedding baggage, you are unprincipled and artful
I am brilliantly intellectual, you suffer from intellectual poverty
My politics is constitutional, yours is confrontational
We sadly wait for a messiah who will never come, you guys have made a real mess by trying out your own hand

Our leaders hands are tied and can do nothing, your leaders could solve all problems if they really wished,

Our leaders cannot influence public opinion at this time, your leaders are misleading the public

We are the public but need to do nothing about public opinion and you are the public and you had better answer to us for your own public opinion.

Our overt/open expression of opinion/dissent is meaningless, your overt politics is too noisy to be anything but futile.

:-)
Sadhana

Jay #213/214

Of course, I am charmed by your humor contained in

above posts.

Nevertheless, I do not think that information in

your post negates my submission that South Asia

needs a heavy focussed dose of math/science

education. I also do not think that `` Pak

Education`` can not be as good as any other

education in the world given reasonable amount of

resources and proper environment. Any theory that

proposes that people of one country are ``better``

than those of other, is bound to fail.

Yes, India and Pakistan have different systems

and different priorities. But that difference can

be addressed.

I believe that South Asians are one of the best

players in the field of IT. And it is not a zero

sum game that progress in India can only be at the

expense of other. In fact, we can develop lot of

synergy between the two countries. Though it

seems utterly unlikely to happen, but if the two

countries agree to take full advantage of current

situation by pooling their resources and

knowhow, South Asia can prosper overnight and all

problems between the two, as we know of, will

appear tiny.

You might ask why India needs Pakistan. It does.

Because Pakistan can have a substantial pool of IT

manpower given right conditions. Without India, it

may not be able to harness those resources.

That is why it looked to strange to me that Mr.

Lodhi can choose to give more priority to

spending money on advertisement while masses, in

general, are hungary f

Re: pragmatix #211

Why don`t you be a little ``pragmatic`` and post the links here instead of pasting 5000 words from the article? Let`s make the leap of logic and assume that if people are reading your message, they have access to a computer and can click on a link just as easily.

EDUCATION PAK STYLE,

Salman, spend your 2000 to feed battery chicken, send this news from dawn of today to any one who suggests that money should be spent on education in pakistan.

KARACHI: Zero percentage in 15 institutions

KARACHI, Sept 14: Not a single student belonging to 15 colleges and higher secondary schools of the city passed this year`s intermediate part-II examination given to the humanities group.

The pass percentage of another 13 institutions was 10 or less than 10 per cent.

According to a list provided to the media by the Board of Intermediate Education Karachi on Thursday, the names of the institutions having zero pass percentage are: Quaid-i-Millat Government College; NJV Higher Secondary School, Urdu Medium; NJV Higher Secondary School, Sindhi Medium; Iqra Inter College; PNG Higher Secondary School; Allama Iqbal Government Higher Secondary School; Al-Noor Degree College; CMS Government Boys Higher Secondary School; Government Girls Higher Secondary School Konkar; Government Girls Higher Secondary School, Murad Memon Goth; Rasheeda Memorial Higher Secondary School; Nayab Higher Secondary School; Ever Green College; Government Bengali School, and; Lal Shahbaz Qalander College.

`K` FOR KAFIR, BASICS

Every man and his dog are asserting that education is the key to progress for pakistan. What kind of education. Education does not start in a vaccuum, it starts from what has been taught at home, transfered in the mothers milk, may be in the womb.

In teaching a new language, one relies on the common knowledge, what is present in every day lives as the guide posts. `A` apple is fine for the children of England, it was `ant` in the corners of kerala.

`K` for Kafir, my mind shudders at the thought of how the kafir idea would have been tranfered to a child below five years. Kafir cannot be a common sight in pakistan, but it is the idea of a kafir out there that is imparted to them. In the later years they go out to kill them in the persuit of jihad.

It is hard to accept, sitting in USA, the basics of english came with the jihadic message. K for kafir, that sums up the education, in the grammer schools, in the US, the source of the undying urge, that finds expression in jihadic donations, in the reports on front pages of dawn.

umair: reply # 203

``junagarh........``

right jack. wait for some time. and start counting

sindh, balooch, NWFP, PoK. what remains BTW ?

50 years and no sign of ``kashmir liberation``.

some body is mighty mighty pissed off.

lets not talk about bangladesh.

enjoy

nchiket

Re: Umairr

Here we go again. Let`s set the ifs, ands or buts aside....let`s do what the UN Resolution requires for its implementation. First step (according to the resolution, not India) is for Pakistan vacate to PoK. Now go do it. shoo

cbb 201, You are spot on in saying that the future will belong to a well educated population. India needs to do a lot more to spread quality education to the rural heartland. Below is an encouraging post (for those who missed a post on another thread) on plans for quality grad education in India. I agree with you that Salman`s money would see better returns in a similar initiative in Pakistan, and perhaps when the madness ends we may see a collaboration between institutes in south asia. Apologies in advance for the long post.

http://www.india-today.com/ntoday/newsarchives/100/9/3/n99.shtml

NRIs plan dream science and technology institute

for India

NEWS TODAY EXCLUSIVE

By Suman K. Chakrabarti

Calcutta, September 3: Year 2003.

If you have already planned to send

your children abroad for higher

education, hold your breath and

cancel your plans. Forget

Massachusetts Institute of

Technology, dump the Princeton University. Because, here comes

the Global Institute of Science and Technology (GIST) with each

campus on a sprawling 2,000 acres of land accommodating 20,000

students.

A group of businessmen and visionary entrepreneurs of Indian origin

have started mobilizing a private capital, initially targeted at US $1

billion, to bring a quantitative and qualitative change in India’s higher

education.

The idea for this institute was conceived by Dr Purnendu Chatterjee,

president of the New York based Chatterjee group (TCG) and backed

by a host of former IITians including US-based tycoons, Database

millionaire Vinod Gupta (who has set up the Vinod Gupta School of

Business at his alma mater, IIT-Kharagpur); Gururaj Deshpande,

founder of Sycamore Networks which is one of the world`s hottest

new technology companies, valued at more than $ 38 billion, along

with his wife Jayshree Deshpande; Arjun Malhotra, co-founder of the

HCL group and currently chairman and CEO of Techspan Inc and

Rajat Gupta, CEO of Mckinsey, the world`s leading management

consulting firm.

The idea, which was mooted during US President Bill Clinton’s

March visit to India, has received the backing of both the Indian and

US governments, according to sources in the Prime Minister`s Office

in New Delhi. Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee will also announce

the project officially during his upcoming visit to the US, sources

said.

Kishore Bhattacharya, a Calcutta-based consultant with the

Chatterjee group and childhood friend of Dr Chatterjee told NEWS

TODAY ``that all these former IITians have taken the responsibility of

mobilizing and providing the resources and management needed to

establish a group of world-class institutes in India with emphasis on

research in science and technology.``

According to the final proposal for the establishment of GIST, a copy

of which is in possession of NEWS TODAY, ``funding commitments from

founders and other donors have already crossed the half way mark

towards the targeted $ 1 billion, sufficient for starting six campuses

in India.``

Bhattacharya told NEWS TODAY that the University of California,

Berkeley (UCB) (Dr Chatterjee`s alma mater) has agreed to grant

affiliation to the first GIST campus which will be set up in Bangalore.

The Karnataka government has already allotted land for the project.

“Though Dr Chatterjee wants to build up the second campus in

Calcutta, we might not succeed because the West Bengal

government is not willing to give land and we do not want to waste

the philanthropic fund in acquiring costly land,” Bhattacharya said.

Other campuses may be affiliated with different universities such as

Stanford and MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology). According

to sources, the Washington State University, Michigan State

University at Dearborn and North Western University has also shown

interest in the project.

Though a host of states like Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Gujarat and

Tamil Nadu have offered free land and infrastructural facilities, the

second campus is likely to be set up in Chennai.

Indian corporate houses including Mukesh Ambani of Reliance, R.

Narayanamurthy of Infosys, and Azim Premji of Wipro have also

come up with offers of help.

Underlying the proposed establishment of GIST is the fundamental

belief that the need for scientific and technical talent will continue to

rise in India as well as globally, and India will be a major contributor

to that talent.

In the US alone there is a shortage of 300000-400000 professionals,

growing at the rate of 15-20% a year. The shortage in India is likely

to be substantial if the Nascom-McKinsey projection of India`s

potential is to be realized.

India due to the widespread use of English in the country, the size

and skill of the domestic student body and a cultural emphasis on

education is uniquely positioned to be a key provider of scientific and

technical talent.

Approximately 10 per cent of Silicon Valley start-ups between 1995

and 1998 were founded by Indians, companies created by

entrepreneurs of Indian origin have a market capitalization in excess

of $ 200 billion.

Despite these impressive statistics and the staggering potential for

Indian talent, quality technical and scientific education has been

denied to many in India.

At the IITs, out of the 250,000 students who take the entrance exam,

less than one per cent gets admission. This is significantly lower

than the acceptance rates of other leading schools worldwide (e.g.,

Stanford 15 per cent, MIT 20 per cent).

Moreover, creating and maintaining a world-class science and

technology institute is expensive and the IITs and other institutes in

India have to depend largely on government budgetary support, with

very little private funding.

Consequently, the expenditure on higher education has been very

low. The research budgets and grants of leading schools in the US

are immense, the final proposal of GIST says.

GIST PROPOSED STRUCTURE

GIST will be an autonomous, self-funded institution and will be

established as a corporate body under Section 25 A of the Indian

Companies Act. The governing body will comprise of members

including major sponsors for the institute, world-renowned science

and technology researchers, academicians, practitioners and CEOs

of multi national companies.

To provide advice on future direction and priorities, an advisory

council, comprising of a broader group of academicians and business

leaders, will also be created.

Each campus will have an academic council to decide the curriculum

of the various courses offered by the institute.

The faculty will comprise of a core permanent group, supplemented

by visiting faculty from leading international schools and industry.

VISION AND OBJECTIVES

GIST is a movement intended to spawn a set of privately funded and

managed world-class modern research institutes throughout India.

The objective of GIST is to build and sustain world-class research

universities that will achieve the following objectives: (i) Provide best

education to the best minds and help them stay current. Some of its

key elements are: Create an intellectual ambiance, which

encourages and fosters questioning, investigating, and creative

solutions.

Bring education and research under the same roof in close physical

contiguity and in deep intellectual relationship. Experience shows

that discovery; itself is the greatest form of teaching, and that both

teaching and learning may be viewed as an adventure in discovery.

The students, during their formative years, will be exposed to the

thrill of discovery in a variety of ways in the classroom, in special

seminars and by direct participation in research.

GIST will be guided by the philosophy that education is much more

than teaching; it must include the creation of an inquiring mindset.

Design programs which are most relevant to the educational needs of

the society and not driven by departmental needs or inertia. Provide

the possibility of continuous learning and to stay abreast of the

changing world. Design and build a strong and lasting bond between

GIST and its alumni, which could be crucial also to the

self-sustainability of the GIST ventures. The commitment of a small

share of lifelong earning in lieu of part or all of tuition fees would

reinforce this long-term university-student bond.

Complement scientific and engineering know-how with liberal

humanities education in order to prepare the graduates to join the

fellowship of an educated person and be effective in life.

(II) Develop as major, cutting edge knowledge creators. Some of its

key elements are:Induction of the best minds for research. This

would require world-class facilities, motivated and outstanding

student body, stimulating ambiance and competitive remuneration.

Research prioritized and driven by need for excellence, intellectual

challenges, market forces, including availability of funds (corporate,

government, institutional, etc.) and faculty interest.

GIST will continually strive to stay at the frontiers of knowledge.

Collaboration with corporate and other leading research institutions,

both locally and globally, to ensure that GIST plays critical role in

major issues and developments.

Corporate collaboration (with co-located facilities) can be taken to a

new dimension.

With a world-class setup, GIST will be in an ideal position to attract

major national, specialized scientific laboratories to become partners

in research. The marriage of the general and the specialized hasbeen

extremely widespread and of immense importance in the growth of

both the pure and applied sciences in the advanced countries.

Three very successful examples of this are: Rutherford Appleton

Laboratory, Oxford University. Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California

Institute of Technology and National Institute of Fusion Sciences,

Nagoya University.

Address intellectual property rights issues in a way that will promote

long-term GIST interest, and help achieve GIST objectives.

(III) Contribute to growth of India as a power house in the knowledge

of economy. Some of its key elements are: Build GIST to a scale

and scope such that numerous large industries can be

spawned.Seek collaborations with other research centers to further

leverage GIST capabilities. Support and encourage the growth of

corporate and technological parks around GIST locations.

(IV) Catalyze the development of a new paradigm for institutions of

higher education.

The most distinguishing criterion of our times is the accelerated

change in everything around us often caused by the remarkably rapid

innovations in science and technology. In order to convert this

challenge, GIST will deliberately build necessary flexibility in its

governance, management and programmatic structures but without

sacrificing the strengths of more conventional set-ups. There will be a

pervasive focus on adaptability in all aspects of academic and

non-academic planning.

It will be designed not only to quickly adapt to change, but also to

become the author and pace setter for change. Ensure that the

funding sources do not impede the ability of the researchers to

change directions as and when needed. Self-supporting research

(sometimes in collaboration), and development of long-term

relationship between GIST and its alumni, would be effective ways to

insure that.

Continuous search for new talent to gain immunity from the power of

existing paradigms to squash or obstruct the emergence of new

areas and disciplines. Take active steps to share and spread the

paradigm of flexibility with strength by creating a networked model for

leveraging GIST`s resources and expertise with that of existing

engineering and science & technology institutions and thus help

raise over all standards of research and teaching.

GIST PROGRAMS

It will start with the establishment of one or two world-class research

universities, with an initial focus on applied research later blended

with fundamental research. The details of the academic architecture

will be worked out by the faculties of the respective campuses and

will necessarily be a function of time. One will however, begin with a

faculty, which is equitably divided between basic and applied

sciences.

The basic science programs will include Mathematics, Physics,

Astronomy, Chemistry, Biology, Life Sciences, Electrical

Engineering, and Computer Sciences while applied sciences will

span Engineering, Information Technology, Material Sciences, Health

Sciences, Atmospheric andGeo-Physics, Mathematical Biology and

Ecology. The programs are expected to be individually strong and

interactive with one another.

The faculty and the research programs will not be forced into

department but rather a fluid inter/intra departmental structure will be

adopted to promote the concept of adaptability.

It is recognized that tangible and effective applied research in most

areas requires a thorough grounding in basic sciences and an

understanding of the humanities to develop a rational basis for

understanding the observed phenomena and predicting the future

outcome. Thus the education and research planning at GIST will take

full cognizance of its special role of providing sound basic training for

all research, pure and applied.

At GIST, the under graduate program is expected to follow the

Masters and Doctoral program. Shorter programs focused on specific

topics will also be offered from time to time. Students will have an

opportunity to take courses in standard as well as cross- discipline

areas. An emphasis will be placed on fundamental scientific and

technological principles and their intersection with the new economy.

Moreover, to promote adaptability, the GIST programs will be

targeted towards providing education throughout the lifetime of the

individual on the premise that the generally followed custom of a fixed

time period for learning leads to obsolescence in a period of ongoing,

rapid, knowledge expansion.

Finally, to train students with a zest for tackling unsolved problems;

research work will be an integral component of the curriculum.

Since the philosophy behind the GIST education is to be a training

ground for cutting-edge scientists and engineers, the educational

curricula must stress and hone those aspects of the mind which are

crucial to making innovations, inventions, and discoveries. Thus, the

development of reasoning, investigative, and critically imaginative

faculties is to be emphasized.

The general classroom instruction will be augmented by a variety of

structured as well semi-structured programs such as: assignments

to develop problem posing and solving abilities (including interactions

with the business community), group discussions between the

students and faculty, between the students themselves, and student

seminars. There will be continual contact with the investigations

being carried out by the faculty and the graduate students.

To encourage students to develop independent thinking and working

habits, there will be access to Internet, well-stocked libraries and

well-equipped laboratories. Moreover, for the more adventurous and

inspired students, funds should be made available for pursuing their

own research ideas. An intellectually mature student with ability and

drive could choose a totally independent line of enquiry and will have

the blessings of the faculty. In fact, the emergence of powerful,

self-propelling young minds will be the fulfillment of the GIST mission.

FACULTY STRENGTH

From a study of successful universities on which GIST could be

patterned, it is estimated that 2000 students will be taken in the

graduate and undergraduate courses combined and a faculty of

approximately 300-400 which will provide the necessary initial

strength for a sustainable experiment in excellence - in teaching,

research and liaison with industry and the world at large. Individual

GIST campuses can grow to become mega-campuses with 20000

plus student body.

The size of the faculty is the most important parameter of the entire

enterprise. Among other things, it will determine the cost of building

and maintaining GIST. The proposed low student-teacher ratio will go

a long way in ensuring that the best young minds are given intense

and personalized training so that they may have a chance of

reaching their full potential.

All GIST selections and promotions, whether for faculty, students or

staff, will be totally need- based.

FACULTY SELECTION

The acquisition of an intellectually distinguished and pedagogically

inclined world-class faculty convinced of the importance and mission

is the first critical and daunting task for the GIST founders and

facilitators.

The recruitment of the faculty will be done in several stages. Initially,

a group designated by the GIST board will choose a few highly

reputed and distinguished persons in each discipline. The initial

group will consist of a desirable combination of senior and

established scientists and junior researchers of demonstrated

potential. The core groups, so selected, will shoulder the primary

responsibility for the choice and selection of their peers. The details

and procedural matters will be worked out in due course. The

university will constantly look out for outstanding researchers from all

age groups to add to its ranks.

GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS

The next rung in the research establishment is the graduate student

who combines the twin roles of a student seeking knowledge and of

a researcher creating knowledge. At the proposed strength, up to

40% or approximately 800 graduate students would be on a campus.

The primary admission criteria, the procedures, the rules, the

graduate academic programs, the structural relationships between

the graduate students and the faculty, the additional responsibilities

of the graduate students, the details of the qualifying examination

and other modes of assessment etc. will be worked out by individual

departments with some overall coordination.

Education and research under the same roof is one of the guiding

principals of the GIST initiative. commitment to exciting, high-quality

undergraduate education is, therefore, the center piece of the

institution.

A minimum-sized GIST campus will have 1200 undergraduates

spread over four years ofstudies, requiring a selection of 300 per

year. The selection will begin with an appropriately prepared written

examination, designed to test the students`reasoning and critical

faculties.

Those who pass at a desired level will be invited for an interview. In

the early years, the interviews may have to be conducted mostly at

the GIST campus, but with the passage of time, the GIST network

will grow and theGIST alumni at various places in the country or

abroad could conduct the interview. The idea is not just to pick

students who are bright and capable,but those who, in addition, show

a tendency to pursue careers in science and technology and related

enterprises.

Training at GIST will be very expensive, and it is prudent that the

aptitudes and inclinations of the student be judged before admission.

Enrollment in GIST will be open to non-Indians also for up to a third of

the student body and this will help in creating an enriched

multi-cultural experience.

GIST OUTREACH

GIST will entertain no quotas or reservations. In order to reach the

socially or economically weaker sections of the society, more so

females, GIST will devise an active program. This will consist of

identifying more advanced students belonging to the target groups,

and providing special and additional training for them so that they can

be better prepared to compete for admission.

Summer courses given atthe GIST campus or other suitable

locations for students in the last two or three years of high school will

be the cornerstone of this program.

GIST FUNDING

The current intent of the GIST initiative is to establish up to six

campuses across India in a phased manner so that limited resources

are fully deployed towards the twin objectives of ensuring excellence

at every stage, and gathering sufficient experience for the better

design and development of subsequent institutes.

Each of the campuses will include both academic and residential

facilities. To realize the lofty aspirations of putting together and

supporting a world-class faculty, a world-class student body, and

world-class facilities and intellectual ambiance in several locations,

the sponsors of GIST are raising a sizeable endowment fund.

An initial target of $1 billion is expected to reach within the next 6-12

months (with over $ 500 million already available) to start work on the

first two campuses.

GIST ADDENDUM

Regulatory Framework: GIST will adopt ``IIM`` model and concentrate

on the Post-Graduate/Post Doctoral program to get GIST launched,

at least with one or two locations.

It will continue to work with the government of India and help evolve a

suitable regulatory framework for providing world-class undergraduate

education in a research university. With this approach we believe we

would not need any change in current regulation to begin operation.

Permanent Faculty recruitment: Combination of the focus on

research/ Post Graduate program and the sequenced campus

development approach that GIST wants to follow will also mean that

the quantum of faculty needed for GIST would be less than 100per

year starting from 2003. Such faculty and senior research fellows

would be sourced primarily from the pool outside the major Indian

teaching Institutes.

Currently India is producing in excess of 4400 Ph.Ds in Science and

Engineering and a substantial number of them are from outside the

major institutes is also an attractive target for GIST faculty. Once

theundergraduate program is launched GIST itself will be a source of

its faculty, in addition to the various other sources such as Indian

and non-Indian international faculty attracted through 5 year

contracts and tenure, Indian industry and research centers, etc.

GIST is open to consult with Indian government in case of faculty

recruitment from some specific teaching institutes.

Student tuition fees: Tuition can be paid in 2 forms: (i) fill cost, an

option likely to be exercise by foreign students, or (ii) nominal base

amount with share of future student income pledged to the School.

Currently it is envisaged that students would willingly pay 1% oftheir

earnings in the first 5 years, 2% in the second 5-year periods and

3% there after. However, this will be finalised after financial modeling

and at the time of introduction of undergraduate courses.

krashid #207

The quotes were from Brains article in the News. Someone had quoted that article taking a few bits which he liked. I was merely pasting some others to give a more complete picture.

As to yur assertions etc - well for the time being we can leave them as they are since nothing much will come out of the argument.

The whole thing is a new version of the `emperor`s new cloths syndrome

Chief Justice Cornelius, Dorab Patel, Now Supreme Court judge Bhagwan Das I don`t have to look into books. They are quiet prominent and there will be other names also.

General Gracey was the first Commander in chief of Pakistan.

One asking Pakistanis to get correct picture not from Pakistani media on Kashmir.

I usually verify with BBC, whose address is BBC.com.

May be it is also biased. Only reliable media is what, please tell me.

Nameless #190

I read with interest your post.

You referred to kashmiri freedom fighters as immoral monsters.

How do you refere to freedom fighters of India and Pakistan.

Dhoti clad, half naked barbaric.

By the way are Indians moral monsters to mericelessly kill their own citizens.

Anamika #195

Theory and practice are different.

If 2-3 soldiers are killed in ambush daily and at slightest sound they start firing, how can you further alienate them by making them responsible for wrong killings. There will be a mass desertion of soldiers and alienation against the Government for which they are fighting.

MASS DRUGGING OF PAKISTANIS

Administration of drugs on an entire population is very rare, but is practiced in the west. Flouridation of the drinking water and iodisation of cooking salt are good examples.

Pakistanis also need a treatment of this proportion, to rid them of the attention seeking habit, Attention Deficit Disorder, ADD. The present attempt of pakistan to talk peace with india is a manifestation of this disorder. Pakistan is known the world over for its support for taliban, its policy of sending pakistanis to taliban for training, enroute to india, dont forget, the hundreds killed in the US cruise missile raid on taliban were pakistanis. A govt actively partaking in taliban activities cannot be for peace.

In the domestic front as well pakistan is a violent country, has legitimised killing of women, has death penalty on some one who said that he is god. Now can any one imagine this country and the administration interested in peace, no , not at all.

The talk of peace is an attention seeking ploy, ADD. They want peace talks, not peace, while the jihadic killing are carried out behind the bogey of nuclear war.

Retalin appear to be the cure. Not many pakistanis have piped water, so retalin will have to be administerd through air, bombs of colloidal retalin, dropped from indian mirages.

Peace is worth persuing, even through unconventional means.

it seems the cut-and-paste culture is increasingly becoming rampant in chowk.... but then there are quite a few nice posts here like ferozk #86, sameerJB #129 and some more. i fully agree with feroz, that when CE-PM says that the ball is in india`s court (it has become such a pet phrase in political parlance), he means it in an ironic sense. but the consistent way we`ve stuck on to our respective positions, we would never be able to decide on the criteria that pakistan should satisfy before talks get going... even if india could articulate such a prerequisite, there would be enormous loopholes in it that either side would be able to revert to the traditional way of accusing the other of violation etc.

a sensible thing for inida to do would be to initiate a dialog with pakistan on the condition that PM drops kashmir-first-all-next stance, may be behind the scenes. there`s a lot we could agree on - treatment of our diplomats, cooperation in IT, trade, oil-pipeline etc. No doubt, kashmir is the core issue. but lets pick and dispatch the smaller and easier ones first...yes, that was the core of the lahore process...

i am reminded of a story about chandragupta... that was in the days when he repeatedly failed to dethrone the nandas despite a series of attempts to capture their capital, pataliputra. once while wandering in disguise, a sudde pelting rain forced him to take shelter in front of a hut. inside that hut, an old lady was serving dinner - a plate of hot pancakes - to her little grandchild. the kid dipped her finger right in the middle of that hot pancake and screamed at once because it blistered her tender finger. she admonished the little child not to do things the chandragupta`s way. she should start with the lukewarm `peripherals` and proceed towards the middle... by the time the `core` is reached, it too would be just warm enough to mop up a delicious food.... the gupta got that message and subsequently succeeded in getting patna.

The same logic applies to any problem of any size.

RSexana: Just when you thought it was safe to go back into the water (from Jaws) :-).

Apparently, people have gotten tired of talking about Kashmir. I am begining to get a bit tired myself. So, for all the people who are bored, tired, or fall into the category of, ``don`t really care`` regarding Kashmir: here is a topic that may (or may not) tickle your fancy.

I suggest that Chowk start a separate thread for the Junagadh Liberation discussion :-)

``Junagadh Liberation Front formed

By our correspondent

KARACHI: The citizens of Junagadh State in Pakistan on Wednesday announced formation of the Junagadh Liberation Front to free it from the clutches of India. This was announced by the president of Junagadh State Muslim Federation, Mohammed Ismail Padhiar, Advocate, at a press conference on the eve of celebration of 53rd Accession Day of Junagadh State with Pakistan.

He demanded of the government of Pakistan to raise the issue of aggression of Indian army on Junagadh State at all the international fora and support the liberation front. Junagadh State was the first Muslim State, which acceded to Pakistan against all odds. Pakistan was legally, morally and constitutionally bound to defend its own territory against the Indian aggression but it failed to do so, Padhiar said.

``Our struggle is peaceful and with in the constitutional parameters,`` he clarified. Meanwhile, the chairman of Muslim Commonwealth Movement, Aslam Bin Ibrahim called upon all the political parties to highlight the Junagadh issue by electing Nawab Mohammed Jahangir Khanji, the Nawab of Junagadh State, to the chairman Senate unopposed for all the time till the Junagadh State is liberated. He was addressing a press conference on the eve of celebration of 53rd accession.`` (The News, Pakistan)

RSexana #198: I hope you are not suggesting that India is not holding a plebiscite in Kashmir, because Pakistan did not vacate Azad Kashmir in 47. The actual reason India is not holding a plebiscite in Indian occupied Kashmir is because India knows it will overwhelmingly lose the vote. If India knew it would win the vote, it would hold a plebiscite today, regardless of what Pakistan did or didn`t do.

As I have suggested earlier; as long as you continue to view Kashmir as an India-Pakistan problem, and not as a problem of the people of Kashmir, you will continue to be able to come up with all kinds of reasons for suppressing innocent Kashmiris and killing them. Pakistan did this, so India should kill Kashmiris; Pakistan did that, so India should kill Kashmiris. I have no solution for that.

What you should be concerned about are the people that the Indian army is killing, whom you claim to be a part of India. If you are genuinely concerned about them (as I am), then what Pakistan did or did not do should be immaterial. I have never stated that Pakistan has any right over Indian Kashmir or even over Azad Kashmir, for that matter. In fact I have always stated that Kashmir`s future should be in the hands of the Kashmiris, themselves.

I do know for a fact that the people in Azad Kashmir feel liberated, and not occupied (half my family lives there). I also know that the people of Indian Kashmir feel occupied and not liberated. This is a fact.

I think if you take a look at the ground realities of Kashmir today, you will discover that the Kashmiris do not want to be with India. And you will discover that the Indian govt. is carrying out human rights violations to the extent that they are not even letting HR organizations near Kashmir. I think even the strongest supporters of India`s actions will agree to the above.

After that, it really depends on how much one values human rights and human life. The people who only value the human lives of those who support them will never be convinced that the human lives and desires of others are equally important. So I am not even going to make an attempt to convince you that India`s actions in Kashmir have been and still are inhumane. Basically, because I know you will never be convinced. So it is a waste of my time.

Regarding my own views: I think you can check and see that I have probably been a greater critic of the human rights abuses of the Pakistan govts., present and past, then of any other govt. I do not really care what Pakistan gets out of Kashmir. In fact, I would be equally happy if the people of Indian Kashmir voted to remain with India. If the people of Azad Kashmir voted to join with India, I would accept that, as well, even though my family has grown up there. Even if there were no UN Resolutions on Kashmir, I would still support the rights of the Kashmiris to decide their own future. I support the right of the East Pakistanis to decide their own future, even though there were no UN resolutions demanding a vote in East Pakistan. And I state all of the above unconditionally.

Your comments seem to indicate that your only concern is what India and the Indian govt. gets out Kashmir. If you had any concern about the people of Kashmir, you would be willing to make unconditional statements regarding Kashmir, similar to the ones I have made, also. But you cannot make such statements, because you already know what the result of a vote would be, and because you are not concerned about the human rights of the Kashmiris. Because of this, you have to continue to deflect the debate from the desires of the Kashmiris, to arguments regarding what Pakistan did and did not do. There is no end to such arguments, since each side will keep presenting a counter argument. In the process, the actual people become border lined.

Here is a portion of Nehru`s speech:

``We have declared that the fate of Kashmir is ultimately to be decided by the people ... We will not, and cannot back out of it. We are prepared when peace and law and order have been established to have a referendum held under international auspices like the United Nations. We want it to be a fair and just reference to the people, and we shall accept their verdict.`` (Nehru)

It just comes down to whether people believe in the subjugation of others, or in the freedom of others. Considering the fact that the Hindus in India were themselves a victim of subjugation for 1000 years, one would expect you to be more sensitive to the plight of the Kashmiris. However, it is a well-known fact that people whose intent is to subjugate others will always find a one-sided justification for it. After all, the British justified their colonization of India by stating that they were actually civilizing the local Indians. You have put up a similar argument supporting Kashmiri subjugation, i.e. that the Pakistan army did not, ``vacate,`` so now India can suppress the Kashmiris, as it wishes.

I have always felt that people who support the killing of innocents are themselves indirect participants in those killings. The reason I post replies pointing out the actual situation in Kashmir is to ensure that supporters of the Indian action are not able to put up a false picture of what is going on there. As I have stated earlier, I do not care what Pakistan gets out the deal. I look at it completely as a human rights issue. I have stated that many times.

In the end, there are two questions you will never be able to answer:

If India is convinced that the Kashmiris are happy with India, and Pakistan is causing all the problems, then why doesn`t India just ask the Kashmiris themselves?

If India is not committing massive HR violations in Kashmir, then why is Kashmir out of bounds for International HR organizations? Why can these organizations enter Azad Kashmir, but not Indian Kashmir? What is there to hide?

After going thru this article and many of the

responses which dealt with this article only, I

humbly feel that somehow we are missing the point

and to an extent, we are about to miss the boat

too.

My reference is towards education. With the onset

of IT era, the whole dynamics of this world are

changing. Education has become a focal point. You

may call it luck or otherwise, India had

invested more on education than Pakistan had. As

a matter of fact, many people will vouch far the

fact that, at least educationwise, an Indian

working abroad is not inferior to any body else of

any other country. While quality-wise Indians are

not inferior, quantity is no problem for India.

The net result is that India is well placed to

receive IT. That is why India is getting so much

of recognition.

And that is how, Pakistan can achieve parity with

India which it so desires. Nothing can change

the fortune of Pakistan except education. No

advertisement will work as long as education

standards remain mired as they are right now.

On the other hand, Pakistan can achieve results

much faster than India because of its size. It has

less difference within the population than India

has, hence more managability. I do not subscribe

to the idea that brainwise, Pakistanis are any

different than Indians.

To me, the money which Mr. Lodhi is earmarking for

advertisement should go to education.

As much as we may like to produce an IT expert in

six months, this strategy is bound to fail. IT

growth needs solid education background and solid

math/science skills. India too has to improve

upon by spreading education to less unfortunate

ones. Per capita wise, India is no where.

Both India and Pakistan have to address this

problem and if we do not, we might miss the boat

to 21st century. We have been enslaved for long.

This is the time w

I read this interesting news item in ``The News``. Hope Munir Khan is also calling for removal of impediment in return of Bihari`s from Bangladesh.

``Pakistan calls for removal of impediment in return of refugees ``

(Updated at 1235 PST)

GENEVA: Pakistan has accentuated the importance of removing all impediments in return of refugees and freedom of movement, arrest of war criminals, establishment of functional central institutions in Bosnia and local governments in Kosovo and the normalisation of relations among neighbours.

Permanent Representative Munir Akram highlighted this point while making a statement at the 20th Session of the ``Humanitarian Issues Working Group`` of the Peace Implementation Council and the Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe on Wednesday.

Akram emphasized the need to strengthen the peace and stability by inviting donors to contribute generously and international agencies to continue playing their role in facilitating solution of the crisis.

Rafiuddin #196:

Haven`t had the pleasure of reading you here before. Welcome to Chowk.

Your post is one of the most dispassionate and least subjective here. Kudos.

Any long term change of perspective needs much ground level shovelling. Lessons can be learned from how B`nai B`rith and other Jewish lobbies work. And I am saying this with a deep sense of admiration for them. They achieve results.

To mention one aspect: their volunteers help in distributing election brochures and leaflet and door knocking for a local municipal candidate, alderman, representative and up. As the candidates moves up the political ladder their IOUs become more and more relevant. They have mastered the art of scratching back. Ofcourse this necessitates long term planning and vision.

But who says a determined people cannot start mobilising now?

rgds,

t


Giving credit where credit is due. Your point is well taken.



Reading some of the responses it`s obvious how those trapped in the circle of negativity will just do that and miss the overall purpose. The point being there is a major problem with Pakistan`s global image that is being further fueled by recent incidences. Blaming India for much of these is something most of us don`t know for a fact. That debate can go on for ever and hence we miss the point again.



Regardless of whose to blame, there are events unfolding that have a global PR impact and something needs to be done to proactively counter that.



I agree with Pakistan needing to raise their overall Global PR savvy. We`re faced with a slew of issues that require global buy-in for our position on such hot issues such as Nuclear arm race, Kashmir issue, Millitancy etc.



I don`t know if an Ad campaign with limited scope does the job. For those who have commented, it`s about an overall PR Strategy/ thinking to maximize the exposure of valid and ligitimate views. This involves identifying the key messages, alligning your actions with the messages, mobilizing key influencers to promote that message. All of this using all the major `media channels` sources including Press releases that are targeted to key journalists, Advertising in targeted media, Sponsoring International events that support the messages, taking leadership roles in various global initiatives, etc etc etc...



You are right on the money with the frustrations. Grass root level initiatives that you are suggesting are the only way to influence this thinking into action. Just having moved to Boston I have noticed many new initiatives that aim to further the economic and global properity of Pakistan. I intend to join and do my part. Hope we all do.



Regards.

Until Umairr trims his beard and answers why Pakistan has not vacated PoK as required for the implementation of the UN resolutions on Kashmir it will be difficult to answer his repetitive monologues on the topic.

Re: Ferozk

``Sadly, that will never happen, because Pakistan will invoke, once again, the specter of evil Indian-CIA-RAW-Jewish conspiracy against Pakistan and will debate this till the cows come home!``

You, sir, are right on the money as always. India-Israel cosying up as they have been recently isn`t helping. Now, outside of that, the fact of the matter is that Jews in America (where the Jewish power base is anyway) couldn`t care less about South Asia. India may be winning out the propoganda war vis-a-vis Pakistan but the Jewish controlled US media isn`t doing much to bolster India`s overall image. Every IT success comes with a picture of a slum dweller (rightfully so).

Salman,

Giving credit where credit is due. Your point is well taken.

Reading some of the responses it`s obvious how those trapped in the circle of negativity will just do that and miss the overall purpose. The point being there is a major problem with Pakistan`s global image that is being further fueled by recent incidences. Blaming India for much of these is something most of us don`t know for a fact. That debate can go on for ever and hence we miss the point again.

Regardless of whose to blame, there are events unfolding that have a global PR impact and something needs to be done to proactively counter that.

I agree with Pakistan needing to raise their overall Global PR savvy. We`re faced with a slew of issues that require global buy-in for our position on such hot issues such as Nuclear arm race, Kashmir issue, Millitancy etc.

I don`t know if an Ad campaign with limited scope does the job. For those who have commented, it`s about an overall PR Strategy/ thinking to maximize the exposure of valid and ligitimate views. This involves identifying the key messages, alligning your actions with the messages, mobilizing key influencers to promote that message. All of this using all the major `media channels` sources including Press releases that are targeted to key journalists, Advertising in targeted media, Sponsoring International events that support the messages, taking leadership roles in various global initiatives, etc etc etc...

You are right on the money with the frustrations. Grass root level initiatives that you are suggesting are the only way to influence this thinking into action. Just having moved to Boston I have noticed many new initiatives that aim to further the economic and global properity of Pakistan. I intend to join and do my part. Hope we all do.

Regards.

krashid: ``Tell me a way, when soldiers are controlled tightly and still fight a

protracted war as in Kashmir.

You have heard you cannot have your cake and eat it too.

So it is a necessity for Indian Governemnt to give free hand to

soldiers, with all its moral, mental and physical implications.``

Giving a free hand must not lead to massacres of unarmed civilians. The soldiers ought to be free to defend themselves but, at the same time, proper checks and balances would ensure that abuses are kept to a minimum.

Re: Umairr

I think that a wait and see approach would be the best!

Re: All

As to the study released in Outlook, US has a thousand of such studies to base their SitSims (Situational Simulations)on and the study in of itself does not mean much. However, what it suggests is plausible and its implications should be seriously reviewed by the present ruling personalities. Sadly, that will never happen, because Pakistan will invoke, once again, the specter of evil Indian-CIA-RAW-Jewish conspiracy against Pakistan and will debate this till the cows come home!

I had a ``pleasant`` discussion with a friend and she admonished me for speaking the propaganda against Pakistan and said, quite confidently, that she has been hearing talks about Pakistan`s demise since she was born and nothing had happened! My response that nothing had happened in her lifetime, because she was born in 1973! I told her that if she had been born prior to 1971, Pakistan would have broken up during her life time. The point is, the majority of the Pakistanis are not willing to admit the truth and when CE/COAS suggests that we should forget 1971, I shudder to think what is to come of us? How are we going to learn our lessons, from history, if we keep forgetting our history?

Ciao!

I can`t see what Mr. Salman Lodhy is moaning about. Pakistan`s military has always been very good at advertising. ``Field Marshal`` Ayub Khan advertised his basic democracy with elan even as he set about to kill the dreams of the common people. General Yahya Khan talked ecstatically of democracy even as he unleashed his murderous soldiers on the unsuspecting people. General Ziaul Huq advertised the glory of his ``shooracracy`` even as his dispensation made millionaires out of generals engaged in drug peddling and gun running. And now General Pervez Musharraf is following in the footsteps of his illustrious predecessors to engage in full scale advertising to marginalize all those that might question his sanctification of perks and privileges of the pampered military.

He has advertised, apparently quite successfully, that:

(1) The time is not yet right for the repatriation of the ``Biharis.``

(2) Hamoodur Rehman`s recommendations on trials for the guilty generals should be ignored because the judge failed to recommend similar things for the politicians.

(3) Osama Bin Laden is America`s problem and not Pakistan`s!

etc. etc. etc.

Here is a recent DAWN article that goes over some of the things that General Pervez Musharraf is determined to ram thru the throats of the ordinary Pakistani people thru an advertisement blitz:



DAWN, Karachi, Pakistan

12 September 2000 Tuesday 13 Jamadi-us-Saani 1421



No trials for `71 debacle, says CE: It was a political failure also



NEW YORK, Sept 11: Chief Executive General Pervez Musharraf said here on Sunday that the 1971 tragedy was not only a military but a political debacle as well.



He made these remarks in response to a question about Hamood-ur-Rehman Commission report at a press conference here on Sunday.



``Let`s forget the bitterness of the past and move forward,`` he said. In answer to a question whether there would be trials as recommended by the report, Gen Musharraf replied tersely, ``No, certainly not. Something happened 30 years ago. Why do we want to live in history? As a Pakistani, I would like to forget 1971.``



He added, ``What happened then is nothing that any of us can be proud of. It was a debacle, not only a military but a political debacle. But why do we want to dig the past up?``



The chief executive said: ``as for the Hamood report, there was a vested interest involved there. The mandate given to the Commission by the man who appointed it was to look into the military debacle in East Pakistan. Why did it not look into the political debacle?``



``It is known who was responsible for it, the very man who ordered the inquiry. I think this issue needs to be closed. It is dead. Let`s forget the bitterness of the past and move forward.``



Gen Musharraf also laid to rest rumours that the national assembly would be revived. ``That is not going to happen,`` he stated emphatically. He made light of the suggestion that after the retirement of the present president and the restoration of the 8th amendment, he would step into his shoes. ``I have not decided anything about that yet. I haven`t even thought of it,`` he said.



Responding to a question about the repatriation of stranded Pakistanis in Bangladesh, he replied that though it was a matter of great regret to him that they were in the plight in which they were, this was not the right time for a decision on this issue. ``I do not add to our difficulties. We have enough of them as it. This is not the time for it.``



Gen Musharraf was asked about the process of accountability which the question suggested left something to be desired. He replied that he did not possess a ``magic wand`` but things were moving and they were moving in the right direction. Everyone was accountable. There will be no exceptions.



He rejected a suggestion that the devolution system he was giving the nation was a re-run of Ayub`s system of Basic Democracies. He said the two had nothing in common. Told that after the fall of Ayub, his system was thrown out, might that not happen to his system also when he was no longer around, he replied that if the system was good for the people, they would not permit anyone to discard it.



He declared that the National Accountability Bureau was not weak. ``Bear with us,`` he added, ``Nobody is out of the list.`` He said there were going to be no exemptions.



Asked about Osama bin Laden, he said while he understood that he was an ``important American concern``, he was not a Pakistani problem. He said he had advised the Americans to engage with the Taliban. He had also said that Pakistan would do what it could to ``facilitate`` things but we had nothing to do with Osama. ``I cannot solve that problem,`` he stated, adding that Pakistan would like peace to return to Afghanistan and a commonly acceptable government established.



Told that there were ``kingmakers`` in Pakistan, he declared that there were no kingmakers in Pakistan. ``I care two hoots about who they are. Let me tell you my friend, the people of Pakistan are the kingmakers.``



One journalist told the chief executive that he was disappointed to hear him say on Saturday that there should be ``healthy criticism`` by the press. ``We have heard this many times before and it always ends up in a crackdown,`` the newsman said. The chief executive replied, ``I must express my disappointment with some of what I see in the press. I say it from my heart. There is money at work in some cases. Tell me truthfully, if it is true or not. Aren`t some reports published for financial reward, reports which the journalist know is counter to facts. I say to myself, either such journalists are fools or they are working for vested interests. People write deliberately wrong stories either for money or for political reasons or for some other reason. I say if I do something wrong, criticize me. I can take it. Write the truth and don`t apologize for it if it is not liked.``



Continuing, he said, ``the national interest should be supreme. I look at Indian newspapers and they seem to always bear the national interest in mind. They even distort the truth if they feel that it serves the national interest. He said while a distorted story published in our press was put on page one, its contradiction was buried somewhere on page four. I have no desire to stifle the press although some of what had been printed in Pakistan would have justified stifling it 10 times over. I believe that in time good sense will prevail. That is my hope.``



When told that some of the ``lifafa journalism`` in Pakistan was due to the ministry of information, he said that was no longer the case. He said newsprint quotas had been used in the past to put pressure on the press but that system no longer existed. ``There is no longer lifafa journalim,`` he said looking at information minister Javed Jabbar who conducted the press conference.



General Musharraf is due to fly back to Pakistan on Sept 13 by Pakistan International Airlines.-APP



Our Correspondent adds from New York: At the last press conference held by Gen Musharraf on Sunday four members of ethnic press media walked out protesting that many people in attendance were not members of the local ethnic media.



One publisher who lodged a protest against ambassador Maleeha Lodi saying ``she was the ambassador of the elitist Pakistanis ,`` also walked out in huff saying non-journalists were invited to the conference.



Gen Musharraf got visibly enraged at the reference to ambassador Maleeha Lodi and declared ``I believe she is an excellent ambassador. If you have to criticize any body criticize me. I chose her as the

ambassador.``



However, of the four people who walked out two came back to the conference with apologies.

Manoj re:187

a) Nehru did not ask for a plebiscite. The UN asked for a plebiscite. Nehru went there because he felt that with the Intrument of Accession in hand it would be an open and shut case. Needless to say, it wasn’t. Vacating Kashmir? And what would stop India from walking in an taking over whatever was left, pray tell. Hadn’t the UN asked India to refrain from annexing Goa, a request that was ignored?

As a question to you: Why does India object even to reinforcement of the UN observers along the LoC?

b) I think the forum members already know the answer to that. Theoretically, a Hindu can. A non-muslim can only not become President or Prime Minister. With the size of our minorities being so teeny, the chances of a non-muslim rising to such a high rank is, probability wise, unlikely. Someone some time back posted a list of non-Muslims of prominence in Pakistan. Can anyone refer Manoj to there, or at least to the forum?

Btw, are you like that Indian doctor I ran into in Cleveland who thought that all women in Pakistan stay in the house and wear nothing but burqa by terms of state law?

( How come the minorities have vanished from pakistan??? The minorities emigrated or vanished into thin air but how about their religious places temples, gurdwaras, churches. Surely the concrete structures did not emigrate to US!!!)

What sort of assumption is that? Please do tell me where you came across that piece of information? That there are no churches, mandars etc in Pakistan? I know that there is at least one important Sikh religious site in Pakistan where sikhs make pilgrimage to annually.

Dunno about the textbooks. Prof Hoodhboy? Though admittedly, it’s not altogether unlikely! I’m sure some textbooks do exist that have got such items. Part of the countrywide curriculum? Damned if I know.

Dear Salman,

How about giving a kick start to your advertising campaign by apologising to the Bangladeshis for the 1971 war. Or maybe throw some light on the historic Lahore visit, what went wrong with it? I personally feel that you don`t need to do much about what`s happening in `the Indian Occupied Kashmir`. Watching any of the PTV`s new bulletins would suffice for that. Khabron ka aagaz hi Kashmir aur Bharat se hota hai. Sometimes I wonder

whether all the Pakistanis are interested in knowing about what is happening in I O Kashmir. Day in and day out it is the same story .

Who are these muzahideen by the way? They comprise of illeterate, unemployed, and even saza yafta muzrims from Pakistan and Afghanistan. They are ( I pity them) fighting the holy war for the Pakistan Army.

U accuse India of concocting lies during the Kargil war. Who stopped u from presenting your point of view to the rest of the world. The whole world knows that Pakistani Army regulars were fighting during the war. u (PAK) kept denying it. So much so , u even refused to accept the dead bodies of the slain Pakistani soldiers. The Indian army personnel buried them according to Islamic rituals.

Please do not tell us about how to deal with minorities in India. Yours is the only country in the whole world where co-religionists are hated. That is why Bangladesh was created. You refuse to accept the dead bodies of your fellow Muslim countrymen. First learn to respect your own religion and brothers. I sometimes wonder had Kashmir not been tjhere, what would Pakistanis do?

Umair quotes from Brain`s article in The News - however there are some interesting parts to it which were omitted from the quote (I know he asks us to read the article and gives us its address)

Quote 1 (and this coming from Brian is something for he often sweetens the pill but not here)

It will be difficult for Pakistan to curb the wild men of the Lashkar-e-Taiba and similar organisations. But I give fair warning: there is much more than Kashmir at stake, here. We are talking about the very existence and survival of Pakistan as a nation; for if such as the Lashkar are allowed to prosper, they will present--perhaps they already present--a dramatic and evil threat to the country itself, and all its decent peoples. They cannot--must not--be allowed to continue to flout the laws of Pakistan. Control of these bands, which appear to think they are above any laws, be these of God or God-guided man, is essential if Pakistan is to present itself to the world as a modern, moderate, rational society with respect for human existence and its own Constitution.

Quote 2:

Many people in the camps are not citizens of Pakistan and have no right of residence in the country--and pray do not give me the line that they reside in `Azad` Kashmir which can award certificates of residence, because this would be sophistry of a high and ridiculous order. I have seen what has happened to unfortunate foreigners whose visas have expired (usually because the reissuing peasant in Aabpara in Islamabad deliberately refused renewal without a bribe): they are out of the country on their ear in no time flat. So why should armed men who are detracting from the peace, security and prosperity of Pakistan be allowed to remain here?

Quote 3: (This is something which nonw of the pakistanis here have said)

he pronouncement by Mr Vajpayee at the UN was crucial, and there is now an opportunity for

Pakistan to take him at his word. While he was ill-advised to say there could be no dialogue

with terrorists, one can see what he wants, and this is not at odds with what would benefit

Pakistan. It would be wise on three counts for Pakistan to move to thwart the swaggering,

gun-toting fanatics whose money comes in large part from drug-trafficking, which is strictly

forbidden by the Qur`aan: first, there could then be no possible excuse for India to refuse to begin

talks; second, and even more important, it would check, and, one hopes, stop the slide to anarchy

that will accelerate if these amoral monsters are not reined-in. Third, and most important: the

world must be shown that the rule of law applies in Pakistan.

Some other interesting analysis which in my view is somewhat closer to what Sameer said in his previous post.

http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/commentary-2000912173654.htm

Toward a U.S.-India strategic kinship

Amos Perlmutter

Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee is scheduled to meet with President Clinton toward the end of this week, and will also meet at Blair House with leading American specialists on the Indian-American relationship. There could be no more propitious time to announce a new American policy: Washington`s willingness to accept India`s world power status that will begin with a U.S.-India strategic dialogue. This is in step with the president`s symbolic trip to India in March 2000.

The United States has underestimated India, its political, economic and military potential. A Sept. 11 CATO-commissioned paper by Victor Gobarev addresses this issue, ``India as a World Power: Changing Washington`s Myopic Policy.``

The author points out two of America`s mistaken attitudes toward India. One is related to the administration`s obsessive concern with nonproliferation, and ``continued insistence`` by the United States that India ``liquidate its nuclear arsenal.`` The second point is the administration`s involvement in the Kashmir issue in its most narrow context rather than its wider strategic concern, i.e. war against Islamic fundamentalists. Insistence on American intervention in the Kashmir dispute is detrimental to general American interests in South Asia. This policy must be reversed, and issues of proliferation, Kashmir, terrorism and other strategic concerns must be emergent from a United States-India strategic relationship. India, and not China, is America`s natural strategic partner.

To address the balance of power in South Asia, the United States must seek to lure India away from the emerging Russia-China-Iran-Pakistan entente, and be reversed to favor real American and Indian interests. An American strategic partnership with India, the largest democracy in Asia, which is becoming Asia`s greatest economic power, could resolve the issue of proliferation by offering India its well-deserved role as a member of the nuclear five club. Why should India be less significant as a democracy and emerging capitalist power than Great Britain? India joining the club will bring an end to the bickering over its nuclear development. Not until the Chinese, the Iranians and the Russians change their pernicious behavior of supporting rogue states and the Chinese cease their support of the Pakistani nuclear program, can the issue of the India-Pakistan nuclear relationship be addressed.

Resolution of India-Pakistan disputes can be realistically assisted only in the context of an U.S.-India strategic relationship. I concur with Mr. Gobarev, who writes: ``Current American national security interests with India, such as deterring a nuclear arms race in South Asia and restricting exports of nuclear technology, are no doubt noble. But is it productive to treat the decision by the world`s largest democracy to develop nuclear weapons the same way we treat pariah states` nuclear ambitions? Is pressuring India to forgo nuclear weapons our best option?``

Mr. Gobarev addresses what he calls worrisome signs of a Russia-India-China axis. ``Signs of an emerging Russia-India-China strategic alliance with an unmistakably anti-U.S. bias are causing growing concerns in U.S. policy circles.`` We are well aware of the effort of former Russian president and foreign minister, Yevgeny Primakov, to establish a Russia-India-China axis. This must be nipped in the bud.

The clear answer to the future balance of power in South Asia, the end of jittery nuclear proliferation and terrorism must be an American recognition of India as a world power. By the year 2025 India`s gross domestic product is expected to surpass those of Germany and France, making India the world`s fourth-largest economic power. In the area of economic globalization, advancing liberal and democratic values, Mr. Gobarev argues that the maximization of the number of friendly states in Asia is axiomatic to American national interest.

One wonders why the administration spent most of its two terms subscribing to an antiquarian, anachronistic Cold War policy of balancing the U.S. relationship between India and Pakistan. The bickering over nuclear proliferation has only retarded America`s real goals in the area.

What is more natural than for the most populous democratic country in Asia, which is becoming a major economic power, to become an American strategic partner? Contrast this with the dubious and failing Clinton policy of seeking a strategic partnership with China. China is no strategic partner for the United States. It is a rival of the United States. In Europe, the Russians are ready to become strategic partners with Europe and the United States, but not in Asia.

The present regime of Iran must be isolated, and the present Pakistani regime must end its terrorist campaign in Kashmir. The answer to both is a strategic partnership between India and the United States. We have to work toward dissolution of the China-Russia-Iran-Pakistan axis that is being formed.

Failing to recognize the strategic importance of India to the United States and vice versa will jeopardize the balance of power in Asia and will strengthen the emerging alternative axis. We must guarantee that India does not become a partner to the China-Russia axis, because its role would strengthen the alliance considerably. It is unfortunate that American media and especially the Congress do not perceive the real American interest in South Asia and the need to lower the level of Chinese aspirations even in a non-revisionist China. There are three major powers in this area: Russia, China and India. Russia no longer is a significant power, even if things reverse within 20 years. But the unrelenting effort to accommodate China and seek strategic partnership with the Chinese, to beg it to end its verbal war against Taiwan, is perplexing. China is part of the American consciousness. India is not. China was central to America`s Pacific policy. The relationship with China has gone up and down throughout the last two centuries.

In 1949, the Republican Party spoke of the ``loss`` of China. But we don`t speak of the loss of India, since India was part of the British Empire, not part of the American political or intellectual consciousness.

To institutionalize and strengthen this strategic relationship, we also must envelop it in the recognition of India`s history, culture and politics. And above all to remember that India is the world`s leading democratic state.



Amos Perlmutter is a professor of political science and sociology at American University and editor of the Journal of Strategic Studies.

An interesting article and some additional info on India.

http://www.timesofindia.com/today/13busi6.htm

India ranked 4th in purchasing power parity

By T V Parsuram

WASHINGTON: India has moved up from fifth to fourth place in the world in terms of purchasing power parity (PPP). It is now only behind the US, China, (which has moved up to second place) and Japan in PPP calculations.

The figures for 1999, given in the World Bank`s annual world development report, are: US ($8,351 billion) , China ($4,112.2 billion), Japan ($3,042.9) and India ($2,144.1 billion).

Compared to the G-8 countries -- the size of the Indian economy in PPP terms is ahead of six out of the eight G-8 powers, analysts said.

The figures for the G-8 other than US and Japan are: Germany $1,837.8 billion, France $1,293.8 billion, UK $1,234.4 billion, Italy $1,196.3 billion, Canada $726.1 billion and Russia $928.8 billion.

Pakistan has fallen significantly behind India in PPP terms despite the fact that the Pakistani per capita was ahead of India`s both by conventional calculations and PPP.

The Indian per capita in PPP terms in 1999 was $2,149 and Pakistan`s $1,757, though Pakistan is still ahead of India by $20 in conventional calculations -- India $450 and Pakistan $470. (PTI)

Assad_K #139

Assad , i would appreciate if you could give point wise rebuttal of the issues raised by me in the previous mail and this one.

a) If Pakistan was so confident of winning the plebisicte in 1947 what prevented it from vacating Kashmir and forcing a plebisicte. Surely Nehru would not have gone to UN to ask for Plebiscite knowing he will lose!!!??

b) About the judge who was promoted. Kindly let the forum members know if a Hindu/sikh/christians can become the Chief Justice of Pakistan, Chief of Army staff, Air staff, naval staff??? How come Pakistan discriminates when Quran treats everybody as equal!!!

c) How come the minorities have vanished from pakistan??? The minorities emigrated or vanished into thin air but how about their religious places temples, gurdwaras, churches. Surely the concrete structures did not emigrate to US!!!

These are very uncomfortable questions Sir.

JN Dixit , one time ambassador to Pakistan had this to say On national TV about Pakistani texts, maybe you can confirm this.

In english texts we have

a for apple

c for cat

and in Paksitani urdu text we have

the urdu J for Jalim ( despot) with a photo of a sikh

the urdu K for Kafir (nonbeliever) with a photo of a hindu with a tikka on the forehead.

This is the staple diet of education for the average pakistani!!!! and yet you have the gall to talk about minorities.

Hello,

I came across this site today for the first time, and found the posts very interesting. In particular, I found Faruk`s posting to be very similar to my current views, as well as those of a number of my Indian friends. I have never been interested in india-pak politics, and have never attended any ethnic function in 12 years of living in the US. However, i recently found myself writing a cheque of $200 towards the anti-terrorist ad campaign (in NYT and elsewhere). I think the pakistani state is waging war on india through the backdoor and, in this situation, i should contribute towards my country.

Pakistan`s military advertises aplenty. Whatever skills the generals might lack, it is definitely not in advertising.

The generals in 1971 had advertised to the point where many an ordinary Pakistani citizen had been fooled into thinking that the army was into rape and murder in East Pakistan to save Islam!

The generals had successfully advertised during the Ziaul Huq zamana to convince even a superpower like USA that all the drug peddling and gun running were to save the free world from the clutches of Communism. General Pervez Musharraf is just as adept in the game as were ``Field Marshal`` Ayub Khan, Generals Yahya Khan and Ziaul Huq.

General Pervez Musharraf advertises that there can be no peace till ``Kashmir Banega Pakistan`` even as he claims with a straight face that the time is not right for repatriating the stranded Pakistanis (aka ``Biharis`) who have been rotting in Geneva Camps in Bangladesh for the last 30 years.

The ``Biharis`` themselves were victims of the skillful advertising of the ruling oligarchy in pre-1971 era when they willingly played the cat`s paw for it. Needless to say, the generals unceremoniously discarded the hapless ``Biharis`` like the rind of a squeezed lemon after the 1971 debacle when the ``Biharis`` were deemed to be no longer useful.

The Generals are now advertising that Jammu & Kashmir must be ``libereted`` while ``Biharis`` must continue to rot in refugee camps. And they seem to be good at advertising because they seem to have managed to fool many an ordinary Pakistani with their advertisement. Too many Pakistanis have been taken in by the slick advertisements of successive regimes to believe that Pakistan will be a ``far far better place`` as soon as Kashmir becomes part of Pakistan!

But slick advertisements cannot fool all the people all the time. Here is the write-up by a journalist who isn`t:

The News International, Pakistan

Wednesday, September 13, 2000 -- Jamadi-us-Sani 14,1421 A.H



Is Musharraf running out of patience with the press?

By Amir Mateen



NEW YORK: General Musharraf has left the Pakistani expatriate community confused, alarmed and nervous -- all at the same time. His over 90- minute ``talkathon`` before the Pakistani community at the Grand Hyatt was an eye opener in many respects.



It could well have been a budget speech by Shaukat Aziz. So replete was it with figures of all kinds ``the percentages and ratios about success stories in every sector`` that it seemed Pakistan was on the road to become an economic superpower in another six months, if it was not already one under the able military government.



Evidently, the economic and social miracle that the general reveled about was not in consonance with the gloomy reports that the

expatriates receive from back home. It was nothing short of a paradise that the general claimed to have brought about in Pakistan. The corrupt will be rooted out, the colonial reign of DCs and SPs will be ended, people will get become the masters of their own wholesome, lively and rich destiny. It was like, as they say, the lion and the goat drinking from the same pond.



The contrast painted by Musharraf was strikingly different from the daily reports that pour out about the economic hardships, the ever- rising inflation, and the outward influx of money and people from Pakistan. It was obvious that Musharraf, like his two predecessors in power, is beginning to live in the mythical world created by the bureaucrats so adept at promising moon by their glitzy presentations.



Benazir could parrot out a plethora of million statistics in one breath, all of them proving how great her government was doing, towards the end of her last government. The expatriates still had fresh in their mind equally tall claims made by Nawaz Sharif two years ago at the same venue in New York. He too got a thunderous applause from, interestingly, almost the same audience.



But the alarming thing for fellow pen pushers was Musharraf`s

explanation for this gap in myth and reality. Like Benazir and Nawaz Sharif, he too contended that all those negative reports that they read are the creation of corrupt journalists. In fact, Musharraf regularly echoed the incompetence of journalists, their unprofessionalism, corruption and deliberate conspiracy to undermine the military government during the course of his five-day visit. He repeatedly talked about journalists accepting money for writing against the government, trivialising issues and becoming a tool in the hands of the vested interest.



``Either the general is not accustomed to the grilling that he had to confront in New York or he is finally running out of patience with the Press,`` a senior colleague could not resist saying. It is yet to be seen what these outbursts have in store for the community.



To be honest, there is some truth about a grain of people masquerading as journalists accepting money for their writings. But the biggest source of corruption in the field of journalism is the government itself. A sizeable chunk of money from that white elephant called Information Ministry is spent in buying journalist. The Musharraf government has the list of all those working for the government and its civilian and military agencies. For a start, why can`t they release those lists. And press freedom is not a luxury that we owe to the military government but a right that we have won through the decades. The stifling of that right may be the last thing that the military government can afford at this stage.



Whatever the consequences, the general feeling is that General Musharraf has become hostage to the sycophants who are searching for scapegoats to cover up their incompetence. Some evidence of this came to the fore when Begum Inayatullah was asked by a journalist what she thought about Musharraf`s statement that he was not cut for politics and would leave once his job was over.



``That might be his opinion, but we would not let him leave the country like that,`` she was quoted as saying. ``The country needs him around and we will make sure that we convince him on that.`` Frankly, it is Ms Inayatullah who needs Musharraf more for her job than the country needing Musharraf. And that may be true of most cabinet members, none of whom could ever dream about getting elected in any direct elections.



General Musharraf returns home an angry man. He was denied a one-to-one meeting with President Clinton. He is disappointed because Clinton skipped Kashmir in his speech while amply discussed Burma and East Timor. The only solace may be a photo-op at the reception given by Clinton. The source of the statement that President Clinton appreciated Pakistan`s handling of Kashmir is the general himself.



So nobody knows what actually transpired between the two. His chagrin may have been accentuated by the tiff that has developed between Bangladesh and Pakistan. So far, the most positive outcome of the visit has been the IT conference and the creation of the targeted $50 million fund. But the cynics around here would like to wait before passing their final judgement on this. The earlier initiatives about all those billion dollar MoUs and IPPs did not turn out to be the way we were promised. So let this project pass the test of time.

Interesting articles from one of my favorite writers, Brian Cloughley. I think he is rapidly becoming an internationally recognized expert on Kashmir, and the Pakistani and Indian armies.

``Kashmir dialogue

Brian Cloughley

At the much-vaunted and completely unproductive Millennium Summit of the UN in New York, India`s Prime Minister Vajpayee said on September 8 that ``terrorism and dialogue do not go together.`` ``Absolutely right,`` the world nods sagely; ``there should be no dialogue with terrorists.`` (Except in Northern Ireland, the Philippines and Sierra Leone; and that is just at the moment.) But hold on. Can this be the same Mr Vajpayee who only eight months ago ordered his foreign minister to negotiate with a bunch of murderous thugs who killed an Indian citizen in cold blood in the course of a airliner hijack? Is this the Mr Vajpayee who last month ordered his home secretary to conduct dialogue in Srinagar with the Hizbul Mujahideen group of terrorists? Of course it is.

What Mr Vajpayee meant, of course, was that on no account will he have a meeting with General Musharraf until Pakistan withdraws support for militants operating in Indian-administered Kashmir. Pakistan says it will not cease assistance to the militants, while claiming that its aid is limited to diplomatic measures and `moral support,` whatever that is.

It may have been noticed by readers that I am something of a supporter of Pakistan. When such hypocritical outfits as the Commonwealth and the European Union leap up and down about ``restoring democracy`` and impose sanctions on Pakistan while propping up African regimes whose despotic leaders act despicably and ruthlessly, then I comment accordingly.

When the red-bearded garden gnome of Westminster, the awful Robin Cook, and his troll-like henchmen bounce and shuttle from disaster to shambles in conducting Britain`s foreign relations while continuing to castigate Pakistan for getting rid of the Nawaz corruption-Raj, then I become quite vexed. But my eyes are not blinkered or blindfolded, and if it is necessary to criticise Pakistan, I will do so. And I criticise Pakistan, here and now, for its assistance to militants waging war in Indian-administered Kashmir, because that assistance is not limited to diplomacy and moral support.

During a visit to Srinagar in April, I was briefed by, amongst others, the Corps Commander, Lieutenant General Mukherjee, a most civilised officer. (I can imagine him getting on terribly well with his peers in Pakistan, if they could but meet socially; what a stupid world we live in.) This was a hard-sell, of course, because the Indians regard me as a card-carrying adherent of Pakistan and want to convince me that Pakistan is indeed giving training and equipment to various militant bands.

It was a soldier-to-soldier meeting: frank, friendly and informative--and the evidence of Pakistan`s support to the militants was compelling. There would have been no point in producing fake figures or spurious claims because General Mukherjee knows well that there are other sources available that could contradict his statements if these were incorrect. There was a bit of exaggeration, but in the past four months, I have called in some accounts around the world and have carefully examined what I have been told, and am convinced that there is support to the militants by Pakistan.

This is not to say that the Pakistan army provides instructors in military skills in the militants` camps in Afghanistan or Kashmir. (It may do so, but no hard evidence has been given me of such activity.) Nor is there evidence that militants` trucks call at army ordnance depots and load up pre-owned AK-47s, gift-wrapped and with an extra free barrel for the holder of the lucky ticket. It is a little more subtle than that, and it appears the militants` cash--and there is plenty of it--comes from strange international donors and the Afghan drug-trade, and that weapons are provided from Afghanistan, where military training certainly takes place....

(The News, Pakistan)

The remaining article is available at http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/sep2000-daily/13-09-2000/oped/o5.htm

Ferozek: #156: I agree with you that there has been quite a bit of activity going on behind the scenes. I had mentioned that around a month ago, when the name of Farooq Kathwari came up. Pakistan has already stated through its foreign office that it has no territorial ambitions over Kashmir. It will accept whatever the people of Kashmir decide. The Hizb based ceasefire was also on the encouragement of the Pakistani government. There were no domestic uprisings (apart from the odd statements from some religious parties) in Pakistan in response the above two actions.

The peace ball in Kashmir is still where it has always been, i.e. in India`s court. There can only be peace in Kashmir if India decides there should be peace, since geographically India controls the part where the problems are occurring. So far, India has not even committed to talk to Pakistan; much less work out a solution (which will be a long extended process, in and of itself). I am not sure what the Indian motivations are behind this lack of action. It could be due to domestic pressure. Or it could be due to the fact that India knows if it starts talking to Pakistan and the Kashmiris, the plebiscite issue will come up. And the Indian govt. is quite convinced that it will lose a plebiscite quite overwhelmingly.

If you look at things from the Indian point of view, it has a lot to lose if it starts discussing Kashmir. Even the Lahore Declaration actually sidelined Kashmir, and only mentioned it once. What motivation does India have to solve the Kashmir problem? The only one I can think of is that Kashmir is having an adverse effect on the Indian economy, armed forces and foreign policy. The question is whether these effects are adverse enough for India to start a series of discussions, in which, even in the best case Indian scenario, any solution will result in a loosening of India`s grip on Kashmir. If the Kashmiris through their freedom struggle have created enough of a nuisance value to where it is India`s interest in letting go of Kashmir, then India will do so; otherwise it will not. I think the general Indian society has already alienated itself from the Kashmiris. If the Indian govt. were carrying out a Kashmir-like operation, in say Bombay, there would be quite a bit of an outcry in India. However, no one in India seems too pushed about the Kashmiris.

People continue to think of Kashmir as an India-Pakistan problem. Even if India and Pakistan are able to sort out the problem between them, it will not really be a long-term solution. Any long-term solution will have to be based on the long-term desires of the Kashmiris themselves. The effect of the religious volunteers from Pakistan is being largely over-emphasized in this whole conflict. Primarily because it is in India`s intereste to portray Kashmir as a battle between Pakistan and India, and not as a freedom struggle. Third parties can only augment a freedom struggle; they cannot be the cause of it. Otherwise, these volunteers could start a freedom struggle in any city in India.

If the Pakistani groups were the main problem in Kashmir, then India would have held a plebiscite long ago, and opened up Kashmir to HR organizations, to expose Pakistan. The fact that it is not doing so is proof that the actual problem in Kashmir is the alienation of the common Kashmiri from India, and vice versa. It is true that Track-II diplomacy has been going on between India and Pakistan. Hopefully, it will continue. However, it has never worked before, and I doubt it will work now, on its own. One can only guess at what is actually being discussed (otherwise it wouldn`t be Track-II).

There are a few things which I am personally quite certain about regarding Kashmir: Pakistan`s part of Kashmir will never become a part of India; India`s part of Kashmir will never become a part of Pakistan; any attempt at a military solution will result in disaster for both countries; regardless of what Pakistan does (even if it accepts every demand that India puts forward), the Kashmir problem will not go away from India, until India decides to solve it with the Kashmiris through dialogue and not through military actions.

The only other option for India is too completely suppress the Kashmiris into submission. It has not been able to do that so far. Perhaps if Pakistan is out of the picture, India would be successful in doing so. Currently, India is trying to decide whether it can take Pakistan out of the picture completely, and then suppress the Kashmiris into submission. If India feels it can succeed in this line, it will adapt it. If not, then I don`t see what else India can do but to discuss Kashmir with the Kashmiris, Pakistanis, and any third party. This will eventually result in Indian losing a significant amount of control over Kashmir (if not outright indpendence of Kashmir).

Let`s see which way India decides.

What is there to be so excited about a US study looking into various scenario and published by ``Outlook India``. This report is at least 6 months old and its excerpts were published in Pakistani daily, ``The News`` and I recall commenting about it during some discussion at Chowk.

This is just a study and perhaps leaked by the State Department with some objective of US foreign policy. In my opinion, its purpose is/ was to pressurize Pakistan into signing CTBT and stop supporting Taliban. Moreover, Pakistan`s nuclear capability is considered a threat to the long term security of Israel.

It is good for US to consider all probabilities, and this is one case of probabilites. What threatens US lot more is the break-up of Russia and control of Russian nuclear arsenal since Putin`s thinking is unpredictable. Just before the Russian recent elections, there was a run-away best seller in Russia. It was written by Communist presidential candidate Zyuganov and among its supporters were Moscow Mayor Luzhkov and previous prime minister Primakov. That book also dealt with possible future scenarios from Russian point of view. Zyuganov strongly aupported a possible Eurasian geographic allaince between Russia, China and India. It is rumored that Putin also likes this idea.

Also consider the failed attempt by US intellegence to bring down Chineese Communist government through student unrest leading to Tian-an-main square face off. It is precisely the fear of Russian plan to strike a Eurasian alliance and failure to control China through ``democracy movement`` which has led to the cozying up of India-US relationships. Pakistan is a small potato in this future outlook for US and niether the IT successes of India are the primary reason for this friendly relationship. Indian government knows their new found importance for US too well and would like to extract some mileage from it in terms of regional issues, vis-a-vis Pakistan.

Pakistan is currently in no position to influence these large geo-political games. Pakistan do have certain cards which, if played wisely, can influence the outcome. Before Pakistan can play any of them, they will need to put their house in order. 1) Stop arming, training and supporting Deobandi-Wahabi based fundamentalist groups. If they are powerless against them, create and support the majority Pakistani Barelvi sunni groups who can easily counter and succeed rather easily against deobandi-wahabi axis. The Barelvis are in majority in Pakistan and generally not radical (read Asif Naqshbandi`s interacts in this regard). They are home grown and not influenced from middle east or Iran. There are signs (read Khaled Ahmad`s article in this week`s TFT) that Barelvi power is coalescing under couple of leaders and this may have the backing of Pakistan establishment. 2) Control export of Islamic fundamentalism to Russia and China. 3) Withdraw support from Taliban. 4) Present a secular model of governance.

After that start discussing the Eurasian plan throgh think tanks and other government agencies and show interest in joining it. Pakistan will have to vastly improve its image and relationship with Russia and China to bring US back to at least even handedness vis-a-vis Pakistan-India. It is niether India nor USA holding the keys to asian future; China is holding the key. If China succeeds in controlling East Asia on one hand and in allaince with Russia on the other, Pakistan will tilt towards them in a split second, no matter what happens to jihadis and Islamists. On the other hand India can not be simultaneously pleasing to USA and China-Russia. Let us wait and see next 20 years which direction Russia takes; a Gore Vidal prediction of Russia joining Western alliance and Christendom or Eurasian sphere as some anti-west Russian visionaries would like.

India and Indians have so many things to worry about before thay can have the last laugh at the proposed demise of Pakistani state.

More USA and India push against Pakistan, more Pakistan will tilt towards Russia. And if it comes to survival, Pakistan will opt for presenting Afghanistan back to Russia-in a silver platter.

Naveen #176

The comment is how many Indian films do you see daily.

If India is able to even sustain the current IT, it will be good.

Is Chinese example not enough for Americans to give the same role to India.

May be for Indian euphoria, think tank, published a report to sustain Vajpayee Government, which is doing the job of Americans much easier.

When I had no TV and my neighbour brought TV in his hut, he was acting like you.

I`m responding to Mr. Rehan`s message

``Make Pakistan recognize Israel and become it`s friend and India will be buried so quickly that no Hotel-Motel dollars or Silicon dollars for that matter will be able to save the day. Mark my word on it. Should Pakistan do it? Not until the Peace-Agreement is concluded.``

What if pakistan recognizes Israel, nothing will happen. The number of countries recognizing Israel will increase by one. Other than I don`t think anything will happen. Why will Israel push India (this year India-Israel trade is going to cross 1.2 billion dollars) aside just for the sake of a terrorist , economically weak and an undemocratic country like pakistan. Please Just think twice before challenging something.

NOTE: FORIEGN POLICIES WON`T CHANGE OVERNIGHT. WE NEED SOME CREDIBILITY FOR THAT CHANGE TO HAPPEN.

Advertisement may work in the short term but will never work in the long term if it tries to sell falsehood. You cannot fool all the people all the time. The basic problem in Pakistan is that its elite (whose crown jewel is the military) has always managed to sabotage the interest of the country in its zeal to maximize its gains. Those that had despaired at ``Field Marshal`` Ayub Khan`s ``October Revolution`` of 1958 had a feeling of deja vu when General Prevez Musharraf ushered in the ``October Revolution`` of 1999. Peace will come to the subcontinent when Pakistan`s ordinary people refuse to be moved by the skillful advertisements of the country`s top brass.

Pakistan`s army has always managed to usurp a disproportionate share of the country`s wealth for itself at the expense of the country. No, Pakistan does not lack in advertisement skills. It has them in plenty. But it has channelized the advertisement skills so that the generals can feather their own nest. ``Kashmir Banega Pakistan,`` for example, is not the voice of the residents of Jammu & Kashmir where a multireligious people had a history of peaceful coexistence for centuries. ``Kashmir Banega Pakistan`` is a slogan coined in the cantonments of Rawalpindi and Lahore. Pakistan`s army has a vested interest to keep alive tensions at all costs to make itself look indispensable for the country. To this end, they are willing to destroy the pluralistic tradition in Jammu & Kashmir, Pakistan`s military is able and willing to fight for Kashmir to the last Kashmiri. It is more than willing to hire mercenaries from abroad toward this end.

A letter to the editor in DAWN hit the nail on the head when it hinted at the superb advertisement skills of the military to preserve its own interests. Pakistan`s military will continue to use its considerable advertisement skill to preserve its perks and privileges by blaming it all on India. But, at least the following letter writer in DAWN wasn`t fooled:

DAWN, Karachi, Pakistan

08 September 2000 Friday 09 Jamadi-us-Saani 1421



Letter To The Editor

by M. SALEEM, Lahore



The worth of a general



THIS is with in reference to Humayun Gauhar`s and Maj (R) Ishtiaq`s arguments regarding some details of the assets owned by most of the generals. Generals of the Zia and post-Zia era would normally possess a choice residential and a choice commercial plot both in the defence housing societies in Karachi and Lahore. Various other schemes would also benefit a general by at least two more plots.



Before a general`s retirement, he is also allotted approximately a two- kanal plot of land for building a house in the most expensive area of any cantonment (like Sarwar Road in Lahore Cantt).



In addition to the urban property, a general is also allotted 50 acres of agricultural land. This practice is not new, it started soon after independence and became more and more widespread with the passage of time. These are the visible assets. Far bigger are the invisible assets depending upon one being at the right place and at the right time.



The biggest source of corruption are the internal and external defence procurement deals. Whether the armed forces would ever be able to eliminate corruption in civil departments can be judged from the level of corruption prevailing in the MES and in defence purchases. What is the worth of a general? All the assets put together, a general is worth close to Rs100 million.



Just compare it with the assets of a much more qualified university professor with a doctorate who would own not more than Rs5 million at the time of retirement. If anyone is in doubt, he should remember the seven plots of land declared by the CE himself. One also wonders what sort of taxes do they pay as hardly anyone declares his rental income or pays the wealth tax. If they are somehow made to reveal their income tax/wealth tax returns for the last five years, unbelievable facts would come to light.



M. SALEEM

Lahore

For a much more balanced view compared to the
peyote induced hallucinations in Outlook, it
is more important to read about what is really
bothering India in today`d Hindu at:

http://www.the-hindu.com/stories/05132524.htm

Wake up and smell the coffee!

Ras

naveen, Asim Hayat,RR

If this `hegemon` worth hundreds of millions of dollars in Hindu nationalist propaganda may ask a simple question before returning to her Indian govt-funded subversive activities on the `disputed territory` of chowk:

What on earth does an Indian magazine publishing a report on a US government document have to do with `Indian obsessions` with `Pakistan`s demise`?

btw, if a Pakistani newspaper has published it, am I allowed to rest my own case regarding the Pakistani elites` obsession with Pakistan`s demise?

Sadhana

folks

check out this news at dawn , sep 13 2000

Outlook reveals US-India nexus against Pakistan

NEW DELHI - A futuristic United States study has anticipated a military alliance between India and the United States targeting Pakistan and its nuclear weapons during next 12 years.

A US Department of Defence Report unveiled by India`s largely circulated weekly the `Outlook` has visualised many futuristic scenarios much to the delight of Indians.

The scenarios include `the US launching air strikes to destroy Pakistani nuclear facilities and Indian attack on Pakistan leading its disintegration and disappearance and creation of an expanded Indian Confederation or Super state.` Written by the US Under Secretary of defence (Policy) the 147-page study known as `Asia-2025` was distributed in limited circles. Over last few years, it has become clear that US defence planners are now shifting their focus from Europe to Asia where they would wish to contain the threat of an economically-resurgent China. This according to the report will lead the US to seek closer alliance with India.

Though Rand Corporations`s Ashley Tellis, one of the architect of the study avers that this report should not be construed as the official policy document, it has, however, left little to imagination, the way US think-tanks funded by Indian and Jew industrialists are heading in their beliefs towards Islamic nations.

The study was held at Naval War College, Newport, Rhode Island, between July 25 and August 4, 1999 and included at least 15 US think-tanks. The report said that nuclear tests by the Vajpayee government coupled with India`s emergence as global IT superpower are bound to lead to a radical rethink on US defence alliances.

The `New South Asian Order` unfolding in the year 2010 in the US study predicts collapse of Pakistan in the year 2010 plagues with economic crises, ethnic conflicts and government`s helplessness on the law and order front rendering it increasing unstable. `Sindhis, Baloch and Pathans, who have long resented a Punjabi-dominated Pakistan, rebel. Mohajirs take to the streets. Islamic extremism adds to the instability in two forms-Taliban`s destablisation efforts and the growing power of the Jamaat-e-Islami party,` the study says.

By 2010, Pakistan is totally paralysed and India moves into Azad Kashmir. The Chinese in support of Pakistan begin mobilising along India`s eastern flank between Nepal and Bhutan to sever the Mizoram-Nagaland and Assam-Sikkim outpost of India and threaten to use `all available means to stop Indian aggression`. This US sends naval forces to the Bay of Bengal and warns China to stay out, the report speculates.

Fearing that Pakistan may use its nuclear weapons, India launches a unsuccessful conventional strike on the former`s nuclear capabilities. Pakistan retaliates by launching nuclear strike against Indian forces along the border. In order to save nuclear weapons to get seized by Islamists, the US strikes by deploying deep penetration warheads launched from B-2 bombers to destroy Pakistan`s remaining nuclear force. In consequence, China backs off on the northeastern front, adds the imaginative study.

Indian army now moves into Pakistan. The country disintegrates and the provincial parliaments of Sindh, Baluchistan and North West Frontier Province vote to join the Indian-led confederation. Punjab, now isolated is now forced to merge with the Indian Punjab province,` dreams the US futuristic scenario.

Dismemberment of Pakistan now has a cascading effect across Central Asia. Afghanistan is attacked by its neighbours-Iran, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, who annex the territory controlled by their own ethnic groups.

The study says the disappearance of Pakistan helps the energy pipelines from Central Asia via Iran, to the energy hungry subcontinent. Iran becomes the main transit country and Karachi the main port to the East Asian markets.

In the end, the US discovers unexpected partners in India and Iran. Both these countries take the enhanced role to protect sea-lanes for oil deliveries, reducing US responsibilities in the Indian Ocean and the Gulf.



any comments ??

Yet another tirade of wet dreams by the Indians in their outlookindia magazine. The article claims that the writeup was conducted by the US secretary of defence studies codenamed Asia 2025. To date, no one, (even the indians) have been able to authenticate the source of the article, and if it has indeed been published elsewhere.

I rest my case about Indian obsessions with Pakistan`s demise... Not that we would give a toss about what happens to their miserable lot.

To Play The Nukebox Tune

If US think-tanks had their way, India’s most cherished dream, to emerge

as a superpower, would be a reality. Harish Mehta looks at three extreme

scenarios - of Pakistan being swallowed by a US-backed Indian

confederation, Sino-Indian hegemony and a win-win China - conjured up by

an American study.

``The United States of America uses its B-2 bombers in the year 2012 to

launch conventional air-strikes to destroy Pakistani nuclear facilities in a

bid to prevent the nukes from falling into the wrong hands. The

extraordinary US action follows an unsuccessful Indian conventional attack

on Pakistani nukes, and a retaliatory Pakistani nuclear strike against

Indian border forces. This sparks the disintegration and disappearance of

Pakistan, and creation of an expanded Indian Confederation or

Superstate.``

THIS is not some Nostradamus indulging in apocalyptic visions. It’s just

one of the many futuristic scenarios culled out from the ``Asia 2025`` study

- a 147-page opus - conducted by the US under secretary of defence

(policy). Written last year and distributed in limited circles, these

documents show that US defence planners are now shifting their focus

from Europe to Asia where they would wish to contain the threat of an

economically-resurgent China. This may in future lead the US to seek

closer alliance with India.

2010-12 A.D. Pakistan near collapse Face-off over Kashmir Pak

uses nukes on India US takes out Pak Nukes

Rand Corporation’s Ashley Tellis, one of the 15 top-guns of American

policymaking who took part in the study, told Outlook: ``These are

long-range perspective studies. Their chief virtue is that they help

policymakers think about alternative futures which would otherwise escape

them under day-to-day pressures.``

2013-18 A.D. Pakistan accedes to India India is superstate India,

Iran, U.S. edge China out

Held at Naval War College, Newport, Rhode Island, between July 25 and

August 4, 1999, the study was meant to explore what Asia might look like

and what challenges it might pose to US defence and national security

planners till the year 2025. The participants realised that the scenarios

were speculative and cautioned that they were not predictive. ``Rather they

are highly imaginative descriptions of things.``

2010-25 A.D. Indonesia fragments US intervenes Sino-India pact US

retreats India/China in control

An Asian diplomat in Bangkok added: ``The remarkable thing is that India

has become such a major factor in US defence policymaking.`` The nuclear

tests by the Vajpayee government coupled with India’s emergence as a

global IT superpower are bound to lead, sooner or later, to a radical rethink

on US defence alliances. What this means is that the US will soon see

India as a partner of choice.

2015-25 A.D. China flexes muscles Offers India deal S. Korea,

Japan push US out India S. Asia hegemon

Scenario 1

The Day India Ate Pakistan

The ``New South Asian Order`` scenario begins unfolding in the year 2010

with the imminent collapse of Pakistan, where ongoing economic crises,

ethnic conflicts and the government’s helplessness on the law and order

front render it increasingly unstable.

``Sindhis, Baluch and Pathans, who have long resented a

Punjabi-dominated Pakistan, rebel. Mohajirs take to the streets. Islamic

extremism adds to the instability in two forms - Taliban’s destabilisation

efforts and the growing power of the Jamaat-e-Islami party,`` the study

says.

In contrast, India successfully combines political decentralisation and

economic reforms, generating rapid growth based on steep decline in

population growth and a massive influx of foreign direct investment.

Simultaneously, China’s economic resurgence and belligerence in East

Asia brings the US closer to India. As Pakistan slides into anarchy, the

US remains focused on North Asia with its forces deployed in Japan and

South Korea.

By 2012, the Pakistani state is totally paralysed and loses control to

Islamic extremists who infiltrate Kashmir. ``India demands that Pakistan

end the Islamic incursions. When Pakistan fails to respond, India moves

into Azad Kashmir. Pakistan issues a nuclear ultimatum for Indian

withdrawal from Azad Kashmir. The Chinese echo Pakistan’s ultimatum

and begin mobilising along India’s eastern flank between Nepal and Bhutan

to sever the Mizoram-Nagaland-Assam-Sikkim outpost of India, and

threaten to use ‘all available means to stop Indian aggression’. The US

urges restraint, and despite other flashpoints, the US sends naval forces to

the Bay of Bengal and warns China to stay out,`` the study speculates.

Fearing that Pakistan would use its nuclear weapons, India launches an

unsuccessful conventional strike on the former’s nuclear capabilities. Next,

Pakistan launches nuclear strikes against Indian forces along their

common border, driven by a ``use it or lose it`` rationale.

The US intelligence shows that Islamists in Pakistan are seizing the

remaining Pakistani nuclear weapons. This goads the US to launch ``a

conventional strike on Pakistan’s nuclear sites``.

``The extraordinary US action is also motivated by a desire to preempt a

full-scale nuclear exchange between Pakistan and India. The US strikes by

deploying deep penetration warheads launched from B-2 bombers to

destroy Pakistan’s remaining nuclear forces. Faced with the reality of

US-Indian cooperation, China backs off on the northeastern front,`` it adds.

``Total anarchy prevails in Pakistan. The Indian army moves in to restore

order. As the country disintegrates, Pakistan’s regions accede

incrementally to India. The Sindhi, Baluch, and North West Frontier

Province parliaments vote to join an Indian-led confederation. An Indian

Confederation emerges. Isolated Punjab is compelled to join the

confederation and merges with its Indian counterpart to form a greater

Punjab province within the confederation,`` the scenario goes.

``India’s central government grants extensive internal autonomy to the

confederal units in exchange for control over their defence and foreign

policies. Economically vibrant, the confederation is recognised as the

regional hegemon and an economic magnet for trade and energy flows.

The disappearance of Pakistan and the emergence of the Indian

Confederation have a cascading effect across Central Asia. Afghanistan, is

dismembered by its neighbouring states - Iran, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan

- who move in to annex the territory controlled by their own ethnic groups.``

The study says that Pakistan disappears by 2020, and the Indian

Confederation emerges as a regional superstate. With Central Asia

stabilising, energy pipelines from Central Asia, via Iran, to the energy

hungry subcontinent are constructed. The East-West orientation of energy

and commerce in Central Asia gives way to a new North-South orientation.

Iran becomes the main transit country and Karachi the main port, to the

East Asian markets.

It sees India becoming a ``regional hegemon``, and US planners are now

urging the US defence department to anticipate a heightened Indian

economic and strategic role in the region, raising the question: What does

all this mean for the US presence in Diego Garcia and the potential for

military cooperation with India?

In the end, the US discovers unexpected partners in India and Iran, who

take on enhanced roles to protect sea-lanes for oil deliveries, reducing US

responsibilities in the Indian Ocean and the Gulf. According to the study,

China could respond to India’s emergence not by challenging it head on,

but by increasing its activities in the Russian Far East and Indochina. It

may, thus, challenge US interests in East Asia. It could, for instance,

strengthen its position in Indochina and the Bay of Bengal, making

Southeast Asia the future arena of conflict and competition.

And, if India does become a future US ally, what kind of development,

regional and global, would be needed to cement these ties further? Tellis

has a pithy list: ``Collapsing Pakistan, aggressive China, threats to Middle

East oil, deeper Indian-US economic engagement, high Indian growth

rates, Indian willingness to participate in combined peace operations with

the US.``

Scenario 2

Hindi-Chini Bhai Bhai, At Last

Asecond scenario is the creation of a ``New Sino-Indian Condominium.`` In

the lead-up to this development, the US tries but fails to reach a strategic

arrangement with India till 2010. India resents US inattention, which feeds

the Indian national psychology of wanting to be seen as a great power.

``In a blatant act of self-assertion, India conducts a new round of nuclear

tests in 2008, precluding any possibility of moving forward in a strategic

relationship with the US. Growing anti-hegemonic sentiments stimulate

India to accelerate its military buildup, shifting attention increasingly

towards naval power,`` the study says.

As the US initiative towards India founders and eventually collapses after

India’s nuclear tests, and as Indonesia’s fragility becomes more

threatening, India and China initiate strategic discussions on regional

cooperation to secure sea-lanes, control regional unrest, and common

concerns.... The anti-hegemonic undertones of their discussion gradually

surface as an explicit shared objective in displacing the US from the

regions they seek to dominate.

Just how deep is US mistrust of China in matters relating to defence?

Tellis says the mistrust is growing. And, how does this sit with US

economic interests in China? He responds: ``Conflict not yet reconciled,

and will not be for a long time to come since China does not yet pose

significant direct threat to the US or US interests.``

In 2014, Indonesia fragments, leading to a slaughter of wealthy Chinese,

as separatist rebels seize Indonesian gas and oil production. ``Everybody

except China and India want the US to act`` to restore order, the study

says.

In 2016, during the run-up to a US presidential election, a small band of

Islamic militants, intent on hurting the US, fires a series of powerful

missiles at a US destroyer and frigate passing through the narrow Lombok

Straits near Indonesia. More than 200 US sailors and marines are killed.

All presidential candidates pledge to bring American troops home and the

US announces immediate cessation of operations and orders US ships to

pull back.

In 2017, Chinese and Indian leaders intensify their discussion of ways to

eject US presence from the South China Sea, where China wants to

establish hegemony, and from the Indian Ocean, where India wishes to

establish its supremacy. They tacitly agree to cooperate and decide on

joint action.

India moves rapidly into the Straits of Malacca, and China takes control of

the Lombok and Sunda Straits and reopens them to international traffic.

China also occupies the disputed Spratly Islands and Natuna gasfields.

India’s navy takes command of the Malacca Straits by cracking down on

the pirates.

Most countries, including Japan, praise China and India for their joint

action. Between 2017 and 2025, the US presence in the Pacific and Indian

Oceans rolls back, and America’s allies reach a new accommodation with

China and India.

``The tensions between China and India are not eliminated by their dividing

much of Asia into hegemonic spheres. But for the time being, cooperation

suits both perfectly..... The New Sino-Indian Order begins.``

The study suggests that Sino-Indian cooperation might be impeded if the

US establishes a working strategic dialogue and common geopolitical

objectives with one partner. ``India appears to be the more logical choice of

the two,`` the study says.

US may need to rethink its strict non-proliferation policy, the study says,

because some states like India which acquire nuclear weapons may

actually contribute to the US national security goals. ``The US may be

faced with a trade-off between selective proliferation and regional

presence,`` the study says.

Scenario 3

Their Chairman is Our Chairman

THIS scenario is hinged on the fact that China’s long-term goal is to

dominate Asia and this doesn’t change whether China is strong or

becomes relatively weak due to domestic economic and political troubles.

Beijing is now determined to control Taiwan, the South China Sea, and the

Senkaku islands (also claimed by Japan).

Well before 2025, China will have established effective control of

Continental East Asia and peninsular Southeast Asia will fall under its

thrall. From 2000-2015, China increases its military presence in the South

China Sea, establishing several naval bases there. asean (Association of

South East Asian Nations) fails to act collectively against Chinese

expansionism.

The study, very clearly says, ``Next, China temporarily and adroitly

neutralises India by recognising Indian hegemony in South Asia and the

Indian Ocean. China withdraws from its de facto bases on Burma’s Indian

Ocean coast. In return, India tacitly recognises China’s hegemony over the

South China Sea, further undermining Southeast Asia’s will to resist

aggressive Chinese encroachment.``

Another scenario, entitled ``China Acts`` sees a full-blown naval battle

between China and the US, with the latter losing lives and aircraft. This

happens after the US withdraws from Japan and South Korea by 2015

following ultra-nationalist protests in those countries against US presence,

ending in a series of terrorist attacks against US forces. The damage is

done and the American people support a pull out of their forces from East

Asia. China takes a series of steps to cash in on the fact that the US has

effectively no forward presence in Asia.

``India sees the US withdrawal as an opportunity to elevate its position in

the Asian prestige hierarchy. India, which has been developing a blue

water navy, accelerates its programme and is capable of out-of-area

deployments. Like the Japanese, it also remains open to new defence

relationships and an enhanced diplomatic role in regional security issues,

particularly in the Persian Gulf,`` the study says. Here, India’s role is

enhanced but it remains subordinate to China’s strategic interests.

What also emerges from these scenarios is the fact that India becomes

crucial to the United States strategic thinking, and could emerge as a

major regional power.

Participants

Chairman: S. Enders Wimbush, Hicks & Associates

Lt Col (USMC) Michael . Brooker, HQMC PP&O

Victor Cha, Georgetown University

Nicholas Eberstadt, American Enterprise Institute

Aaron Friedberg, Princeton University

Graham Fuller, RAND Corporation

Stuart Gold, Science Applications International Corporation

Capt (USN) Karl Hasslinger, OSD/Net Assessment

Juli A. MacDonald, Hicks & Associates

Rajan Menon, Lehigh University

Maj (USA) Thomas J. Moffat, National Ground Intelligence Center

Ross H. Munro, Center for Security Studies

Abram . Shulsky, Consultant

George K. Tanham, RAND Corporation

Ashley Tellis, RAND Corporation

An observation -- when the US declares a nation to be a ``terrorist state``, this results in specific actions that the US must take. For example, economic sanctions, restrictions on visas, etc.

I do not think that India has the legal notion of a ``terrorist state`` defined.

So, you see the seemingly absurd situation of India wanting the US to declare Pakistan a terrorist state, while still wanting to continue its own cultural, economic exchanges with Pakistan, whatever there are.

-arun gupta

http://www.usnewswire.com/topnews/Current_Releases/0911-119.html

Washington Should Recognize and Embrace India as a World Power, Study Says

To: National and International desks

Contact: Patti Mohr of the Cato Institute, 202-789-5293

WASHINGTON, Sept. 11 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The following was released

today by the Cato Institute:

-- India Could Be Useful Partner -- Or Troublesome Foe; Washington

Should Recognize and Embrace India as a World Power, Study Says

India as a World Power:

Changing Washington`s Myopic Policy

by Victor M. Gobarev

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-381es.html

http://www.usnewswire.com/topnews/Current_Releases/0907-131.html

http://www.brookings.edu/fp/projects/south_asia.htm

Salman, Perhaps you should send the $2000 to the 4 year old heart broken little girl in the advert looking at her dead father, slain because of his religion. God (irrespective of your religious orientation) is having a good laugh at us fools!

Guys, guys before you get hot under the collar read this article - from the Indian Express. Before you shoot off that reply contemplate on what is happening around you. Keep in mind the `limited war concept`, `hot pursuit idea`, `east pakistan`, `1965` etc etc (one article think it was in Dawn yesterday (11 september 2000) alluded breifly to this.

The article is available at http://www.indian-express.com/ie/daily/20000912/ina12052.html

Now take a breath deeply, expel that hot air into that bag you have. Get some cool air and think.

The world is moving so fast that we are being left behind (RAS is clever and he has been saying these things but then he is not able to divest himself of his elitist baggage (a legacy of his stay in Bangladesh)) - and read this from Rediff.com

http://www.rediff.com/news/2000/sep/12arvind.htm

The Indians are fast and the world is moving at a terrible pace, we are stuck in an ancient world, a world of outdated ideas and notions.

The mantra is `think` and `educate ourselves`

rather it should be `I am educated hence I think and hence I am a pakistani` not `I am literate, cannot think and hence I am a pakistani`

Umairr #149,

To aap ka khoon khoon our hamara khoon pani, wah mian wah!

Re: bd # 164

Thanks....I will!

Re: RR # 168

Are you kidding me! Pakistan inking a treaty with Israel? Won`t happen as long as the day is long!

Sarcasm aside, I agree with you! It will solve a lot of problems, but India will not sink, because a loss of India, as well as Pakistan, will create a huge geo-political vacuum in the region and that Uncle Sam wants to avoid!

Ciao!

A couple of observations:

1)If we judge the time Indians spend on Chowk, a Pakistani site by origin mind you, defending their country versus Pakistanis doing the same, Salman Lodhi`s cause will need more than a few million bucks to undo the official and unofficial propaganda of the Hindu fundamentalists who rule and/or support India in violating all kinds of Human Rights.

2)It is not the opinion of the public that counts but the opinion of the powers-that-be who really rule that counts, i.e., the wealthy, the powerful interest groups, the MNCs, the PACs, the military, the elite of this or any country. They decide what is best for them and for their country. Democracy is just a BS word to keep the people happy about their illusory power of self-governance. And the opinion of the ruling elite is not shaped by some ad in NYT or WP or LAT. They look for their self-interest first and if a country like India with at least a hundred million middle-class consumers, and a rich domestic campaign contributor lobby, needs their support, you bet they will do what`s right.

You can scream all you want but the interests of the ruling elite comes first. In the case of Israel, for example, the power of Wall St, Hollywood, Academia, and most importantly the print and electronic media causes the decision makers in DC to push the country`s best interest aside and suffer the `73 embargo.

The Jews have actually managed to convince the Americans that making the entire Muslim world their enemy, including the majority of Oil producers, is worth supporting Israel. A country of a few millions that has no intrinsic national-interest value for Americans other than that it`s ``the only democracy in the region`` and it`s ``America`s only true ally`` in the Middle-East. How? They ARE the decision makers in this country thanks to their hold on key levers of power.

Make Pakistan recognize Israel and become it`s friend and India will be buried so quickly that no Hotel-Motel dollars or Silicon dollars for that matter will be able to save the day. Mark my word on it. Should Pakistan do it? Not until the Peace-Agreement is concluded.

Rehan.

its really disheartening to see atalji embarking on that veiled but obvious tirade against pakistan at the UNGA. he was there, as a leader of a nation of a billion people to assert its case to become a permanent member of the security council. and as such he ought to have excercised caution and exhibited matured statesmanship... bitterly, he ended up sounding as if addressing a rural indian election rally...

point is, the prime minister`s references to pakistan in his speech at the UN, at the Asiatic society, and the recent bout of slandering advertisement campaign all put together creates an illusion that india is just tooooooooo much obsessed with pakistan... sure, india needs to project her case vis-a-vis pakistan international fora; but at the moment we are overdoing that with such an undignified frenzy, that we are very fast approaching a point of diminishing returns...

Manoj #137

You are right on point.

Muslims DON`T get shot in mosques in India.

But you did not tell us, where you shoot them):

It was just a joke.

Muslims are not shot in India.):

I think I made a typing error again.

Let me try.

Muslims are shot in India for the sake of democracy and secularism.

I think I have found it.

Eureka.

Anamika # 142

Tell me a way, when soldiers are controlled tightly and still fight a protracted war as in Kashmir.

You have heard you cannot have your cake and eat it too.

So it is a necessity for Indian Governemnt to give free hand to soldiers, with all its moral, mental and physical implications.

If you don`t approve it, then ask your Government to find a political solution.

FerozK #156

You have an interesting thesis there, perhaps you may want to consider the possibility of under-secretary level talks continuing on since 1999 in the capital of an European country. In this lovely metropolis, the sheer density of ISI, RAW, MI5 and CIA agents, with a potent mix of khalistani`s, Bangladeshi`s, Afghans, Indians and Pakistani is so comical, it has to be seen to be believed. Talks have been going on continuously between India and Pakistan. A case in point, have you ever wondered why the regular artillery duels between India and Pakistan never exceed 8 kilometres on either side of the border/LoC, while the actual ranges of the artillery is much more? You may want to factor in this point when considering the statement of the Indian COAS. Another point to consider is why was the ambassador to the court of St. James removed post haste? IMHO, the man was a buffoon as compared to the Washington Ambassador who is absolutely brilliant but now has been asked to pipe down her efforts.

Sincerely

bd

Scout #148

Well said.

Faruk #150

When are you going to shake your head.

Off course the pot will break.

I think Salman Lodhy has a valid point, though not put across in a terribly diplomatic manner.

Blunt truth is often more unpalatable than the choicest of falsehoods. Good article Salman. The price of keeping silent in these media-days is akin to political self-immolation. Gone are the days when one is presumed innocent till proven guilty. India`s approach in forwarding their causes in the world lobby (i.e US), are most commendable, and our efforts pale off in comparison in terms of the sincerity of our representation of our cause. Most of our foreign represenatatives costing our national exchequer obscene amounts of money, can hardly make a definitive and forceful statement(in clear, unambiguous English) under the glare of the media cameras. Rather than admitting their lack of knowledge about a certain matter, these spin doctirs take it upon themselves to prevaricate unnecesarily, thereby losing their own credibility and dignity of a nation, on prime TV.

Scout, i applaud you for taking on the myriads of Indian vultures who it seemed have descended on poor Mr Lodhy for speaking the truth, although in very abrupt words, throwing caution to the wind.

Here at Stanford, there is a server maintaned by a group of radical Indian students, who broadcast propaganda about Muslims and Pakistan and how we should be declared a terrorist country. The officials when approached about clamping down the propaganda, retorted that it was all about freedom of speech. The current steps taken by US indian communities to ingratiate themselves into the US lobbying system to have Paskistan declared a rogue state, is nothing but the case of the indians on Chowk living in their own microcosm, oblivious to the blatant reality of existence of their compatriots actions in US. I was amazed at the backlash of the plethora of the Indian-govt agenda based indians disparaging Salman`s initiative to put into words what quite a few of us were being forced to admit for the longest possible time; Pakistan needs better representation in international media.

On another note,.. i read with much dismay how PTV recently lost about 8.4 Million Rs in a failed bid to transmit the CEO`s five minute address from NY to Pakistan Live. Some Einstein in the CEO PR committee, worked out that a two hour window was needed to be able to transmit ceo`S Speech live. Sat time is expensive running at about Rs 70,000 per minute. The total cost of the fiasco is about 160,000 U.S dollars. I feel the opportunity cost of this debacle is two full page ads to counter the Indian ads printed some time back dishing dirt on Pakistan in the spineless NY times.

Another one for the birds from Rediff at:

http://www.rediff.com/news/2000/sep/11pmus1.htm

Ras

MacGupta re:150

Much obliged for the links. Could you please post the link for the last part when it comes out? Thanks.

Vijayamrit re: 151

The Palestinians, on the whole, also remained quiet `til somewhere around the mid-80s, when the intifada erupted.

Did Pakistan also have a hand in that?

In 1965 the Kashmiris did not rise up in repsonse to the agent-provocateurs that Pakistan had infiltrated.

Nontheless, Sheikh Abdullah felt that Kashmir would vote overwhelmingly to join Pakistan. He was

locked up for years.

So that was all that you got from the article? That the Indian Army was around before 1990? What about the statements it makes about the various

massacres and other sundry unpleasantness?

From what I`ve heard, there was some issue about (another) set of rigged elections that proved to be the figuratve straw that broke the

camels back. I`ll get back to you after reading about the actual origins of the uprising in 1989. Oddly, your claims are that

the Kashmiris are happy,. it is only foreign terrorists causing problems. Yet, as soon as the largest group, the Hezb, declared

itself open for talks, they - the largest militant outfit - were suddenly sons of the soil. And any article you read will state that the

uprising in 1989 was indigenous in origin, though there are indeed a sprinkling of foreigners now involved.

Faruk,

And there I was thinking the Kashmir problem was over 50 years old! There`s that li`l old UN Resolution, y`know.. dates back to well before 1990!

Controlling 5% of the US` wealth? Really?

The author is an adverising professional and obviously not schooled in finance. If not the author would have known this adage, ``Don`t throw good money after bad.`` Make better use of your $2,000/- Money can`t buy truth or suppress falsehood

Re: Umairr et el

In my last post, I had mentioned that Kashmir is a domestic issue. There is a thesis I am presently working on arguing that on an external level Pakistan and India have already settled the issue of Kashmir. They now have to convince their domestic groups of this realpolitik reality, because there are two debates on Kashmir: Domestic and Diplomatic (external). Hence, the so called Track Two diplomacy is such a viable tool inIndo-Pak debates, because it effectively bridges the divide between the domestic debate and its external counterpart.

It is the domestic debate which is fueling the crisis in Kashmir and hence, in the case of Pakistan, is responsible for the seemingly incoherent stand of Pakistan on the issue: seeking a peaceful resolution while engaging in armed confrontation with India. For India, it is denying talks with Pakistan, but doing nothing to discourage third party mediations. In IR nothing happens in a vaccum - for UK or Norway or and other country to suggest possible mediative help presupposes the proposition that there is a poliitcal inclination, on the part of Indo-Paks, to settle this problem.

Why is the Indian COAS suggesting that Kashmir can only have a political solution while a few months ago he was suggesting ``hot pursuits`` into Pakistan? What has changed? Where is the moderating influence coming from?

It is time that the serious Pakistanis and Indians stop believing what their media is telling them and start to read between the lines and the start paying attention to what is not said instead of what is being shouted daily! Some thing is afoot in South Asia...is it a case of the Holmesian dog that did not bark in the night?

Ciao!

reply to Faruk #153

Faruk, what is saddest about your note is the evidence it betrays about the lack of knowledge about who is terrorizing whom, who forcibly occupies a people and a land and how the entire mess began in the first place.

Be a participant against Pakistan and Pakistanis by all means, conduct any and all means of propaganda against us, declare war against us, - but DO base your convictions on truth.

Learn about what has happened in Kashmir from third parties (UNBIASED third parties - and they do exist in the form of books as well). I or others here will refer you to some sources, but only if you ask. (I will understand if you don`t). It would be much more useful if you tried hard to be unbiased in your search and reading and then attempted a productive dialogue here. Shocking as the concept may seem to you, the Indian media may actually have fed you lies.

(And yes, I am well aware of the falsehoods in the Pakistani media. This is why I suggest UNBIASED third parties)

faruk: #153: It is good to finally see an honest person.

A few exaggerations in your comments, however: The population of the US is around 275 million. If Indians constitute 1% of that population, then their total number would be around 3 million. That is a few times higher than the actual figure. Your figure of economic wealth is thus equally far off.

If you are going to hate someone, please don`t try to justify it, by stating that it is the other person who has caused you to hate them. That is quite condescending. If you are going to hate, just have the courage to come out openly, and hate. Very few people are going to believe your justifications for hatred.

Hello everyone,

I am new to chowk and this is the first time I have visited this site. I am one of those ``patriotic Indians the world over `` that Salman refers to in his article, who have contributed to the social/political and media campaign against Pakistan.

Well Salman and anyone who cares, till a few years ago I like many of my countrymen genuinely bore no ill will towards Pakistan or her people. I couldn`t care less, I was busy building my life.

We Indian`s have tried to believe that Pakistani`s are basically good people, but years of Pakistan sponsored terrorism has changed all that. We Indian`s are campaigning against Pakistan because we believe we are at war with you. We want to hit you where it hearts. This is not a war we chose, you imposed the Kashmir problem on us 10 yrs ago and we are fighting back.

We Indians are just 1% of the US population but control 5% of her wealth. We have a economy ready for take off, this is our moment in time and we will size it. We will continue to use all the resources at our disposal to create hell for you. After all your country is in a mess why should we not go for the kill.

I make no apologies for the actions of me and my friends, you asked for it youve got it. Now sit back and enjoy the music. If you think you guys can kill our countrymen and expect no retribution you are sadly mistaken.



Faruk

Umairr#149: I know it is not at all productive to respond to your posts here, you seem to be some sort of R. Van Winkle stuck in a world of your own. How can you say India attacked Pakistan in 1971 without any reason/provocation? Let me put it in your own words. ``Launching an attack

against a country that has not attacked one`s own country is also a crime``. What about the number of refugees pouring into all of east Indian states? My own father who himself was a refugee in Calcutta since 1964 due to extensive riots in E. Pakistan, had to support 8 extra mouths for ten months in 1971 from his paltry income as a middle manager in a private sector. For God`s sake try to be little bit more objective in your accusation. I was a child then, but I will never forget the terrors of those days! I am no fan of Indira Gandhi now, but we were hoping some miracles to occur so that our displaced relatives go back to their whatever ruins of their home. Do you see now the human faces of this kind of action taken by some fanatics in our lands?

The whole thing about India-Pakistan stinks!

SameerJb#

Have you heard about this (since you have heard about the inside story of Punjab), I do not remember in which Indian Magazine I read this (year`s back):

During the 1970 war, India had extracted a promise that Pakistan will accept the Line of actual control as International Boundary. The Pakistan`s PM (or whoever it was, sorry I do not remember) said he cannot do it then and there as he would loose all sympathy from Pakistani people but promised that he will declare it. Latter he completely betrayed that promise.

Assad_K#

The article also says that Kashmir was peaceful before 1990. Indian Army still existed. Do you wonder why? Gandhi, showed a non-violent way of protest why cannot people use it? How many people a government can put in Jail? A million? (I think to use Gandhi way of protest, one would need mass-support, and masses will only support if they had a real problem. I do think that now somebody in Kashmir can get mass-support for protest again India because of the decade long violence, but if peace is there for few years the mass support will erode.)

To Everyone#

Why do we go on arguing/discussing about Kashmir in such a disorganised manner. Is there a way here in chowk, Like a forum or something, where the points and counter points can be discussed in a systematic manner and disagreement clear. I think most of the arguments fall in two categories:

a)India-Pakistan Partition.

b)Right of people to choose their own country even if they can live peacefully with others.(Note: Hizbs are against partition Jammu and Kashmir against religious lines, atleast officially.)

To Chowk Editors or Anyone#

Does it happen in chowk that, they accept your article and never publish it (may be on rethought). How long does it take an article to get published?

FYI, Pankaj Mishra`s articles on Kashmir appear in the Hindu.

``Paradise Lost`` on Sept 3

http://www.indiaserver.com/thehindu/2000/09/03/stories/13030612.htm

``Destroyed Lives`` on Sept 10

http://www.indiaserver.com/thehindu/2000/09/10/stories/13100611.htm

Presumably, the third part will appear Sept 17.

2. Pankaj Mishra about his visit on Charar-i-Sharif five years after 1995, and finding no reconstruction there, seems to contradict what this recent news-report says :

http://www.timesofindia.com/today/07indi21.htm

New Chrar-e-Sharief shrine almost ready

3. About the DNA of the kidnapped British tourist - also mentioned in the article :

a. there are two missing British tourists -- Paul Wells and Keith Mangan.

b. in 1997 also, Indian labs. thought they had a DNA match, and the British did not agree.

Various newslinks about this :

http://www.expressindia.com/ie/daily/20000107/ian07030.html

http://www.the-hindu.com/fline/fl1702/17020100.htm

http://www.irishnews.com/k_archive/080100/news16.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk:80/et?ac=000403786014090&rtmo=LlS3iyLd&atmo=99999999&pg=/et/00/1/6/wbod06.html

http://www.indiaabroadonline.com/PublicAccess/ia-04072000/India/Mystery.html

The last link I found, which I have lost, dates from July, too, says that the Indian police have the case of Paul Wells and Keith Mangan still open.

-arun gupta

mohajir #145: Could you suggest what approach Pakistan should adapt in dealing with the people who were involved in the E. Pakistan tragedy? I am asking this question seriously, and not sarcastically.

Most of the people mentioned in the report are military personnel who are either dead or close to death. An enquiry into the actions of the politicians never took place in Pakistan, since Bhutto did not want to expose his own actions. Bhutto is also dead, and most of his partners in crime are dead or close to death.

I believe Mujib-ur-Rahman did not fare too well in Bangladesh. He is dead, and most of his colleagues are dead or close to death. I doubt India or Bangladesh will ever hold an enquiry into the actions of the Indian supported Mukti Bahni. However, if such an enquiry were held, it would be discovered that most of the people involved in that group are also already dead, or close to death. I also doubt India would ever highlight its own motivations for attacking East Paksitan, and getting involved in that conflict. Launching an attack against a country that has not attacked one`s own country is also a crime.

On the whole, I think Pakistan should make the Hamood-ur-Rahman report officially public. It should carry out an enquiry against the actions of the politicians active during that time also. It should offer an apology for the Bangladeshi civilians that were killed. The Mukti Bahni supporters should apologize for the innocent Pakistanis that they killed (one of my co-workers saw his whole family killed in front of him), as well. India should apologize for attacking Pakistan just to break it up. I do not think Indians attacked out of any sympathy for the Bangladeshis.

The final question would be to figure out what to do with the few people who are still alive, though close to their death beds. One option is to let them die in peace. The other is to bring them to trial, and let them present their point of view (which many weren`t allowed to do during the H. Rahman report), and then decide their fate.

I am hoping you posted your reply out of sympathy for the innocent people in Bangladesh who were killed. I hope it is not an attempt to use the deaths of the E. Pakistanis as a justification to put out pro-India propaganda against Pakistan. If it is the former, then I think I would have to support your stance of encouraging the Pakistan govt. to accept its past mistakes officially (I am not quite sure what that has to do with Kashmir, however). If your motivation is the later, then I would suggest that using one human rights violation (Pakistan`s actions in E. Pakistan) to justify another (India`s actions in Kashmir) is inhumane, in itself.

vitu #144,

Hi vitu. Welcome to Chowk. You`re in for a bumpy ride. Any thoughts on the Kashmir issue?

General exposed!

If any body doubts, please go thru the follwoing

Washingtonpost Article.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A465

49-2000Sep10.html

Pak media is expert in spinning everything but

dies it really help?

Cheer

Re: Veeresh #31 in The Morning Poem

For the benefit of all wishful thinkers from
the other side of the border:

http://www.outlookindia.com/20000918/coverstory.htm

And may the Ganjha be with all of us...

Ras

HYPOCRITE PAKISTAN !!!

Musharraf said to Bangladesh to forget the past. 30 years is a long time. Forget the Past and move forward. While it is 53 years still Pakistan does not want peace with India. Will Pakistan forget the past and accept 1947 division of Kashmir. He does not want to punish the criminals who massacred and killed 3.6 million Bengalis. He says Hamoodur Commission Report was not correct.

Chief Executive General Pervez Musharraf has said that the 1971 tragedy was not only a military but a political debacle as well. He made these remarks in response to a question about Hamood-ur-Rehman Commission Report (HCR) on Monday. ``Let`s forget the bitterness of the past and move forward,`` he said.

In answer to a question whether there would be trials as recommended by the HCR, General Musharraf replied tersely, ``No, certainly not. Something happened 30 years ago. Why do we want to live in history? As a Pakistani, I would like to forget 1971.``

He added, ``What happened then is nothing that any of us can be proud of. It was a debacle, not only a military, but also a political debacle. But why do we want to dig the past up?`` The Chief Executive said, ``as for the HCR, there was a vested interest involved there. The mandate given to the Commission by the man who appointed it was to look into the military debacle in East Pakistan. Why did it not look into the political debacle?``

As Bangladeshi Shahriar Kabir, a leading campaigner in bringing war criminals to trial, said ``it is an irony for Pakistan as regards Kashmir they want the past to settle the problem, but in the case of Bangladesh they want to forget it.``

Pakistan is not bothered on Human rights of Muslims in China or Biharis who have been stranded in Bangladesh for 27 years but is more concerned about Human Right abuses of Indian against Kashmiris, Christians, Dalits and Assamese and Tamils

In an interview with CNN on Friday Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina had called for fresh elections in Pakistan, saying the absence of democracy could not help any country. She had obliquely attacked Pakistan in her United Nations address and demanded suspension of Pakistan from the United Nations following the Commonwealth example.

http://www.dawn.com/2000/09/09/top4.htm

``People should have every right to elect their government,`` she said.

Musharraf, who seized power in an October coup last year, evaded questions on the cancelled talks during a press conference.

Musharraf concurred with Sheikh Hasina`s comments when referring to Bangladesh`s war of independence that one has to forget the bitter past and look forward.

``People of Bangladesh are our brother and we want friendly ties with them,`` he said.

Sheikh Hasina told CNN that war criminals should be punished.

``We cannot forget what happened to our people, our children, our women in 1971. So there is a demand that they should be punished,`` she said.

Bangladesh, the former East Pakistan, gained independence in 1971 after a nine-month bloody war.

Shahriar Kabir, a leading campaigner in bringing war criminals to trial, said ``it is an irony for Pakistan as regards Kashmir they want the past to settle the problem, but in the case of Bangladesh they want to forget it.``

chowk

hello to every body i am new to chowk ..

Washington Post Editorial

EDITORIAL

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46549-2000Sep10.html

By Arthur H. Davis

Monday, September 11, 2000; Page A23

While bitter enemies from Ireland to Israel are bowing to the dictates of peace and economic development, the threat of war in South Asia continues to loom large. The economy of Pakistan is sinking, yet the focus of the military leadership remains stronger than ever on Kashmir. Pakistan`s junta continues to concentrate all its resources on funding and fueling terrorism in Kashmir on the one hand, while on the other dashing domestic hopes for a return to a democratic and secular society.

Gen. Pervez Musharraf, the self-appointed chief executive of Pakistan, who also has the dubious distinction of being the coup leader and saboteur of the Lahore peace process, went on record saying that however the people of Kashmir decide their fate will be acceptable to Pakistan. The general also has reiterated his willingness to conduct his own talks with India at any place and any time on all issues, if Kashmir is included. Yet recent events clearly belie hopes that he intends to honor his words.

In late July the world welcomed the announcement of a three-month cease-fire and the offer of unconditional talks with the central government of India by the Hizbul Mujaheddin, the largest militant group in Indian Kashmir. Majir Dar, the Hizbul commander operating in Indian Kashmir, reportedly made this unexpected announcement after secret meetings with Hizbul followers and presumably with the group`s leader, Sayed Salahuddin, who resides in Pakistan.

To this, the Indian government exhibited a new and welcome flexibility by responding positively to the offer. Lt. Gen. John Mukherjee, commander of Indian forces in Kashmir, announced the cessation of all operations against the Hizbul, while senior officials from Delhi proceeded to Kashmir to discuss the modalities of talks with the Hizbul. Unfortunately, the prospect for peace was not met with similar alacrity by Pakistan`s military and fundamentalist religious leaders, who were clearly caught off guard by this show of militant independence. Pakistani security agents reportedly picked up Salahuddin shortly after the cease-fire agreement, while his Hizbul Mujaheddin was ejected from the United Jehad Council, the umbrella alliance of Kashmiri militant outfits. And while official Pakistani responses initially were muted, wholesale attempts since have been underway by the junta to employ its influence over the regional militants to derail the incipient peace talks.

On the night of Aug. 1, more than a hundred Hindus, many of them pilgrims, were massacred by Pakistani-backed terrorists. The massacre has been followed by the attachment of two deal-breaking caveats to Hizbul`s offer of ``unconditional`` talks. In a move the State Department has since termed ``not helpful,`` Hizbul has demanded a seat for Pakistan at any talks and also that those talks be conducted outside the scope of India`s constitution, thus allowing for a deal on Kashmiri independence. Indian leaders long have resisted both conditions.

It has been widely stated in Washington and other Western capitals that India must negotiate with the Pakistani military for a definitive peace to be achieved. But the question remains whether the army really wants peace. All three wars between India and Pakistan have been fought when there were military governments in Pakistan. A fourth, under the present military leadership, remains a possibility--this time with a nuclear shadow cast upon it.

The Pakistani military regime is exhibiting an almost pathological determination to keep South Asia in turmoil, doing little to curb Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism breeding within its borders, while scuttling others` steps toward peace.

During his visit to the region earlier this year, President Clinton threaded a needle of admonishing Pakistan for its support of violence in Kashmir while keeping the door open for engagement if it abated such activities. Unfortunately, his stern warnings have yet to exact much change. Pakistan`s intended destruction of the nascent Kashmir peace process requires a firmer response from the U.S. administration. Declaring Pakistan a terrorist state, and thus putting it on par with the terrorist groups it harbors and supports, would encourage the people of Pakistan to remove the military warmongers who have deprived them of sustainable development.

It is clear who wants peace in the region and who does not. Only by challenging Pakistan`s duplicitous ways will peace have a hope of winning.

The writer was U.S. ambassador to Paraguay and to Panama in the 1980s and has advised the U.S. mission to the United Nations on terrorism.

kassad #132

Thanks for the link. It is a fairly comprehensive write up. You may also search for a series on Kashmir at rediff.com from a few months ago. You will find there some unvarnished recounting of police atrocities in Kashmir. The murder of the 5 accused posthumously of the massacre of the Sikhs is shameful. The failure of the authorites to set up a judicial enquiry is not helping India`s image any. I believe that India should punish human rights violators hard. I also believe that India should try to do its best by avoiding such violations in the first place by not placing its soldiers where they are in great danger.

That said, I have no sympathy for those who have taken up arms. They have chosen that route and should they die along the way then so be it. Things get a little dicey when those who fight the soldiers and other security forces are sheltered by the local populace.

However, a proper investigation would also reveal the extent of shielding of the militants in each unfortunate incident. I wish India would be a more open society. That is the only way to preserve democracy.

Sameer:

``Let me repeat, every government in Pakistan is internally ready to accept LOC as permanet boundary and externally not; India is ready to accept LOC as permanent boundary externally (as long as it does not happen) and internally not.``

I think its exactly the other way round. India is ready to accept the LOC as a permanent border but Pakistan is not.

The day Pakistan agrees to accept the LOC as the border, the Kashmir issue will be resolved.

India is not officially relinquishing its claim to POK, only to use it as a bargaining chip if and when the dispute is resolved through negotiations.

Its Pakistan which is not willing to maintain the status quo, because its India which is in trouble Indian Kashmir. POK is willy nilly very much with Pakistan at the moment, so there is no incentive and no tangible gain as far as Kashmiri territory goes; for Pakistan to accept the LOC as the border. Thats why Pakistan in its present state of mind will not agree to the status quo. The least it wants is seccession of Indian Kashmir from India. Contrastingly the most India wants (officially it may state anything) is legalization of the status quo.

Satyavadi

Anyone notice that the primemover behind the NYT ads is a Pandit?

Sameer re: 129

I fear you may just have been added to the list of jehadis in the eyes of many! :-)

Manoj re: 137

b) *kaff *.. What exactly suggests to you that Pakistan would have lost a plebiscite in 1947/48?

Even in 1965 Sheikh Abdullah was saying that given the choice, Kashmir would vote for Pakistan!

Regarding Pakistan,

The point regarding sheer numbers of minorities has been brought up many times..

needless to say, the numbers of minorities have dropped. You may choose to believe it`s

ethnic cleansing.. I don`t know if it`s continued cross migration, pure higher birth rates

of Muslims, migration at thetime of partition, or any other factors (stats regarding 1947

figures seem to be pre-Partition.. or not?).

(Last I heard was a juge who could not be promoted since he was a Hindu!!!!)

Please keep up with your facts. It may interest you to know that the judge.. was promoted!!!!

Assad_K #132,

What an awful ad. What the hell is wrong with Desis.

Just to add to my previous mail.

a) The two nation theory as propounded in 1947 and on the basis of which accession of states was decided was dead and buried in 1971. Religion, as the Pakis sadly found was no glue to hold countries. If Pakistan is hoping to apply failed principles of 1947 to 2000, they can do at their own risk.

b) Many on the forum claim that Indians dont want Plebiscite because of fear of losing. Maybe then they should also ask why Pakistan did not create conditions for Plebisicte in 1947 ? was it the same fear ??

c) In 1947 the people of India had a choice betwen a secular democracy (India) and a tolerant democratic Islamic state ( Pakistan) as envisioned by Mr. Jinnah. Do the people have the choices today? Tolerant democratic Islamic Pakistan?? A country which has morphed into a mutant , rouge nation overrun by drugs,thugs, AK47;s is talking of free will of people. The point I am trying to make is that there were a set of options available to people in 1947 under a set of conditions. The conditions no longer exist today. What hope is there for Hindus, Sikhs, christians in Pakistan? or for that matter Muslims. Muslims dont get shot in mosques in India unlike Pakistan. it is not without reason that the Afgan-Paki area is the centre of gravity of terrorism.

Everybody talks of oppression of minorities in india. Can i have some answers to the following

a) What was the % of hindus/sikhs/christians in pakistan in 1947 compared to 2000?

b) How many Hindu/Sikh/Christian officers are there in Army/Airforce/navy/police?

c) What are socio economic indicators of religious minorities in pakistan?

d) Number of temples/gurdwaras/churches in 1947 compared to 2000?

e) What prominent posts are held by minorities in Pakistan. Last I heard was a juge who could not be promoted since he was a Hindu!!!!

Before Pakistanis go on a drug induced moral high, pl look at your country.!!!!

peace to all

as somebody said

India has kashmir and Pakistan the kashmir issue

A NATIONAL OBSCESSION,

Today is the death anniversary of the father of the nation, M.A.Jinnah. Dawn did report it on the front page of the internet edition. It is the day to reflect on the sacrifices of the freedom fighters, men and women who brought to existence a nation called pakistan, which most of the educated are vocally proud of, going by the posts on chowk. Such a solemn day should be devoted to introspection, a few moments of silence. But the editors of dawn know their clientiel, they know what a pakistani long to hear, day in and day out.

On the front page of the internet edition there are four reports of death. One is a bus overturning in india and killing thirty, sorry it is far away from kashmir, still it is prime news, a few more dead kafirs. Another is from srilanka, another from chechnia, another from kashmir... What a tribute to the father of the nation fron Dawn, what the people wanted.

Looking for a glorious tomorrow..

BLOOD THIEVES,

Here is a news item for the advertising guru, to make something positive out of. From dawn of today,

Forced blood donation

WHILE returning home from office after a tiring day a cousin of mine was forced by some volunteers of Fatmid Blood Bank to donate blood.

Although he tried to explain to them that he was exhausted and had donated blood to a patient only two months ago they said there was no harm if blood is donated again within two months.

They asked him to lie on a bedstead placed on the footpath and started their work. Then they offered him a glass of juice stored in a nasty cooler.My cousin felt severe headache and weakness all the way home.

When he contacted his doctor, he was strictly prohibited from donating blood before three months.

Blood is of course a valuable donation but there should be no compulsion.

MARIA TASNEEM SIDDIQUI

Karachi

///Poor Maria, she is talking about blood donation, how sad, they are robing people of their blood, blood suckers, the literal ones are alive and well and thriving in pakistan. Maria, what is in a name.

The authour states

``Entitled ``Jihad for Pakistan, agony for India``, will partly be funded (and take

serious note of this) by patriotic Indians the world over and the rest by the Indian Government``

I have not seen any evidence that this effort is funded by the Govt of India. Can anyone point me to the source of this information?

I disapprove of negative advertising but its just another weapon in putting pressure on the dictator to play ball the way the international community wants it to. The world will not let the economy of Pakistan collapse as it will increase the destabilisation of a destabilised country, but maximum concessions will be squeezed out before letting the country off the hook.

bd #114

I have provided a rebuttal of comparing Kargil with Siachen. You may read that in a previous link.

Talking of body bags, Pakis must remember that body bags in the subcontinent dont mean a thing. Value of human life is a big zero in the subcontinent. For a country like India with a population of 350 million in 17-35 age group, casualties in J&K are next to nil. Pl dont compare India/pakistan with USA/USSR. I would like to you to compare PAk army casualties in Kashmir as a % of your popuLATION. You will be surprised to know that 7 people were shot dead in UP during a Army recruitment after Kargil. The Army was expecting around 400-500 people at the recruitment site but around 2000 turned up. In the resulting chaos , police had to shoot to control the crowds who wanted to join the army.

The rampant unemployment in India/Pakistan provide more then required numbers to fill Indian Army ranks and Pak jehadi groups!!!!

I also recommend LOC as IB. as somebody said ` the kashmir party is over , get back to business`. I feel India may accept this formula but the Pakis who are riding the Jehadi tiger will find diffculty in dismounting. From a Indian point of view all it requires is a amendment to constitution. How about from a Paki point of view!!! Who would like to be branded as having bowed to the Kafirs???

So, to abruptly go back to the content of this article, hands up everyone who saw page A34 of todays (Sep 10th) New York Times.

If you missed it just click your browser to www.agonyofindia.com.

Vijayamrit re 104/107

Take a peek at

http://www.nybooks.com/nyrev/WWWarchdisplay.cgi?20000921036F

BTW, should we now refer to Vajpayee as Vajpy and Indians as Indoos or some similar pet names?

Re Sameer,Ferozk, and RSaxena

Allow me to participate in your discussion. I agree with the concluding part of Sameer`s post. However since I do not know about the talk between BB and Rajiv I pledge my ignorance of it.

You say:``There was an accord between Benazir Bhutto and Rajiv Gandhi in which Pakistan agreed to withrdraw its support for Khalistan in return for talks on Siachen. It is widely rumored that BB even gave away the plans, lists and names of Khalistani leadership and activists``

However it appears from a close reading of the above para that some of the conclusions that follow are made on the premise that BB actually withdrew support and ``even gave away names`` and that India did not reciprocate positively. Whether it was a truth, is shrouded in mystery as even the above para calls it only a rumour.

Now comming to my personal opinion on this subject. Sameer says that Pakistan can not trust India. Incidentally India also has the same problem with Pakistan. To some extent, some people are right in saying that Kashmir has become an issue of prestige for India. It is also true that India was losing much more in Kashmir even before 1989 that it stood to gain. So the present tenacity of India to hold Kashmir inspite of regular bloodbath is a bit baffling. The question can be partially answered on social, psychological and defence basis. From the ``defence`` POV, if an independent hostile state of Kashmir is formed, it will invariably look to Pakistan or China for economic assistance and will become a puppet in their hands. Indian states of Punjab, and Haryana as well as Delhi will lay exposed and vulnerable to the hostile neighbors which is the worst nightmare of India. From religious POV there are many revered Hindu shrines like Amarnath and Vaishno devi, in Jammu & Kashmir and Hindus in other parts of India will resist any attempt to give it away. On a psychological basis, many Indians still remember partition with great agony, so much so that thought of any further partition of state makes them emotional and adamant.

Well, if I know anything about the Indian Public opinion, most of the people have reconciled themselves to the reality that they may never get PoK back except for some hardliners. Even RSS recently suggested trifurcation of state into Jammu, Kashmir and Leh. This I guess was prompted by the understanding that in the event of any partition at least Jammu and Leh is retained. Indians will be more than happy to buy peace for giving up the claim on PoK. However I guess both sides do not trust each other for the fulfilment of their parts. There is an atmosphere of distrust and suspicion and Indians can not trust Musharraf especially who designed Kargil misadventure.

I agree with Vijay`s post #119 that it seems to be important for Gen. Musharraf to have Vajpayee sitting infront of him talking. Whether, they actually resolve some thing or not is not of much consequences. It also seems to me that Indian leadership has realized this gimmick that offer to talk is just a ploy to gain legitimization. It is also certain that Indians at large will not forgive BJP if it shakes hand with the ``author`` of Kargil as aptly pointed out by ``BD`` in his recent post. Above all, it is almost certain that talks will not resolve any thing. Indians just have to learn to live with the likes of Gen. Musharraf and keep high alert.

Ferozk #115, RSaxena #121:

It sounds good to me to accept LOC as permanent international boundary and move on with rest of the important bilateral as well as more important internal issues for both Pakistan and India.

However, I see many problems here by just looking back at history. India has repeatedly expressed its desire for Pakistan to withdraw from supporting jihadis, to which Pakistan seems to be resistant, before any bilateral talks can resume. There was an accord between Benazir Bhutto and Rajiv Gandhi in which Pakistan agreed to withrdraw its support for Khalistan in return for talks on Siachen. It is widely rumored that BB even gave away the plans, lists and names of Khalistani leadership and activists. Well, in return, they talked, talked and talked with no resolution. India was not ready to give an inch and Pakistan was not ready to give an inch either. What it means is that if the boundary is not clearly marked and there is not enough Pakistani defenders at Siachen front, India can move further ahead--because boundary is not clearly marked. Not only that India had actually moved across clearly marked LOC at various points, though not too much into P-Kashmir territory. India was not even willing to withdraw from these areas.

Now if Pakistan accepts Indian demand to pull the plug on jihadis in return for bilateral talks, I assure you, it will be just talk, talk and more talk because niether side will budge. Pakistan knows that. That is why Pakistan is willing for third party mediation, which India flately refuses. It is quiet understood that any third party will ask 1) Pakistan to withdraw jihadis; 2) Accept the LOC as international boundary. It is beyond wildest imagination that a neutral third party will hand over Kashmir to Pakistan. Now tell me who is more resistant to LOC as international boundary. India is against third party mediation because India does not want LOC as permanet boundary.

Actually India eyes all of Kashmir according to the deal with Maharaja Gulab Singh (or Hari Singh?). Except for Advani, Bajrang Dal and RSS, India does not openly ask for it because it will raise the temperature and force international community to mediate. On the other hand, Pakistan projects all of Kashmir as theirs based on TNT but internally they have given up on it. They are more than willing to accept LOC as permanent boundary, though their is some opposition to it from hard liners and religious parties.

I am certain, if Pakistan unilaterally withdraw jihadis, there will be talks. But at the same time, seeing Pakistan`s weakness, their will be more voices within India demanding P-Kashmir. Now this is an issues which is more important to Pakistan than any Kashmiris. It controls waters of rivers Sindh, Jhelum and Chenab. About 20-30 percent of electricity is generated by Mangla Dam which is in P-Kashmir. There is no way for Pakistan to think of such a scenario even remotely. Pakistan will use all its power to defend it, or better never to make it as a bilateral issue. Pakistan`s invasion of Kashmir in 1947-48 was as much to do with water as to TNT based desire to include Kashmir in Pakistan.

Let me repeat, every government in Pakistan is internally ready to accept LOC as permanet boundary and externally not; India is ready to accept LOC as permanent boundary externally (as long as it does not happen) and internally not.

At present, a status quo favors India, because Pakistan is economically bleeding more than India, in relative terms which India would like to see it continued.

It comes back to the question: what is good for Pakistan irrespective of India? Pakistan desperately wants to settle this issue without giving an incentive to India--to demand more.

A good starting point may be a unilateral Pakistani inspired cease-fire by some jihadi organization. A pull back completely should be reciprocated by an official Indian disclaimer to P-Kashmir and simulataneously Pakistani disclaimer on I-Kashmir. India and Pakistn must give up their respective claims on each others` territories. Otherwise talks without a desire to settle this issue once and for all will lead nowhere, India would be considered succeeding in Pakistani withdrawal of jihadis without agreeing to any time frame or anything for that matter.

FerozeK #115: I agree.

I think eventually, Kashmir will be split up into three pieces, according to the wishes of the Kashmiri people in each of the three areas. Azad Kashmir will remain with Pakistan, and will become a part of Pakistan officially; not a semi-independent state bordering Pakistan, as is its current status. The people of Azad Kashmir are quite happy with Pakistan. They are getting a pretty good deal. In fact, they are getting a better deal within Pakistan, then most people of the provinces that actually constitute Pakistan. There are quite a few affirmative action programs that benefit them. They are also well integrated into the Pakistan military and other govt. branches. Many, if not most, of the influential Azad Kashmiris have married into Pakistan. As a whole, they are waiting until a final decision is made on all of Kashmir, before officially deciding which way to go. However, speaking from personal experience, I believe they will remain with Pakistan. That is what I would vote for.

The people of Jammu and Ladakh will vote to remain with India. These are not Muslim dominated areas, and they usually vote in the elections that are held by India in Kashmir. They would not like to end up as a minority in an independent Kashmir.

This brings us to the Valley. That is where all the violence is occurring. It is hard to tell which way the people of the valley will vote. One thing is for sure, they will overwhelmingly vote to separate from India. 11 years of killings has ensured that. Now, will they vote for independence, or to join Pakistan is a tough call. My guess is they would vote to join their cousins, across the border, in Azad Kashmir. Azad Kashmir would then vote to join Pakistan. So indirectly the Valley would vote to join Pakistan.

However, I do not think India would ever accept the Valley joining Azad Kashmir. So they would not be given that option. The only option they would have is some kind of partial or complete independence from both countries. Had India played its cards correctly, and given them this kind of an option ten years ago, they may have eventually joined back with India. It would be impossible for a land locked independent Valley to survive on its own. They may have gone right back to India. However, I do not think this will happen now. They will learn to somehow or the other to survive on their own.

Regarding domestic policy: Pakistan has already announced that it has no territorial ambitions over Indian Kashmir. I think a big majority of the common folk in Pakistan is actually concerned about the people of Kashmir, and not the land. Had the Kashmiris been happy with India, I do not think too many people in Pakistan would complain. After all, there are other areas in India that have a concentration of Muslims who are happy with India, and very few people in Pakistan are concerned about them.

The problem is that Kashmir has become an issue of ego for India. India gains absolutely nothing from the Valley. The violence there is actually depleting the Indian economy, not adding to it. Killing civilians always brings out the worst in any military (Bangladesh, Vietnam, Afghanistan, and now Kashmir are good examples). India cannot raise the Kashmir issue in any international forum because it knows that legally Kashmir is not considered a part of India, etc. etc. However, it is using Kashmir to define the identity of India, for some reason. Much like teen-aged girls are used to define the identity of a family in Pakistan. If the girl does anything against the family`s wishes, she is killed under the banner of honor killings.

If the valley of Kashmir is given some sort of independence, I think 99.9% of the Indians won`t even feel the difference. It will not affect their day-to-day life in any manner. All the Muslims in India will not, all of sudden, start demanding independence (if they do, then India has far bigger problems than Kashmir). India will not break up. The only noticeable change that will occur is that things will become a lot more peaceful and happier in South Asia.

However, I am not sure how the Indian govt. can be motivated to sideline its ego regarding Kashmir for the time being. I don`t see it happening. In fact the only time the Indian govt. has shown interest in talking about Kashmir is when the Kashmiris have been able to create a high degree of nuisance in Kashmir through their freedom struggle.

I think if Pakistan can continue to highlight the legal, moral, ethical, and humane side of Kashmir in international forums, then sooner or later, India will have to start talking. The important thing for Pakistan to do is to not claim any territorial rights over Indian Kashmir, not to carry out any offensive military actions in Kashmir (even if India does so), and to continue offering talks to India anytime and at any place. The combination of the international pressure and the freedom struggle currently going on in Kashmir will eventually force India to talk, and discuss peace. After all, India cannot continue militarily suppressing the Kashmiris for the next 50 years; can it? At some stage, it will have to stop.

kris #102

I would not respond but you are distorting facts.

Yusuf Youhanna in our language is Joseph (I am sure) and Jonah (which I am not sure).

Should I start calling my Grandfather Moses instead of ``Musa`` to please you.

Why are you so pissed up by Yusuf Yohanna. Because he was instrumental in defeat of India in Asia cup at Dhakka.

By the way, is this one one the reasons for killing priests and burning churches):.

May be you can adivise him, not to score against your secular and democratic country): because that is ISI and Jihadist conspiracy against the secular and democratic ideals):

``India knows that if it talks to Pakistan, it will lose out in the end``.

It is true that India has no incentive to change the status quo unless it will eventually end up being better off.

Likewise, we can say ``Pakistan knows that if it stops supporting the terrorism, it will lose out in the end``.

That is the real failure. Each side is trying to put the other in the position of being less worse-off (which is not quite the same as better-off) if the other should yield.

-arun gupta

Coming to think about it, please do advertise. Take out a Super Bowl ad., full page ads. in the New York Times. Hire expensive firms to lobby Congress.

At hundreds of thousands of dollars a pop, it leaves less money for arming the militants.

Think about it, advertise and save lives !

-arun gupta

Where is Z.A. Sulehri and Altaf Hussain Qureshi. They will be delighted to see this post.

I am pretty sure Mostly Indian and a few Pakistani responders will be on this board.

Government of India and Government of Pakistan spokesman.

What if India is propagating, is it going to stop imminent shattering of India ?(unless it reverts to secularism) or prevent the rising states from demanding more share. OR alienation of minorities. Let them dig their grave.

Let them do their job, if they think it is right.

We should do our job, regarding better education and economics.

It is Government`s job to respond. Common man needs bread, education, clothes and housing and should put energy in that direction.

rsaxena #117, ``But why don`t you get the hell out of Kashmir and do the same? You sure as hell need to do it even more badly...given how precariously close you are to missing a loan payment and creating massive devaluation and inflation.``

My stance on the Kashmir issue has been the same and will remain the same, I think the land belongs to the Kashmiris and that`s the end of it. Yeah, so it will become another poverty stricken country like Bangladesh or Burundi. So people will die out of hunger, at least they won`t die at the hands of power-hungry countries. Why don`t we pick the lesser of the two evils?

BUT if both India and Pakistan have a problem with it, they should sit down and talk about it. Isn`t that the only solution, instead of killing innocent people aimlessly?

So go back to Delhi and ask your government why it`s not willing to have talks with Pakistan before waving the flag of righteousness and peace.

As for loan payments, massive devaluations and inflations, what the hell? Do I look like some sort of Pakistani economic policy maker? Where the heck did that come from?

Or was that just a negative ``filler`` item that is a trademark of your posts?

Ref: Umairr #79

I apologise for the ``have lost faith and any hope of rationality (in the Pakistani government)`` remark, without further elaboration it does sound very arrogant. Self-righteousness is indeed the first sign of ignorance.

What I ment by the remark is that we have failed to see any pragmatic flexibility from the Pakistani side which would lead to a decrease in violence and an increase in trust.

Essentially the elements of the pakistani strategy are:

1)Maintain a high level of violence in the valley so as to maintain a high level of Indian forces.

2)Subject Indian troops to high levels of stress and wait for the inevitable violation of civil and human rights (the BSF, CRPF jawans are no paragons of virtue)

3)Use media outlets to highlight all such violations to force an international response and grab the high moral ground.

4)Maintain disassociation of official institutions from the Muj groups to ensure deniablitiy.

5)Divert supplies to pro-Pak groups and undermine pro-Independence groups.

6)Keep offering talks, as any talks now without a decrease in violence only legitimizes the current level of violence.

I don not see these policies changing anytime soon. Do you disagree?

I do not deny the atleast one genuine grudge that population has which is of the denial of political expression through rigged elections, which is a serious violation of a fundamental right. But other than that where have the Indians gone wrong (post 1947):

1)There has been no attempt to alter the demographic balance, no non-resident of Kashmir can buy land in the state. Contrast this to Chinese attempts in Tibet and Xinjiang.

2)There has been no attempt to supress Kashmiri religion, language or literature. Contrast this to the Turks in Kurdish ares of Turkey.

Re:Umairr#108

Instead of a defensive role that you suggest, Pakistan can actually play a very constructive role in Kashmir, if it chooses to do so. Basically there is a stalmete in Kashmir and people on all sides are tired of the conflict. The Hizb ceasefire episode openly showed that ordinary Kashmiris are involved in the insurgency and India recognizes that. A smart strategy for Pakistan should include the following:

1. Get all the mujahideen groups to declare a unilateral ceasefire and initiate dialouge with India - A ceasefire will force talks to start. Even if Pakistan is not directly involved, it controls the mujahideen and it can participate from the background. There is no risk because you can always call off the ceasefire. At least if the violence stops for a while, the talks can progress ahead.

2. Declare a willingness to work out a negotiated deal that will be ratified in separate referendums to be held in India, Pakistan and Kashmir - That will show the seriousness of Pakistan to solve the problem and the recognition that a creative solution has to be developed.

3. Exhibit strict control over the jehadi elements in Pakistan and stop them from making fire breathing statements that will discourage the peace process.

4. Announce a genuine desire for reconciliation with India - A vision for a post Kashmir subcontinent would be very helpful with Indian public opinion. For e.g. increased trade, relaxed visas, end to propaganda, equal access to all in Kashmir, possible economic and military alliance with India etc. If the CE presents a vision like that, it will jumpstart the desire on the Indian side to settle the Kashmir issue.

Re: Ferozk #115

I am all for accepting the LoC as international border for now and moving on. But I doubt Moosh will settle for that.

In any case, an independent Kashmir squeezed between India and Pakistan will become the Burundi of South Asia. India will not trade with Kashmir (not a big deal since we`re trying to move away from arts and crafts industries) and impose an economic embargo. Pakistan is too deep in the economic gutter to provide much assistance even if it wanted to (I doubt it will in this scenario). That ensures a fast track highway to hell for the economy of Kashmir. Believe it or not the Indian government pours in massive funds to ensure the place has electricity, food, and access to water....

One more things about Kashmir.

Before 1990, there had been election in Kashmir, where people have participated and accepted India. Does it not in itself reflect a willingness of Kashmiris to accept India at least once? What is the Pakistani`s views about it? Were all the assembly elections in Kashmir a farce?

(I assume referendum will be done once..and how can it be done, when Pakistan doesn`t vacate the POK ``Pak occupied Kashmir``. If Pakistan takes 50 years to do its part, why cannot India take another 50 year to do its part. Why do Pakistani think, that UN asked Pakistan to vacate Kashmir and not India?)

The real reason why Musharraf wants to talk to India is this:

If Vajpayee accepts him, the world will be more kinder toward him. This is the reason, why he is dying to talk to him. Kashmir is an excuse.

India has talked to Pakistan before.

There is the part of moral upmanship too. How much Army was present in Kashmir before 1990? (before the Russian went away from Afghanistan).

As it was said, ``dialogue and Terrorism do not go hand in hand``. Army is there because of terrorism and not vice-versa. I hope there was a way to proove what is the cause and what is the effect. I think ``terrrorism is the cause and Army is the effect`` and not vice-versa, we can argue for ever about it.

There is a difference between secession and freedom. We call it Secessionist/terrorist and you call it ``freedom fighters``. They have the same right as other Indians do and what do they want ``freedom`` from. ``Freedom`` is only required, if you do not have the same right as others. See what Pakistan did to G.M.Syed. I found it from a web link at http://members.unlimited.net/

TO THE ADVERTISING SPECIALIST,

Here is a news item from pakistan which can be used in an ad to demonstrate the bravery of the pak police.

Chimp slaughter

ACCORDING to Dawn story of Sept 7, Manzoor Ahmad, a `law enforcer`, shot dead an unarmed chimpanzee! Reminds me of the `police muqabla` stories we read in newspapers every now and then. The incident is sad, indeed. Sad not only for the widow (of the chimp) but also for all animal lovers in the country. The fellow was a fine specimen of chimphood and the spouse adored him. It is difficult to comprehend how she must be feeling in the noisy and polluted environment of Karachi Zoo. She looks so helpless lying on the floor with an apple in her hand and tears in her eyes. (See picture above).

Even though the ``neighbors were confused and did not know how to deal with the beasts until they decided to call the police``, the police should not have reacted the way they did - shooting an unarmed adversary in ``self defence``. In any case, it was not their jurisdiction and they should have called ``Dr Aamir Rizvi and compounder Fareed Zaidi who used tranquilizer shot`` on the surviving female, thereby preventing another chimp slaughter. The story also says that ``the female was severely beaten up and was under immense stress.`` Who beat her up? What was her fault? Eve-bashing? Male chauvinism? Or what would you call it?

In our society it is considered a brave thing to kill an animal. But let me tell you, there is always this fear of the wild animal which prompts you to kill it before it gets you. Remember the press stories some years back about the leopard killed in Swat and another in Satellite Town, Rawalpindi? The poor creatures had wandered off during the night into ``enemy territory`` and paid heavily with their lives.

S.M. SHAHID

Karachi

Good night my friend.

Re: scout

``To all the Indians who are reading this:

Instead of wasting your precious time putting Pakistan down, go send reformists and doctors to India to resolve it`s civil and health problems.

Do something to help those poverty/disease stricken people. They need your attention more.``

I`ve said that a 100 times. But why don`t you get the hell out of Kashmir and do the same? You sure as hell need to do it even more badly...given how precariously close you are to missing a loan payment and creating massive devaluation and inflation.

Re: Shankar, RSaxena, Umairr et al

There is an interesting debate going on Chowk on Kashmir, but I personally think that the Kashmiri status quo ante will be a lot harder to alter than most people like to think.

The best India and Pakistan can do is to formalize the division of Kashmir and accept the fait accompli of the status quo, because if given the option, Kashmir would opt for independence from both India and Pakistan. There is a sense of political alienation in Kashmir vis a vis Indian and Pakistani policies and this is a very subtle reason why a final determination of Kashmir will never be advocated, because both India and Pakistan have will lose more than they will gain in terms of domestic political consensus on the issue!

I think that as time goes by, both India and Pakistan will have to rationalize the Third Option and arrive at a compromise over the issue: Kashmir cannot be a part of India and Pakistan.

Kashmir is destined to exist within a rubric of Indo-Pak politics as a seperate, but equal part of India and Pakistan without being formally incorporated in either country.

I think that given the right atmospherics, India and Pakistan would be more than willing to accept the status quo of Kashmir outside their political unions and the only obstacle to this is their domestic political considerations which hold Kashmir as sine qua non of their national identies! If the domestic hurdle can be solved, then there is chance of agreeing to a compromise, because in a real sense, Kashmir is not a bi-latreal issue - it is a domestic issue!

Ciao!

Umairr # 108

I am not sure whether this will be fruitful but for what its worth, here are my comments on the points which you raised.

ABV and NS did have a peace process ticking along very nicely and it was gathering speed when Kargil happened. Your rationalisation that Kargil was a Pakistani reaction to Siachen is right from a military perspective, but it was a disaster from an overall strategic and political perspective. I need not explain the details of this disaster for us. Given that framework and background, your point about a weaker and a stronger party is not really applicable here. You can argue the legality of the Kashmir situation up and down from UN resolutions down to the autonomy proposal, (it was interesting to note that you didn`t mention the first precondition of the UN resolutions). In any case, the UN resolutions are now nicely null and void, since the third party, China has not been mentioned in the UN resolutions, there is a fair chunk of kashmiri territory with them. Anyway, that is another debate.

Your question of human rights violations by the Indian army is correct, but pragmatically speaking, you are spitting against the wind if you expect the Indians to let the human rights organizations into Kashmir. Its reality and that is it. India is not going to lose out at all, AI and HRW can scream themselves hoarse and nobody is going to take a single bit of notice. You tend to forget that for the vast world outside, the Indians are fighting ``Islamic fundamentalism``, and when fights of this nature occur, the blinkers come on. Notice Chechnya, Algeria, Turkey and the lot. India is actually getting thanks of the people who matter and the HRO can go hang. So that human rights angle is also negated. Now for your 3 remaining conditions.

1. Pakistan having a military government. Well, you will have to admit that Pakistan did shoot itself in the foot, the history of military governments really hasn`t been rosy, have they been? The prior agreements with GoP military governments have been after war`s usually, and then the Kashmir issue wasn`t propagated internationally to that extent as it is now. Signing agreements is part of pragmatism. India believe that the carrot and stick policy will work in India. The fact that Pakistan has a military government gives India a great excuse not to hold talks and India will be stupid not to use that. Your final issue, India is definitely concerned with the fact that Pakistan has a military government, most of the military (mis)adventures have been conducted under the aegis of military governments.

2. Kargil and talks, Umairr, perhaps you could refer to the first paragraph for my comments on this. The talks began, THEN Kargil happened, what do you think the Indians will do? come back to talk? - I dont think so, at least not immediately. The Indians have a democracy, if they went back to talk after getting ``betrayed``, the NDA and ABV will be slated in the polls. Unfortunately, India is a democracy and cannot ride rough shod over public opinion.

3. Umairr, your final point was to have Pakistan stop the support of the freedom fighters. You say that the Indian government has to withdraw the army from the state and then the freedom fighters will withdraw. This would have been funny if this was not sad. What do you say to the counterpoint? if the freedom fighters withdraw, then the army will withdraw? I expect that the first two conditions can and will be overlooked by the Indians eventually, but they will NOT overlook this third point.

For talks to occur, the Indians have to get a bit more tired and see lot more body bags, I expect this condition to happen inside the next 12 months at the lastest, if later than that, then it will have to be after the next Lok Sabha elections. Unfortunately, the CE doesnt have any power within the country to address the last bit. The solution? I dont know, I expect this to keep on dragging even longer.

Umairr, could you give your comments on how Pakistan can rein in the mujahids?

Sincerely

bd

PS: The sham of the ``political/diplomatic/moral`` support has to be ended, its enough, this has been bleeding Pakistan for so long, our people have been dying for a crappy and god forsaken place for absolutely selfish and violently incompetent leaders, egged on by totally moronic religious leaders. After 50 odd years, what do we have to show for all this political, diplomatic and moral drum banging? Let the Indians keep the poxy place, accept the LoC as a boundary, integrate AK into Pakistan and raise a wall over the western boundary. Tell everyone, ``ok, folks, move along, the kashmiri show`s over, now go home and be productive in your life``. I apologise for blowing my steam here, but I am cynical enough to realize that I am also spitting against the wind here.

Umairr,

{{If the Indian govt. sincerely feels it has the moral high ground in Kashmir, and Pakistan is the cause of all the trouble, then it should be running after Pakistan for talks; just like Pakistan is running after India for talks. }}

I think your sense of righteousness blinds you. Either that or youre a total sucker for Mushy.

Did you think Vajpayee took a bus to Lahore to eat your famous chappal kebabs?! Get real!!

This Pakistan`s ``moral superiority`` vis a vis Kashmir is getting very boring. Pakistanis are the only ones who believe that crap. Even when Pakistan was the darling of the West, they didnt buy it. You really think the OIC buys it?! They put out ``resolutions`` just to make you shut up & turn around & give India a nod & wink.

Why did the UN jump & intervene in E.Timor & nobody listened to Pakistan shouting herself hoarse , about Kashmir?!

Read my lips ,NOBODY BELIEVES YOU!!

Give all your money to the conman who authored this article. Pakistan`s behaviour speaks much louder than all his proposed ads. At least it`ll make his ad business very wealthy. There`s a sucker born every minute.

Until next time, wallow in your sanctimony.

Umairr #108

I think your reasoning as to why a country would disccourage talks was very simplistic and narrow. How about this that a country ``A`` can choose to discourage talks with another country ``B`` because it deduces from past experience that offer for talks is just a smoke screen and a ploy to mask underlying hostalities, and that the only solution to the problem lies in facing ``B`` eye to eye. Further, this country might be convinced that such approach, as above, is better than going for talks and then get stabbed at the back by ``B``. This country ``A`` might also be convinced that ``B`` can never trusted and there is no point wasting time and energy talking to ``B`` .

In all of the above scenerio, country ``A`` will refuse to talk to ``B`` even if it wants to find a solution to any problem between ``A`` and ``B``.

Talking specifically about India, India did demonstrate its intention to solve its problems with Pakistan when Vajpayee went to Lahore. That opportunity was not wasted by India. You do not expect India to turn up on the table when ever Pakistan shouts from the wall!

Re: Kris # 102

Yusuf is the Arabisized version of Joseph, while Youhana was a Arab Christian figure of old. YOu will note that many Coptic CHristians use Arabic versions of Christian names also.

Yusuf Youhana crosses himself on international television after every century.

How can you say he or other Christians are trying to hide their religion and therefore do not use Christian names? You make no sense.

Reply #: 69 pullu wrote:

``Ras Siddiqui #re 53 and Umairr #re 50
You talk of permanent peace but you would not agree to any Indian suggestion. You would insist kashmir is disputed, thus trying to break India. We can have Kargil once in a while. But no, we can still talk peace. We should not indulge in propaganda because it harms Pakistan. What an irony?``

When have I ever advocated that I want India to
break up? If the US State Department to this
day recognizes that Kashmir is DISPUTED TERRITORY
then does that mean that it too wants to break up
India? Am I also to believe that the various
UN Resolutions also want to break up India?

Let us wake up man. It is in the interest of
both India and Pakistan to see stability on BOTH
sides of the border. Kashmir can be sorted out by:

1) Either India ceding a few hundred square miles
to Pakistan in Kashmir (Pakistan`s choice)
2) Independence for the Kashmir Valley plus some
districts in Jammu and Ladakh (Kashmiris first
choice)
3) ``Autonomy`` for Kashmir within the Indian
Constitution (India`s choice)
4) Nothing (India`s Fantasy).

None of these choices involve the ``Breakup of India``.

Ras

By the way Umairr is right on the money when he
states in the previuos reply that if India starts
talking to Pakistan, it thinks that it will lose
Kashmir. So the military option...

I think the 70 to 80 replies are the longest an article can go, before making a detour towards Kashmir :).

FerozeK #86: Your remarks are insightful, as always.

In my opinion, putting any kind of conditions on talks between Pakistan and India is pointless. Conditions are themselves a very subjective idea. The whole purpose of holding talks is to create a conducive atmosphere for reaching a solution to a problem. If a conducive atmosphere existed to begin with, then there would be no need for talks. Countries that are in the middle of a major war also hold talks.

In any confrontation, the country encouraging talks knows that it has a lot to gain from talks. While the country discouraging talks, knows that it will lose out, if it holds talks. This is analogous to presidential debates, as well. The candidate who is a strong debater always wants to hold a debate, while the weaker debater does not. In that situation the weaker debater puts up conditions for debates, which he/she knows the stronger debater will never accept.

A similar condition exists between Pakistan and India regarding talks about Kashmir. India knows that if it starts talking about Kashmir with Pakistan, it will lose out in the end. Legally speaking, the UN resolutions will be held as the standard. These resolutions call for a plebiscite, which India knows it will lose (otherwise, it would have held one itself). Morally and ethically speaking, the talks could lead to a call on international human rights agencies in assessing the actual situation of Kashmir. Again, India would lose out, because these agencies would expose what is going on in Kashmir (had the freedom fighters been causing all the problems, and not the Indian army, then India would have called in these HR organizations in, itself). On a public relations front, India would lose out also, because the talks would get international press involved, which would describe the whole Kashmir situation to the rest of the world.

The only area in which India has the upper hand is in the military arena. It knows that Pakistan cannot, ``take`` Kashmir from India. Keeping that in mind, if one thinks from the Indian govts.` point of view, it makes sense never to talk to Pakistan, regardless of the Indo-Pak situation. Because if it starts talking, it will lose out, due to the above mentioned factors.

However, the Indian govt. also cannot bluntly state to the rest of the world, that it just will not talk to Pakistan. Hence the conditions. If these conditions were satisfied by Pakistan, there would be new conditions, and then more conditions. The aim of the conditions is not the conditions themselves, but the avoidance of talks. Lets take a look at the conditions, one by one:

1.Pakistan should have a democratic govt.: The kind of govt. a country has is the prerogative of that country. India has talked to and signed treaties with military govts. in Pakistan before. It also regularly signs deals with dictatorships in the Middle East. It was one of the strongest allies of the communist dictatorships in USSR, and supported the USSR appointed dictatorship in Afghanistan. So what`s so different now? If Musharraf were to offer half of Pakistan to Vajpayee, I am sure the Indian govt. would be more than happy to talk to a military govt. The type of govt. that is representing Pakistan in the talks is the problem of the Pakistanis; Indians need not be concerned about it.

2. Trustful atmosphere after Kargil: This is an ironic statement. Kargil is done and over with. It was another battle in the series of battles that go on between India and Pakistan. Historically, there has never been trust between India and Pakistan. Never was, and I doubt there ever will be, until they start talking. The whole purpose of talks is to build trust. The ironic part is that currently India is carrying out a military offensive against Pakistan in Siachen, and Pakistan is still offering talks to India. If anything, Pakistan should be the one complaining about trust, now. Pakistan even invited Gen. Chibber to Pakistan. He is the one who orchestrated the Siachen offensive. If he can be invited to Pakistan, then what is wrong with Musharraf going to India?

3. Pakistan must stop supporting and sending freedom fighters into Kashmir: This demand has actually been accepted by the freedom fighters themselves. However, they have in turn stated, that the Indian govt. must remove its soldiers from Kashmir. If the Indian govt. agrees to this, I am quite sure the freedom fighters will stop their struggle in Kashmir. In the long run, a lot more freedom fighters die in freedom struggles than soldiers. So it is in the interest of the freedom fighters to stop their fighting if the Indian military moves out. Some of the freedom fighter organizations have now stated that they will call a cease-fire (without asking the Indian military to move out of Kashmir), if India agrees to talk to their representatives, and the Pakistani representatives.

The Indian govt. needs to stop putting up any kind of conditions to talks. This is a delaying tactic, until it can sideline Kashmir, or get a deal, which it wants (as it may have gotten through the Lahore declaration). If the Indian govt. sincerely feels it has the moral high ground in Kashmir, and Pakistan is the cause of all the trouble, then it should be running after Pakistan for talks; just like Pakistan is running after India for talks. At the end of the talks, if the Indian govt. has the stronger case, it will surely end up on top, regardless of what Pakistan is doing in Kashmir, and the type of govt. in Pakistan, etc.

Pakistan, on its part, I think is finally moving towards a well-balanced policy on Kashmir. It should announce that it has no territorial interest over Indian Kashmir. It has already stated that. It should continue to use arguments in areas in which it is strong, i.e. it should call for a legal solution through the UN resolutions; if third party mediation is not acceptable to India, then Pakistan should continue insisting on bilateral talks through the Simla Declaration; it should ask for an ethical solution through the International HR organizations; and it should try to get international media`s attention to Kashmir by pointing it out as a nuclear flashpoint, as well as point out the actions of the Indian military in Kashmir. And finally, it should continue stating that Pakistan is ready to talk to India anytime and at any place.

One thing, Pakistan should avoid is any kind of military confrontation. This is the one area in which India has the upper hand. Pakistan needs to just go into a defensive mode. If India is taking offensive action in Siachen, then it is too late now for Pakistan to counter it with its own offensive action. It will be counter-productive for Pakistan. Kargil proved that. So Pakistan needs to just remain extremely defensive militarily with India, and point out to the rest of the world that it is willing to cut down its military, if India agrees to do the same. This is exactly what Musharraf stated at the UN.

If Pakistan continues pointing out the legal, moral and ethical side of Kashmir, and agrees to talk to India anywhere at anytime, and avoids any kind of military conflicts (even the ones in which India is on the offensive, like Siachen), India will have to eventually talk to Pakistan.

In India`s case, if it knows it has a correct stand on Kashmir, it should not be afraid to talk to Pakistan, unconditionally.

ummair#

I also go and read the Dawn to see the other side of the ``story``. Give me examples of Pakistani criticising Pakistan in a moral way, in Indo-Pak conflict. Here we have an article which says Kargil was all done by mujahideen. The masscares are all done by Indian Army. It is the propaganda, which is making Indian believe these ``facts`` not to be true. Do you believe that the 30 people that were killed during Clinton visit was done by Indian Army? Without reading any news, I can say that it is not possible. If I find that if it was done by Indian Army, I will loose complete faith in India and will not care what happens to India/Kashmir. That is how strong my believes are (This does not mean, that I do not think that they do no wrong). How much faith do you have in the people trained to kill in India to trust them as I trust Indian Army? The author is also not 100% confident so he says, ``Barring the outside chance of sheer stupidity on their part``.

I was once on an Indian board during cricket, and one Indian criticised muslims, while he was criticising Pakistan. Many other Indian jumped on him and he was kicked out of the board. This is how Indian criticise and react.

When I see people here openly criticising Hindu (calling them inhuman and latter not offering apology but saying that I meant bad Hindus, thus redifining what is meant by Hindus). I did not find a single Pakistani saying that one should not criticise Hindus. (I don`t meant to say that one should not critices caste system and other evils.)

Vijay

Mr. Salman:

Assalmalaikum. Your article has further strengthened my pledge for giving the Kashmir Dispute a true face, and banish the glitter India generously sprinkles on it. Also that it`s most important to first make Pakistan economically stable. It brought about many aspects so well. Thank you.

Wassalam.

Aisha

I agree with Mr. Lodhy. Pakistan should concentrate on propaganda and add to their cause in Kashmir. They should advertise and Pakistanis should actively contribute to this ad campaign.
Nothing would make me, as an Indian, more happier. Bring on your best. Bravo, Mr. Lodhy.

Then, I don`t think, you would mind Indians increasing their media campaign in the US, which they are actively indulging in anyway. From there on, it all depends upon clout and influencing power in the corridors in Washington.

But, let me add an extra two cents worth. Pakistan, as you say, has not been dormant all these years. I always thought, they were better at presenting their govt.`s stand than their Indian diplomatic counterparts. India presently has a sluggish, tired looking ambassador to the US. He may be intelligent, I don`t know, because he seems to be snoring whenever he speaks.

Pakistan also raises the Kashmir issue at every international forum. It is another issue that no one listens to it. It beats its breast about Indian ``atrocities`` while only supporting ``morally, emotionally and diplomatically`` the terrorists who are equal culprits (if not more, because no terrorists, no army) when commiting violence in the valley. It conveniently does not mention the militants` role in the violence. This, Pakistan has been doing at every international forum. Especially more so, when it comes to the members of the OIC. There have even been attempts to stop the supply of oil from Gulf states, so that India will come to her knees( wishful thinking, no?) The gulf states while paying lip sympathy to the Pakistani cause, carry on with business as usual. Someone, earlier on the interact said, that Pakistanis do a lot of introspection and are very fair and on and on about a lot of things which certainly must have made him feel very good. Yes, sir, he was right. No wonder Hussain Haqqani in the Friday Times, says that Pakistan (he actually says mujahideen, I think) should extend its jihad (al Sagheer variety that is, then why is it that most Muslims are interested in it more than Jihad al Kabeer?) to where it really matters in India, like Bangalore and Hyderabad. Yes, introspection, that is the word.

India, I don`t think is doing enough to highlight the way it has been wronged ( yes, I believe it and I will stick to it) by Pakistan/mujahideen. I wholeheartedly supported the ads in the media by Indians because it was a weapon in our fight against pakistan. And please don`t say that the govt. policy need not be peoples` policy. Please don`t separate the people from the govt.`s actions. The govt. is an extension of the people. The govt. does what the people want. The govt. is what the people want it to be. And deducing from that, we would only be foolish and naive to believe that things were hunky dory with Indians and Pakistanis all along, because they weren`t and ain`t. There was always a simmering undercurrent of animosity and distrust, if you don`t believe me, check out the past interacts on Chowk. Sure, there are some peaceniks, but they only want to make friends on the other side and want to hide reality. If they are really so concerned about India and Pakistan, they should tackle things head on. Like why are Hindus as a community, irrespective of nationality, are so despised in Pakistan? Like why Siachen? So why all the motherease? Lets be honest and forthright. Let us not be hypocrites by saying ``Oh, we don`t care what Indian and Pakistani govt.s do, but we are good friends`` and then go and support the Indian and Pakistani stands anyway.

But I must admit, the best propagators of the Indian media campaign are our keffiyah masked friends who say on American tv that ``If there is a nuclear war, Pakistan will be destroyed. But that is only a small number of the muslims in the world. But if India is destroyed, all Hindus in the world will be wiped out.`` This was said during the Peter Jennings special when Clinton visited India. But then Pakistanis might say that Jennings is an Indian spy and receives regular payments from the RAW. But then so would be the NYT and other American journals whose editorials carry a distinct anti-Pakistan flavour nowadays.

So, Mr. Lodhy, go out and initiate a media campaign against India, but I doubt if anyone would believe you.

Kabuli

ummair#

I also go and read the Dawn to see the other side of the ``story``. Give me examples of Pakistani criticising Pakistan in a moral way, in Indo-Pak conflict. Here we have an article which says Kargil was all done by mujahideen. The masscares are all done by Indian Army. It is the propaganda, which is making Indian believe these ``facts`` not to be true. Do you believe that the 30 people that were killed during Clinton visit was done by Indian Army? Without reading any news, I can say that it is not possible. If I find that if it was done by Indian Army, I will loose complete faith in India and will not care what happens to India/Kashmir. That is how strong my believes are (This does not mean, that I do not think that they do no wrong). How much faith do you have in the people trained to kill in India to trust them as I trust Indian Army? The author is also not 100% confident so he says, ``Barring the outside chance of sheer stupidity on their part``.

I was once on an Indian board during cricket, and one Indian criticised muslims, while he was criticising Pakistan. Many other Indian jumped on him and he was kicked out of the board. This is how Indian criticise and react.

When I see people here openly criticising Hindu (calling them inhuman and latter not offering apology but saying that I meant bad Hindus, thus redifining what is meant by Hindus). I did not find a single Pakistani saying that one should not criticise Hindus. (I don`t meant to say that one should not critices caste system and other evils.)

Vijay

shankar #100

Let me explain myself too. I didnot have any reason to have `prejudice` about Pakistanis back in India(till a few years ago), because I didnot think a lot about them, nor did aam janata I lived among.

Extrapolating from things like the hearty reception (and sign-ups)any Pakistani artiste gets in India, looking at those who enjoyed Pakistani TV plays, and the number of people who travel between the countries visiting divided families, or cross-border marriages and the large number of fans and admirers of Pakistani cricketing talent, I never had any occasion to witness or feel any rancour.

Those actually living in India and Pakistan are the ones who will have to pay in real terms for endless acrimony, not those living in far off lands. Those attempting to influence events from here have to realise that. Hence, hi/bye between NRIs and NRPs are all fluff, the money and support for sectarian organisations back home by both Pakistanis and Indians from abroad is the real deal one should focus on, if one is really interested in peace.

Sadhana

first save your sinking ship, save your judiciary then speak of us. regarding communal harmony, india offers much better religious freedom than pakistan. eg.no one can identify a christian by his name(yousuf youhana)in pakistan because you have succesfully curtailed their voice

good finally every pakistani thinks jehad is the only way to get india out.

same old pak. propaganda but a new story teller.

No matter what the article is about , when it is about india and pakistan , the final moral would be the the kashmir issue. Even in this case, the anti-pakistan or anti-india media coverage in the US or Europe or else where.

Is anyone out here in chowk ever thought of the consequences or impact (pro`s and con`s) kashmir being a part of pakistan

To all paki`s

Assuming that kashmir becomes a part of pakistan .. I would like to know your comments regarding the future of kashmir as a state of pakistan.

it was the defeat of soviet union in afghanistan which sparked the insurgency in kashmir, until then atleast the tourism industry was going fine. and then all of a sudden everything stopped and rest is history.

May be pakistan is under the impression that once kashmir becomes their territory, everything will be fine..

but folks i assure you it wouldnt be the same.. people who had been carrying guns all their life, fighting, killing, do you think they are simply going to lay their arms and say ` comon kashmiri`s now that we have got independence , we`ll live happily`` .If you think this is gonna happen , then you are mistaken.

1.maybe afghani style society is gonna be installed in kashmiri`s.. no cable tv, women shouldnt work, no cinema theatres,maybe then all paki`s would be happy.. right

2.or maybe the tourism industry will be back in businees again in full swing, and paki`s can pay of their hugeeeee debt (the only part which the paki politicians havent laid their hands on)

3. or maybe there are hidden dreams.. who knows.. if anyone has something in this context. please post it.

sadna,

I guess I should clarify my point. Indian & Pakistani interaction & cooperation has helped in many indiect ways. You have a better understanding of a people & a more realistic appraisal of them.

In my personal experience, its only after intercting with them as fellow humans I have found a deeper appreciation & respect for them. Despite our arguments, which I admit, can be quite contentious & occ downright uncivilised--I have a deeper sense that they are just as human as us. They have the same hopes, dreams ,aspirations , moral values & faults as us.

This may sound naive. When I was growing up in India, I thought Pakistanis were all ogres. Yes, I admit it was very immature of me. Even though we disagree over many many things, we all have similiarities too. Above all, both of us hope & dream that our respective counties will prosperous, free & at peace with each other.

I sincerely hope everyone realises that if either country goes down the tubes; that country will make damn sure the other country is pulled down with it.

I worry about Indians & Pakistanis left behind in our respective countries. Their pride, patriotism & prejudices wont mean a damn thing after a nuclear holocaust. I worry more about idiots in India/Pakistan who confidently believe their country will survive a nuclear war. A part of me worries that people in the subcontinent havent seen REAL suffering yet. The suffering in the Partition, all our famines, wars , genocides, natural disasters --all put together wont match the suffering after a nuclear holocaust.

If Indians & Pakistanis interact more (hopefully, even through the internet), there will be a much greater chance for peace. Neither side can afford the alternative.

reply: jay # 92

``Lashkar-e-Toiba shot 3 women........ ``

there goes the indian media machine again.

how could Lashkar-e-whatever a dastardly thing like that.

Its the Indian army, brethren trying to ``malign Laskar-e-whatever`` ( am i damn near puking ? )

just like chattisinghpura, pilgrim massacres.

and where is that smell of rum coming from anyway?

nchiket

Umairr #79, ``In short, the Pakistani community should spend its resources on helping and defending Pakistan.``

That`s what I say. I wonder why the Indian contributors are getting all worked up about it.

I have no problem when an Indian wants to help India out in some way. It`s a good thing.

To all the Indians who are reading this:

Instead of wasting your precious time putting Pakistan down, go send reformists and doctors to India to resolve it`s civil and health problems.

Do something to help those poverty/disease stricken people. They need your attention more.

jay #89,

You called me a Miss Mullah. That is quite interesting to me, because never in any of my posts here did I even mention religion or jihad.

Since no one was paying attention to your posts, you had to make me the easy target of your mullah fantasies?

I`ve never poked fun at you jay the way others do, Indians and Pakistanis, let`s keep it that way.

Good article & good idea! Please let me know where to send the contibution.

Re: ylh

``Sometime this year, PSA Rutgers is organizing a Kashmir rally in front of the UN building. Its going to be a major event.``

Hahaha. Please let me know the date...I want to be sure to see this...bunch of silly Pakistani kids from Rutgers with plastic AK-47s and Jehad banners jumping up and down in front of the UN in -10 degree weather screaming something about a placed called Kashmir while the 5 person audience of tourists takes pictures of ``streetside theatre in New York.``

shankar #93
``He makes a good point that so far the best hope for peace in the subcontinent is the harmony with which Indians & Pakistanis have peacefully coexisted & interacted in the US.``

Shankar, I have no quarrel with the sentiments about `hope`. But let us just be a little realistic here. Would one make an equivalent statement `The participation of Pakistani-Americans in the US political process presents the best hope for demcoracy in Pakistan.` Or a statement `the participation of Indian-Americans and the attainment of high positions by them in the US administration presents the best hope for democracy in India`.

And has the so-called peaceful coexistence of NRIndians-NR Pakistanis helped prevent even a single instance of Indo-Pak disagreement back home? Has any fraction of the significant monetary support to `political/sectarian causes` on either side ever been targetted for peace efforts?

Sadhana

FerozK

{{What will it take? It will take nothing short of a new approach to the problem with both sides agreeing to disuse their past political rhetoric on the issue. It will take a political will, unseen so far, in which Pakistan has to confront and subdue and erdicate its domestic nest of vipers and India has to be willing to spell out in concrete terms what will fulfil its requirements of trust! }}

Excellent point.

I agree with you that there needs to be a radical change of heart from both sides.

Lets assume, hypothetically ofcourse, Mushy clamps down on all ``freedom fighters``. I believe India will be then pressured by both internal & external forces to start talking to Pakistan. We can differ on this, but I think India will come to the negotiating table. When the Hizb declared a cease fire, the Indian govt did respond positively. The talks broke down when the Hizb insisted that Pakistan be included--they went as far as threaten India with a deadline. When you start making threats like that, it becomes a peacekiller.

As far as I`m concerned, India has every right not to trust Mushy. He is blatantly hawkish. If Pakistan was unhappy about Siachen, that should have been discussed on the diplomatic front after the Lahore declaration. The very fact Mushy refused to even be present at Lahore & was actively planning the Kargil operation, even while Vajpayee was being hosted in Pakistan, means he didnt give a damn about giving talks a chance. Now whether NS knew about Kargil during the bus trip or not is a moot issue. He`s not in power anymore, Mushy is.

Mushy wonders why India doesnt want to talk to him? As I`ve said before, the typical Indian response is ``Mushy, youre so full of sh *t, your eyes have turned brown``!!.

Lets go back to the current article. I`m totally against the Indian diaspora in the US wasting their time & money launching an anti-Pakistan tirade. I may disagree with many of Umairr`s views. He makes a good point that so far the best hope for peace in the subcontinent is the harmony with which Indians & Pakistanis have peacefully coexisted & interacted in the US. I happen to believe that most NRIs dont want to change that status quo. Yes, they dont like the Pakistan govt. However,only a minority faction is contributing to this anti-Pakistan propaganda.

A few months ago, India Abroad had a huge section on all the various Indian communities in the US hosting their national conventions. The main thrusts in the conventions were charities organised for India, cultural programs & working on bettering Indo-US relations & understanding. Pakistan was hardly ever mentioned.

TO THE SPIN DOCTOR

Please my dear advertising guru, give this news a positive spin. Announcement made in pakistan and delivered in india, a pak achievement,

SRINAGAR, SEPTEMBER 8: A day after Pakistan-backed militant outfit Lashkar-e-Toiba issued a threat to Muslim women in the valley to use purdah or get ready to be shot in their legs, militants today fired at and injured three persons, including two women, at a beauty parlour here, an official spokesperson said.

The militants stormed the parlour at Gonikhan and shot at and injured the owner and his two women employees, the spokesman said.

Lashkar-e-Toiba had yesterday issued three draconian diktats: all Muslim women should wear the burqa or risk getting shot in the leg; all TV channels, except international news channels, should be banned; and state government employees participating in Census operations will be killed.

Re: ferozk #86

Well said! I wish I had the patience to lay out my similar thoughts as well as you did.

IMPOSSIBILITY OF KASHMIR PEACE

`` A problem cannot be solved at the level of awareness that created it`` Let us give credit to that to Alfred Einstein.

Kashmir is a creation of TNT, a belief that hindus and muslims cannot live in peace. TNT created pakistan, a unified ex-indian muslim state. Bangladesh proved the TNT wrong, hindus are not the only `enemies` of muslims. They did not accept the TNT fully, Bangladesh and india can coexist peacefully.

In the case of pakistan, the TNT has been introduced into the education system, there are children of TNT. So far no pakistani has dared to question the premise of TNT in a consistant manner. All that pak intelectuals could come up with is the `` Accidental Theory of Pakistan, ATP``.

According to this view pakistan is a political accident, nobody wanted it, it was just a bluff for political leadership, but the circumstances colluded to create pakistan. The tragedy of this view is that it leaves the TNT intact.

With out taking significant steps to alter the awareness in pakistan, there can be no peace with pakistan. All of the indications are TNT has taken very deep roots in the educated and the uneducated alike in pakistan. Many on chowk have admitted that no pak govt can stop jihad.

All the talks and all the meetings will be a waste, jihadists will keep coming looking for their private heavens and will send a lot more to shared hells.

An Iraquisation is the only option to alter the awareness.

To Scout,

slink #54, ``scout..you ask why people dont go and protest against the blasphemy law in pakistan itself. quite simply, because you might be killed.``

You are right. But can we let this fear handicap ourselves? We can`t afford to.

///// Chowk is really getting to you, just reflect on this, take it easy /////

I know it`s easy for me to say, I`m not living in Pakistan at the moment, but there`s always risk taking involved in bringing change. And I don`t think protesting outside the UN Millenium Summit would benefit Pakistanis immensely. Yeah, it might be mentioned in the local channel 9 news, but I can guarantee the coverage will be laced with negativity, thus lowering the confidence of Pakistanis themselves, and sending out a bad message to Americans. We need to get positive aspects of Pakistan ``out`` there. I`m not glossing over Pakistan`s problems, those will have to be dealt with by ourselves. What I am saying is to start repairing the damage done by the international and Indian media.

//// Very true. At least in the internet editions of dawn and nation I cannot see anything positive about pakistan, at least some human interest stories. Please do post them. Please, please.

This is one of those rare exceptions where a post has been reproduced by me, but the opening remark seem to have trivialised death. Death is a great advisor, can resolve dilemmas, a great equaliser, treat it with respect

It was almost like an Ms. Mullah, sending the young to the jihad.

Regards

Jay

Have just come back from Pakistan - and am catching up on Chowk.This is an excellent article that speaks of exactly the thing we ought to be doing but are not. The alacrity with which our Indian and pro-Indian friends jumped on the article tells me how quickly their media machine and sympathisers react to defuse or negate anything they feel is going to expose the actions of the Indian government and the Indian security apparatus. We MUST revive Pakistan economically, because we can then be better able to defend Pakistan and Kashmir. And we MUST stand up and refute falseness in the Indian media every chance we get. Mr Salman Lodhy, I will help in this task. As all Pakistanis should.We have an uphill battle I feel, because the west is and has always been pro-Indian. But I believe strongly in the truth, and that is where our focus ought to be. The truth of what the Indian government has done and is doing is what needs to be brought up time and again to answer anyone who would whitewash what is happening in Kashmir. Will write again.

Sometime this year, PSA Rutgers is organizing a Kashmir rally in front of the UN building. Its going to be a major event. Those interested please email me at

yasser@eden.rutgers.edu

Slandering emails from Indians are not welcomed.

And by the way I commend you Salman Lodhi ... excellent job.We need more Pakistanis like you.

-Pakistan Zindabad

Re: Shankar # 82

As far as my ``take`` of CE/COAS`s interview with Peter Jennings, all I can say is that Andy Warhol would be smiling - CE/COAS got his 15 minutes!

If I have to take a stab in the dark, my initial assessment of the South Asian political gridlock will be a dismal one. Without restating the oft repeated policy positions, the region is in serious problems and at the present time, there is no hope for a major breakthrough. Why? India is refusing to talk with Pakistan over what it call cross-border terrorism and the fact it will not enter into discussions with a military based government in Pakistan. India also wants Pakistan to restore the trust that existed before Kargil. These then are, in a very basic sense, the Indian conditions for holding talks with Pakistan.

Lets us say that Pakistan restricts cross border terrorism and in time, becomes a civilian government. If these two things happen, then two out of three Indian conditions are realized. That only leaves the matter of restoring trust in Indo-Pak bi-lateral relations. This where the whole enterprise turns interesting! How do you restore trust and who determines its restoration?

Trust is, in my opinion like virginity - once it is gone it can never be replaced! Also, trust is an intangible element; it can not be phyically verified or confirmed as the stoppage of cross border terrorism and a civilian government in Pakistan can be seen and verified accordingly. The stumbling block in Indo-Pak relations has, and always been, the levels of trust. What is India`s idea of trust and how does she wish to quantify these levels of trust? Saying that trust needs to be restored is ambigious, because what political conditions is India including, in the actualization of this trust, whose attainment or resolution will ensure a level of trust as being acceptable to India?

India needs to craft specific benchmarks in political terms that can be considered as facilitating the tangibility of an ideal: trust! When CE/COAS says that ball is in India`s court, he is right in an ironic sense, because only India is in the position to determine what politically can satisfy its ``levels of trust``.

India can refuse to discuss Kashmir with Pakistan in any forum of the world, because it is its right and privilege to do so. Will Indian refusal to dicuss Kashmir with Pakistan solve the problem?

On the other hand, Pakistan needs to critically reexamine its foreign policy options in this regard. The manner in which the current Pakistani policy is structured, it is based on confrontation. Pakistan needs to reconsider its Kashmiri policy as the foci primius and see if it can be an ancillary and not the raison d` etre of its foreign policy. Pakistani foreign policy pundits need to accept the fact in the new post cold war order, economic policies are the continuation of politcs by other means and having said that, is Pakistan economically viable to pursue a proactive foreign policy?

Yes, it can do so if it can at first, as a sine qua non of its foreign policy, stabilize its fast decaying domestic political scene. There is no denying the reality that the greatest threat to Pakistan stems from the internal dysfunctional imbalances in its polity and not from any identified external source. Pakistan needs to rein in its rapidily disintergrating political scene due to the antithetical nature of the various political organizations operating on its soils; each implementing its own independent foreign and domestic policies in opposition to Islamabad`s political machinations.

If Pakistan does get its house in order and implements the Indian conditions on cross border terrorism and a civilian government, the question will still remain: what will reciprocate an Indian trust to undertake dicussions and resolve Kashmir?

What will it take? It will take nothing short of a new approach to the problem with both sides agreeing to disuse their past political rhetoric on the issue. It will take a political will, unseen so far, in which Pakistan has to confront and subdue and erdicate its domestic nest of vipers and India has to be willing to spell out in concrete terms what will fulfil its requirements of trust!

Ciao

Lanny Davis, (ex?)-counsel for President Clinton was/is also a paid lobbyist for Pakistan.

NRI/NRP politics : look, either the subcontinent is a nuclear flashpoint or not. If it is, and many Pakistanis urging Indian introspection on this forum assert that it is, there is no point shedding tears at supposed `divide` in North America, we have bigger problems to worry about back home. If the subcontinent isn`t a nuclear flashpoint, then why not try your hand at convincing the US that it is not so? You cannot have it both ways.

And, I`d like to see one itsy-bitsy bit of Pakistani `introspection` on any location other than an English newspaper/online forums` columns either India or Kashmir, and any sign that such introspection has ever made the slightest difference to Pakistani policies.

Sadhana

re: Umairr

Excuse me for picking on your replies. But you as a person are very interesting. hence the interest in your world-view.

Where do you get non-sense like this from :

``So far, the Pakistani community has not attacked India, and there is no need to start now.`` - I have seen this go on ever since I came to the US starting at colleges. Also Pakistan indulges in this officially and has been for a long long time.

``Pakistanis currently seem to being through a great deal of introspection, to the extent that it is being overdone.`` - says who and based on what ??????

Lastly your point about global terrorism and Pakistan not indulging in state sponsored terrorism. How come they all (WTC bombers, whacko snipper outside White House, Kenyan embassy, etc. - I am pusposely not mentioning dastardly acts committed on Indian soil) end up in Pakistan. Lets say Pakistan govt is officially not responsible for this. But are they (Pak govt) responsible for what happens on their soil or not. This double speak is what is getting on everybody`s nerves (like was Pak involved in Kargil or not !!!)

I aprreciate your intentions but don`t make up ``facts`` to support your view points.

As far as media representations I barely read Indian or Pak media and have to disagree with you. Don`t know why you spend so much time reading Indian media ? You must be, since you think all Pakistans ills have been created by this so called media blitz.

regards

re: Umairr

Lets take your statement that Pakistan is in no way a terrorist country. Also knowing your penchant for numbers and ratios have you ever worked out this ratio:

the no. of terrorists ending up in Pakistan right after the act : the number of terrorists operating globally.

Now lets not split hair over the definition of ``terrorism``. For the above ratios remove any act of terrorism committed in India and re-run the numbers. The results will still be quite enlightening.
Stop being obsessed with India and see who are Pakistans real enemies.

regards

On 9/7/00, millions of Americans watched the segment on ABC World News Tonight, where Peter Jennings interviewed Gen. Mushy.

Those of you who saw it, please tell me your take on the segment.

For what its worth, here`s mine.

I felt Gen Mushy was very blunt. He said, relations between India & Pakistan are at the lowest ebb. Of course, the root cause is India`s behavior. Sure there is a possibility of war. However, he warned India that he would not rule out a nuclear strike, if India dared to try any stunts. He stated that Pakistan does not/never has harbored terrorists.

On these issues, ofcourse, Indians & Pakistanis are equally divided. From the average American viewpoint, they really couldnt give a damn which side is right or wrong.

I think what was disconcerting for Pakistan (in terms of Salman`s propaganda war), is Peter Jenning`s narration. He equally bluntly said the US doesnt believe Pakistan`s assertion that they are NOT harboring, training & arming terrorists. He went on to say the US considers these radical muslim elements a real threat to America. He went on to say, these radicals are threat to Pakistan domestically because they just might come to dominate the countriy`s policies. All the while ABC News showes armed zealots brandishing weapons, madrassahs & Pakistani citizens burning the American flag.

I dont want to debate whether ABC is right or not.I also dont want to debate ``who cares what America thinks?!``

In reference to this article on Chowk, just think about how these millions of Americans felt. Right, wrong or indifferent, Americans trust Jennings more than Mushy. So Mushy is an out-an-out liar. On top of that he is a hawkish leader threatening a nuclear war if things get ouf of hand. They are going to believe Pakistan harbors terrorists (never mind a decade ago Americans called them freedom fighters). How do you think they felt when they saw the US flag being burnt in Pakistan?!

Now, let me ask you guys. Do you think any Indian money influenced these views? Salman has his work cut out for him. He will have to buy millions of dollars of ads to counter Jenning`s views (if Americans actually bother to read ads that contain a lot of text).

Take it from our resident chowk expert, according to Feroze,in IR image & perception is the most important thing. India`s biggest PR asset is ole Mushy himself! The Indians themselves have done squat to influence these views.

It goes without saying, my opinion is biased. I`d really like to hear other views from posters who saw that segment. Especially because it pertains to this topic.

If you guys want to blame the Indian diaspora for inluencing ABC News, be my guest. I`d like to sell the Brooklyn bridge to those who do.

Taliban style rule in Kashmir

SRINAGAR, India (Reuters) - Unidentified gunmen wounded three people in a ladies`` beauty salon in Indian Kashmir Friday, 24 hours after a Pakistan based militant group reportedly warned women they would be shot if they did not wear veils in public. Police and witnesses said the Islamic militants stormed into the beauty parlor in the busy Gonikhan market place in Srinagar and fired indiscriminately on the occupants. Two women and the male owner of the salon were wounded, a police spokesman said. The women received thigh wounds and the salon owner was shot in the abdomen. None of them were in danger from their wounds. No group claimed responsibility for the unusual incident in Jammu and Kashmir state, which has been rocked by separatist insurgency for more than a decade.

The shooting came on the heels of a PTI/Yahoo report that the Pakistan-based militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba had warned women in Kashmir that they would be shot in the legs if they did not wear a veil while out in the streets. The report said the group``s command council also warned cable television operators in the Kashmir valley to stop relaying all channels except the BBC, Pakistan Television (PTV) and National Geographic.

And I wonder what happened to those erstwhile Paki promoters such as good old Henry K, his protege Lawrence Eagleburger, and even George Schultz? Why are they keeping quiet when they can be employed either for fee or just out of voluntary spirit, to speak on behalf of Pakistan and its needs? Edolphus Towns, geez, what a powerful congressional force. Who`s next? Al Sharpton or Khalid Mohamed from the Nation of Islam?

And on a separate discussion going on in this thread, re the plebisite. Shouldn`t china vacate both the land gifted by Pakistan and what it seized from India and have people [or yaks or whatever] living there throw in their two cents please. Therefore, should Pakistan be going to their chinese masters asking for their land back? And one more thing, it`s supremely ironical that the country whining for a democratic resolution of this crisis has such a terrible record with elections, democracy and minority rights?

bond dongs #71: ``I too personally dislike the anti-Pakistani campaign of some Indian organizations but we (as a community) have lost faith and any hope of rationality (in the Pakistani government), all we can hope to do is to contain their aggressive intentions and wait for the day rationality returns.``

First of all, I am not advising any sort of anti-India campaign to be carried out by the Pakistani community against India. If you read my previous reply in full, you will realize that I have written against it, even though many Indian organizations are going full throttle against Pakistan in the USA.

As far as saying that you, ``as a community`` have, ``lost faith`` in the Pakistani govt. then I am afraid you, ``as a community`` are being quite arrogant. You are assuming that the Indian govt. is correct, and the Pakistan govt. is incorrect on issues. This is a very self-righteous attitude, and this is exactly the attitude that I have repeatedly pointed out about Indian contributors. They are never able to indulge in self-criticism. Even you are justifying your brief attempt at self-criticism by indicating that the Indian community is actually friendly; it is the Pakistanis and Pakistan govt. that is causing them to attack Pakistan in the USA. You are not willing to out and out criticize the hate-filled and dishonest actions of the anti-Pakistan Indian organizations in the US.

I have also, ``lost faith and any hope of rationality`` in the Indian govt. (just like you have in the Pakistan govt.), however I have still openly stated that Pakistani organizations should not try to harm India in the US, and Indian organizations should not try to harm Pakistan in the USA. This includes taking out stupid ads, and trying to get each other declared a terrorist state. I state this unconditionally, regardless of what the Indian govt. is currently doing. Do you have the courage to make such an unconditional statement?

The more and more I read the replies from Indian contributors to the site, the more surprised I am too how quickly they tend to believe the Indian media and govts`. point of view on Indo-Pak issues. It is quite amazing. I rarely believe anything put out by the Pakistani media, or the govt. regarding India, without confirming it with articles from the international press, and from Amnesty International. I am afraid, there will never be peace in South Asia, if the Indians continue to follow their govts`. line regarding Pakistan. They need to get out of these shackles, and start thinking as independent human beings. They need to criticize themselves, their own country, and how it relates to Pakistan. At the very least, they need to stop buying everything their media and govt. throws at them regarding Pakistan. One does not become insecure by accepting one`s own faults, the faults of one`s own community, one`s own ethnic group, or one`s own country. It is in fact a sign of self-confidence and security.

Pakistanis currently seem to being through a great deal of introspection, to the extent that it is being overdone. Pakistan has never indulged in state-sponsored terrorism. In fact, Pakistan during the Afghan war, was the world`s biggest victim of terrorist attack. Pakistan has co-operated far more with the US govt. in catching and extraditing wanted criminals than vice-versa. There maybe small groups within Pakistan that do practice terrorism. But, these groups exist in every country of the world. Has the Pakistan govt. ever carried out a terrorist attack against the US, Europe, South America, or in the Middle East. The US attack on Sudan, the US firing of tomahawks over the Pakistan airspace, the Indian actions in Kashmir, are far better candidates of state-sponsored terrorism than anything the Pakistan govt. has ever done in this arena. Yet the introspection (and Indian media offensive) regarding Pakistan being a terrorist state, has been so strong that many under-confident Pakistanis have themselves started seeing Pakistan in a terrorist light.

However, in the long run I think all this self-examination (and even self-doubt) will prove to be healthy and positive for Pakistan. Countries that do not introspect, and concentrate on targeting their adversaries instead, in places ranging from the USA Today to the US Congress, will gain a certain amount of advantage in the short term. However, in the long run, their efforts will prove counterproductive.

Because of this, the Pakistani community in the USA should not indulge in the same practices as many members of the Indian community, i.e. the Pakistani community should not attack the Indian community. If the Indian community in the US is bent upon bringing the Indo-Pak conflict to the US, and is bent upon creating a false image of Pakistan to satisfy its own insecurities and hatred, then let it do so. It is actually harming itself.

What the Pakistani community should do is to not take these attacks lightly, and to understand the grave consequences for Pakistan, if the efforts of the Indian community in the US are successful. Even though the US has no international moral, ethical or legal high ground in declaring other countries as terrorist states, the consequences of being declared one by the US, are extremely harsh. So these unfortunate pathetic attempts by Indian community supported organizations should not be taken lightly.

However, the Pakistani community should counter these threats defensively, without attacking India. So far, the Pakistani community has not attacked India, and there is no need to start now. The general US population is much more sympathetic to people defending themselves, than to people attacking others (as unfair as it may sound to many non-US citizens of the world, US public and political opinion does effect the economic situation of third-world countries greatly).

In short, the Pakistani community should spend its resources on helping and defending Pakistan. It should not adapt the attack approach of the Indian community. The Pakistanis, in general, should continue to indulge in introspection and self-criticism in all arenas from Indo-Pak relations to domestic policies, without being apologetic. All of this, though in contradiction with what the Indian community has been doing, is the correct way to counter the ever-increasing hostile attacks from the US-based Indian community, in my opinion.

This was Indian Prime Minister`s reply to Anti-India speech by Pakistani Chief executive Parvez Musharraf at UN in New York.

Atal Bihari Vajpayee chose not to mention Pakistan by name, even as he sent General Musharraf a clear and unambiguous message, ``Many statesman-like words have been delivered from this high tribune. Unfortunately, some of them are a mockery of the truth. The world must see the reality as it is. The acid test of sincerity of purpose is not words, but deeds. Terrorism and dialogue do not go together.``

In the longer version of his speech, which will remain on record in the UN, the prime minister went on to add, ``Those who have stifled democracy at home speak of freedom from this forum. Those who have engaged in the clandestine acquisition of nuclear weapons and delivery systems talk of ridding South Asia of these. Those who have repudiated solemn covenants talk of new agreements to prevent war. The authors of a vicious terrorist campaign that has claimed more than 30,000 innocent lives in India, who actively sabotaged a historic peace initiative, are now offering new initiatives for dialogue.``

mohajir, sadna

Since Umairr wil not deign to respond let me play devils advocate and put forward the alternate point of view:

Dan Burton, Edolphus Towns etc are paid for by the Pak government through the lobbying organizations and are not (significantly) funded by NRP`s (am I right about this?), in contrast to this we see NRI oranizations as being increasingly assertive about influencing US public opinion and lobbying on the hill. This is creating friction between NRP`s and NRI`s who have traditionally enjoyed a harmonious relation keeping away from subcontinental politics. If I understand correctly this is the main thrust of Umairr`s argument and methinks he may have a point here.

re: salman Lodi

No matter how much you spend on advertising it is tough to sell ``products`` like religious extremism, terrorism, murder, drug trafficking, illicit arms trade. The only way would be to ``package`` it in something else. So you call it all Jehad against India. bah !!
India is fighting a war against the above. Now where Pakistan is officially or unofficially involved is for you to figure out and is of no concern to me. But the Indian war against Jehad=religious_extremism + terrorism + murder + narcotics_trade + gun_running must be won by India. It could even mean a full scale conventional or Nuclear war.

As far as Vajpayee not talking to Jurnail saheb. I think Vajpayee put it most aptly when he said, ``The acid test of sincerity of purpose is not words, but deeds. Terrorism and dialogue do not go together.``
Vajpayee spoke about his bus ride to Lahore in search of a new quality of relations in the sub-continent and a new age of regional cooperation and then proceeded to draw up an inventory of the responses from the rulers of Pakistan:
1) Kargil in the summer of 1999,
2) the eclipse of democracy,
3) the steep increase of the terrorist campaign,
4) the hijack of the Indian Airlines aircraft to Kandahar last winter,
5) the massacre of 40 innocent Indians during US President Bill Clinton`s visit last March,
6) the carnage that left more than 100 dead following the move to resume peace talks in Kashmir and so forth.

And there are still people (like the author) that believe they have something to ``sell``.....stop blaming the PR, look at ...oh well forget it.

We all know how this is going to end. This is one of the possible endings:
PAKISTAN AS A STATE FAILS. IT IS OBVIOUSLY BECAUSE OF HINDUS UNDERMINING ISLAM AND SUPPRESSING KASHMIRIS (YOU KNOW SINCE PAKISTANIS WERE TOO BUSY PROTECTING THE KASHMIRI INTEREST WHILE THEIR OWN LEADERS RAPED AND PILLAGED PAKISTAN). BUT SINCE IT WAS ALL A BIG INDIAN CONSPIRACY, anyway, THEY WILL JUST BLAST THE NUCLEAR BOMB, SINCE THAT IS THE LAST RESORT AND YOU MIGHT AS WELL GO DOWN FIGHTING (AGAINST WHAT ??). ANYWAY, THE FUTURE GENERATIONS OF PAKISTANIS LIVING ABROAD WILL THEN RAISE THEIR YOUNG BY TELLING THEM HOW THEIR ANCESTORS WERE MARTYRED FIGHTING AGAINST OTHER ANCESTORS FOR THE CAUSE OF STILL OTHER ANCESTORS....... AND THEY ALL WENT TO JANNAT.

regards



As far as Vajpayee not talking to Jurnal sahab.

Edolphus Towns of New York , Dan Burton of Indiana, Eric Margolis (of Canada) have been lobbying for Pakistan in US and Canada. I am not sure how much does Pakistani government pay to each of these lobbyists, but estimates are $25000 per month.

Re: pullu #69

Umairr has never answered why Pakistan is not willing to do its part (required as the first necessary step) and evacuate PoK so the UN resolutions can be implemented. So expect him to selectively ignore other questions as well and deliver 1000 word propogandist monologues on Kashmir.

bong-dongs
Only Dan Burton? How about President Ronald Reagan toasting Gen. Zia-ul-Haq in the White House as `friend of freedom` or `partner in freedom and democracy` or some such thing? Forget about Pressler? amendment waivers signed by even President Bush personally testifying to Pakistani nuclear `cleanliness` until coincidentally the end of the Cold War? Lets not even talk of missile and other interesting buys from China.

Was anyone complaining about those? Frankly, Indians are bigger bunglers than even Pakistanis, I have to agree.

Sadhana

Re: Bong_Dong # 71

Dan Burton is a Congressman from Indiana and not a senator!

Re: Satayavdi # 70

Robin Raphael is working for the State Department as an assistant secretary though I do not think that she is with the South Asia desk at the moment.

She is presently working on the task force seeking to bring some internal reforms in the State Dept.

Ciao!

Ref Umairr #50:

``The Indian community supported Congressmen (many of whom couldn`t point out Pakistan on a map before the US Indian community started supporting them) are also now pushing the Indian community agenda of harming Pakistan``

Umairr, could the honorable senator Mr Dan Burton point out where India was on the map before the Khalistanis/Pakis got to him? Pakistan has played the same game of influence on Capitol hill for as long as India, so you cant claim any moral high ground there.

I too personally dislike the anti-Pakistani campaign of some Indian organizations but we (as a community) have lost faith and any hope of rationality (in the Pakistani government), all we can hope to do is to contain their aggresive intentions and wait for the day rationality returns.

Sadhana #67:

``one of the terms of any bilateral agreement between India and US ought to be to get Barbara Crossette of the NYT off the India desk :-).``

I would add replacing Pamela Constable - South Asia correspondent of the Washingtonpost, as well.

Satyavadi

PS: Where the hell is PakistanPremi Robin Raphael of Clinton`s first administration, these days?

fairdinkum #re 51

To be ``fair``, I am trying, actually I am holding myself from breaking into a laughter. But for Pakistan, we would have needed a lot to prove ourselves. Was Sadhana too smiling..I don`t know. :)

Ras Siddiqui #re 53 and Umairr #re 50

You talk of permanent peace but you would not agree to any Indian suggestion. You would insist kashmir is disputed, thus trying to break India. We can have Kargil once in a while. But no, we can still talk peace. We should not indulge in propaganda because it harms Pakistan. What an irony?

You advocate peace not for peace but because we are numerically superior!

To all those who talk of Siachen..go back to the first war on kashmir.. the attack was intitiated by Pakistan without even trying peaceful options. Heard of operation Gibralter!

Scout #re 44

The problem with you is sometimes you are too sensible. :)

It was certainly bad and wrong that Pakistani leaders who are held in high esteem by all pakistanis, were labelled as terrorists. Sometimes People can stoop to any level to prove something. The people who published such a slandering ad were more at fault. They atleast could have acted more responsible.

Musharraf/Sharief would have been enough. :)

BTW aren`t all battles nowadays fought in US?

Pullu

And as far as the Indian propaganda `war` against Pakistan in Western forums in concerned, like any other war, proxy, real or propaganda, its a means to an end, which is stable detente. Pakistan has its own way of waging war to force detente, to each his own. Selective moral outrage is misplaced here, too.

Sadhana

I was telling someone the other day, one of the terms of any bilateral agreement between India and US ought to be to get Barbara Crossette of the NYT off the India desk :-). India has suffered bad press for very long, and currently there is only a lull, I sincerely believe.

The press that any issue gets, whether concerning India or Pakistan or any other country(or even internal issue)is a function of the US governments` current aims. I saw a report one day of a protest rally against NYT for NOT reporting on some issue :-).

As a NR Indian/Pakistani your point of view has to put forward in many ways. Not being taken for granted or correcting blatant misinformation or misinterpretation by writing letters to publications is one way. For eg, I saw two excellent replies to the `Jihad University` issue of the NYT magazine. To have well-thought out and consistent point of views to put across also helps. Mere indignation will not do.

Hence we come down to basics. If you don`t want to rally against Pakistani problems in the US, at least rally in Pakistan? Make news by facing down religious intolerance at least once. Demonstrate public distaste against honor-killings. Make the devolution plan a grand success in terms of voter participation and fairness. Highlight efforts to rationalize the Constitutional amendments. Highlight education and human rights efforts. Highlight Pakistani culture. Notice, all these things have nothing to do with India. If the author had bothered to list these `propaganda` items, his point of view would make some sense.

scout: The caste-system, sati and bride-burnings, arranged marriages, snakes and tigers are the first things that spring to any average American`s mind when they think of India. On average Pakistani minds too, btw. So what are you complaining about :-)?

Sadhana

Speaking of media wars, did any of you kids see Peter Jennings manhandle Musharraf uncle last night? The best part was when he showed footage of some Jehadi kid in Pakistan burning an American flag and then Peter Jenning mouthed in with ``display of open hatred towards India and the US.``

Just lovely I tell you.

That`s right, it`s all about propoganda. And you better watch out because I and 5,000 of my closest friends on Wall St., Silicon Valley, and Stanford University are raising a fund called ``Anti-Jehad Capital Partners IV`` and it`s primary purpose will be a media war through our Jewish friends in the American media (you do know about the Hindu/Jewish conspiracy against Islam don`t you??) to malign everything Pakistani.

re: author

// * The writer is an advertising creative consultant living in Los Angeles *//

Without trying to defend either the Indian or Pakistani rulers one thing can be said with cetainty that the author is a third rate propagandist and not `creative` anything.

How about donating your two grand into fixing Pakistan`s educational system?

Rafay

tahmed321 #60, ``. If you must emulate someone else`s behavior and not try to use and trust your own mind, then look towards the US and Britain: these are a country where issues are openly discussed.``

You are forgetting that these countries have already established themselves as international powers. They are in a totally different ballpark than Pakistan. At this moment, Pakistanis just cannot afford to publicize their problems in the international media. And anyway, I think everyone already knows the issues faced by Pakistan.

``I still think that you are too concerned about the West`s opinion of Pakistan, and not concerned about how God will judge the evil things (like the harrassment of minorities through blasphemy laws) that are undertaken in Pakistan.``

I am concerned about the Pakistani image because I am a Pakistani. It`s a mixture of ego and to some extent patriotism. Are you asking me to lower my head in shame and annihilate Pakistan mentally? I`m sorry, I won`t do that. As for God, I`m sure he`ll find away to reward the innocent and punish the guilty somehowSo what about the mistreatment of women in Pakistan? I hear no protests outside the UN summit against that? Why don`t we bring all our dirty dishwater into the public? Why just the blasphemy laws? Where do we end? Do we only defend the issues that serve us better?

I`m sorry that you think I`m not concerned about the evil things happening back home. Of course I am. I don`t know what I have said to invoke such a response from you. Did I tick you off sometime, I`m forgetting? :)

slink #54, ``scout..you ask why people dont go and protest against the blasphemy law in pakistan itself. quite simply, because you might be killed.``

You are right. But can we let this fear handicap ourselves? We can`t afford to. I know it`s easy for me to say, I`m not living in Pakistan at the moment, but there`s always risk taking involved in bringing change. And I don`t think protesting outside the UN Millenium Summit would benefit Pakistanis immensely. Yeah, it might be mentioned in the local channel 9 news, but I can guarantee the coverage will be laced with negativity, thus lowering the confidence of Pakistanis themselves, and sending out a bad message to Americans. We need to get positive aspects of Pakistan ``out`` there. I`m not glossing over Pakistan`s problems, those will have to be dealt with by ourselves. What I am saying is to start repairing the damage done by the international and Indian media. We can`t leave open wounds unattended. This is just part of the plan to bring Pakistan up.