An International Failure

Re: Prem

``...Offical India and offical Pakistan have gotten stuck in a finger-pointing loop ...``

I think that that is part of the story. The other part is that official Pakistan has gotten stuck in a violence-inflicting-on-Indian-public loop (something you did not mention). Official India is not engaged in any activity of that sort.

Here is an NY Times editorial

The Pressure Rises in Pakistan

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/20/opinion/20THU1.html

SameerJB

“India should have followed what Mohathir Mohammed said to him. You may visit Malaysia if you like but you are not invited. India did not even give him a lesson in democracy what MM told him on his face.”

….so we now have mahathir giving lessons in democracy…somebody should ask anwar ibrahim what he thinks of that….

Re: Shammi

The problem is no Pakistani trusts the word of India just like no Indian trusts the word of Pakistan.

Bring this man before the world and let it ask the question as to who really did it and if India is a democracy, as it claims, then it should give Pakistan the chance to question this person before it unilaterly condemns Pakistan. In this case, India is not United States and it cannot act as the judge, the jury and the executioner. Yes, there are two set of laws in this world; one for the United States and one for the rest of the world and no amount of Indian friendship with the United States will alter this reality.

If India has such solid evidence, why is it not sharing it with the world? India will only help her own case.

In case of 9-11, the United States did share its evidence of OBL`s crime with Pakistan; granted Pakistan had no choice, but the United States DID share the evidence. If India share the evidence with the world, it will only increase India`s moral standing in the war against terrorism.

It makes no sense why India is so adamnt and refuses from sharing its evidence with world. Logic would suggest that it could only help the Indian cause and not hurt it.

Things have reached a very serious stage and this has happened, because India and Pakistan trade allegations in a crisis situation and do not dicuss means to diffuse it. India refuses to talk with Pakistan and if India continues to adopt this posture, it will help no one.

India has everything to gain and nothing to lose if, as it claims, that its evidence is solid. The question is, why is India so eager to waste this golden opportunity of gaining the moral assendency over Pakistan?

Ciao

Dear SameerJB:

re#266

I agree with most of your summation.

Despite Kargil (that was pretty stupid) -- I don`t think Musharraf is THAT stupid to knowingly ALLOW the Indian Parliament attack.

However after the Kashmir Assembly attack he should have tightened his control over ISI sponsored or unsponsored terror activities -- by reining in the Jaishis and the LT. Apparently he did not do that considering the same pattern of attack on the Indian Parliament.

If not for the love of India -- for his own safety and his country`s safety -- Musharraf has to show some activity in this regard. This becomes of paramount urgency -- now that the all the Al Qadaeda terrorists are streaming into Pakistan.

The danger to Pakistan is real serious -- it MUST NOT allow itself to become -- the next incubator of World Terrorism -- after Afghanistan -- it`s not a distinction that Pakistan or any country can be proud of these days -- it`s very hazardous for the health and well being of a country.

India is prepared to help Mr. Musharraf to rein in his Jihadis -- but Mr. Musharraf has to help India as well -- instead of such Goebbelsian inanities like -- ``they attacked their own Parliament`` -- right now the LEAST he can do is to BAN THE B#ST#RDS.

As far as India encourging democracy in Pakistan is concerned -- India is as promiscuous as USA -- ready to go to bed with any dictator any tyrant any aggressor in the world -- as long it helps its ``national interests``.

India is partly responsible for the ascendancy of Army dictators in Pakistan -- ready to oblige them with legitimacy -- at the drop of the hat.

I agree with your idea that India should invite all the democratic leaders of Pakistan to visit India and interact with various institutions of Indian democracy -- it will help the Pakistanis to become more familiar with -- as to how to run democracy in Pakistan -- and it will also help India to make some lasting frienship with Pakistan leaders.

But with the BJP in power -- that is another chasing the rainbow.

Eid mubarak

From the Washington Post:

``The Pakistani terrorist groups accused by India may be even tougher to take on: As supposed freedom fighters in Indian-ruled Kashmir, they have been supportedfor years by the Pakistani military`s own intelligence service. Their bloody and despicable attack on the seat of Indian democracy last week was undoubtedly timedas a counter to the downfall of their al Qaeda and Taliban allies, and meant to force Mr. Musharraf to shift his troops and attention away from the fleeing terroristsand toward India.Fortunately, India`s democratic government has reacted to the assault with admirable restraint; though it has as much right as the United States or Israel to defenditself against the extremists, it has so far refrained from acting while waiting to see what Mr. Musharraf would do. The Pakistani president has temporized, demandingto see evidence that the Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed groups were involved. Meanwhile, his forces have been busy with al Qaeda, arresting more than150 fugitives and fighting a gun battle with one group. Mr. Musharraf`s defenders protest that he cannot be expected to take on both groups of extremists at once,and U.S. officials have been cautious, at least in public, in pressing him to do so. Yet aggressive action on both fronts is essential, above all for Pakistan`s sake -- itoffers Mr. Musharraf the chance to purge his regime once and for all of its corrupting links to Islamic extremism and terrorism. If he can act decisively in the comingweeks Mr. Musharraf could put Pakistan firmly on a course to greater stability and renewed development. If he flinches, he will likely face an even greater crisis.``

I am sorry to cut and paste rather than just giving the URL, but here`s the editorial from today`s Washington Post, one of the most influential newspapers in the US and most closely attuned to the US Govt.`s views.

Notice the use of the words ``credible information`` regarding India`s position on the attack.

______________________________________________

On to Pakistan

Thursday, December 20, 2001; Page A42

POLICYMAKERS are still debating where the war on terrorism should go next, but as a practical matter it has already moved -- to Pakistan, where it has been driven by an extraordinary and dangerous confluence of events in the past few days. Hundreds of Taliban and al Qaeda fighters, probably including a number of senior leaders, have filtered into Pakistan from Afghanistan, eluding the army of Gen. Pervez Musharraf. At the same time -- and surely not by coincidence -- Pakistani terrorist groups long connected to both al Qaeda and the Taliban have been credibly blamed by India for carrying out a suicide assault on the parliament building in New Delhi. Mr. Musharraf, who chose, after Sept. 11, to align his military regime with the United States and against the terrorists, now faces a crucial, two-front test of that commitment. Final defeat of the Taliban and al Qaeda may depend on how aggressively his forces move to kill or arrest the militants who have crossed the border; and a serious move against the Pakistani groups is essential to divorcing his government from extremism and avoiding military action by India.

Taking on either task may force Mr. Musharraf to confront formidable domestic opposition. The Taliban refugees, who by some accounts include many senior officials of the deposed Afghan regime, are likely to try hiding among fellow Pashtun tribesmen in the wild border area, or in the Islamic schools where many were trained in the first place. Though the government has enlisted some border tribes in its effort to root out the fugitives, many could find harbor, creating the possibility that a Taliban or terrorist structure might reconstitute itself inside Pakistan. Preventing that may mean confronting Pakistani Islamic militants and their followers, who have already staged several violent anti-government demonstrations since Sept. 11.

The Pakistani terrorist groups accused by India may be even tougher to take on: As supposed freedom fighters in Indian-ruled Kashmir, they have been supported for years by the Pakistani military`s own intelligence service. Their bloody and despicable attack on the seat of Indian democracy last week was undoubtedly timed as a counter to the downfall of their al Qaeda and Taliban allies, and meant to force Mr. Musharraf to shift his troops and attention away from the fleeing terrorists and toward India.

Fortunately, India`s democratic government has reacted to the assault with admirable restraint; though it has as much right as the United States or Israel to defend itself against the extremists, it has so far refrained from acting while waiting to see what Mr. Musharraf would do. The Pakistani president has temporized, demanding to see evidence that the Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed groups were involved. Meanwhile, his forces have been busy with al Qaeda, arresting more than 150 fugitives and fighting a gun battle with one group. Mr. Musharraf`s defenders protest that he cannot be expected to take on both groups of extremists at once, and U.S. officials have been cautious, at least in public, in pressing him to do so. Yet aggressive action on both fronts is essential, above all for Pakistan`s sake -- it offers Mr. Musharraf the chance to purge his regime once and for all of its corrupting links to Islamic extremism and terrorism. If he can act decisively in the coming weeks Mr. Musharraf could put Pakistan firmly on a course to greater stability and renewed development. If he flinches, he will likely face an even greater crisis.

REf: Stuka #275

Stuka,

First of all I am not all convinced that the choice India has to make is between Gen. Musharraf or the Jehadis. Its more likely to be between Musharraf or some other General, who might be more sympathetic to the jehadi cause than him. Does that really matter so much? In any case Musharraf is no friend of India, nor is he likely to become one. And after having survived Zia, do we really need to be scared of what Pakistan can throw at us?

Secondly, not acting at this moment is likely to confirm Pakistans and the jehadis` conviction that India is a wussy state waiting to be kicked around. We need to act now, or we deserve everything that we get. The only question is about what to do.

My personal favorite is to withdraw from the Indus river treaty, and reduce water flow to Pakistan. This would not be a declaration of war, especially if we declare our intentions of negotiating a new and ``just`` treaty. Then we can go ahead and draw out the negotiations as long as possible while Pakistan hurts. And if Pakistan feels threatened enough to declare war on us, so much the better. We could teach them a lesson, and still be acting in self-defense!

I think that one low grade aggression deserves another. Don`t you?

-narain

ref: Trojan Horse #258

``Our forefathers were smarter. They didnt build a house on someone elses property.``

...though of course they built mosques over other people`s temples. :)

-narain

Stuka, Ferozk, Sherdil

Detainee: Pakistani Forces Backed India Attack

NEW DELHI (Reuters) - A man arrested over the bloody raid on India`s parliament said Thursday Pakistan`s army and top intelligence agency had armed the suicide squad and they had telephoned their families in Pakistan the night before they died...

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20011220/wl/india_parliament_dc_20.html

END OF QUOTE

I think that this proof is as good as, if not better than, the proof provided by the United States through the Bin Laden video. Here is a live conspirator who is telling tales. Ferozk, do you still consider the Pakistani government as a bona-fide investigator after this evidence (in other words, can a prime accused be the prosecutor?). Stuka, what do you think? Army and top intelligence agencies are implicated. Sherdil, anything to add?

#219 saminashah

How about translating some of that nooyawk-yiddish into english? Whatever it was, sounded like you were telling him off!

Audio-video-Radio,

I don`t know about phreedom phiters and their phathers but if any phreedom phiter could come and get you, we will all be better off.

Give up this Urstruly-like hatred, man.

Ferozk # 227

I share your view that our countries need to act more mature and begin to trust each other, but IMHO there is a far more critical, and more difficult to achieve, maturity that all of us need urgently: the maturity to be more self-critical, to begin to question our own governments, most importantly, to realize that our governments are NOT our countries, no matter what they tell us.

Offical India and offical Pakistan have gotten stuck in a finger-pointing loop that has absolutely no resolution, because they trust each other less than two gladiators of yore did, when they were told to fight till death.

That is a hard fact that we all must face.

So the responsibility devolves to individuals. If we really love our COUNTRIES then we need to start asking our GOVERNMENTS: What the hell is going on? What dangerous games are you guys upto?

Indians must ask the Indian government and Indian hawks to stop talking about launching a full-scale attack until they make a better case for any allegations they might level against Pakistan. Pakistanis must ask the Pakistan government and Pakistani hawks whether there may be reasonable grounds to suspect that some of the allegations Indians make might be true.

Unless we develop that attitude, no amount of information, no amount of evidence, no amount of reassurance means a thing.

To what extent do Indians and Pakistanis have that attitude? I find very little of it.

As an Indian, I have a natural inclination to believe more of what the Indian governments says than what the Pakistanis government says. The same, and perfectly justifiably, is the case for Pakistanis. My Pakistani friend has an equally strong natural inclination to believe more of what the Pakistani government has to say than what the Indian government says.

But are we, as thinking, non-robotic human beings, willing to move beyond that? And, if not, what point is there in our making that sort of idealistic demand on our governments and those who have vested interests in keeping the enmity between the two nations alive?

Regards.

InYourFace #206 writes ``Don`t you know that Arundhati Roy, Farzana Versey, Praful Bidwai, Varsha Bhosle, Dilip DeSouza et al e ``Journalists``? Their job is to find ``problems`` but not ``solutions``.``

One man`s problems are another man`s solutions.

Stuka #275
``You are concentrating on ``should``, what should be done, what should Pakistan do etc.``

Nope I am talking about what INDIA should do.

``to expect Mussharaf to do a major crackdown on Kashmiri militants is foolhardy, Mussharaf will be overthrown, and the Jehadis will get what they want. On the other hand, if we go to war, again, the Jehadis, to whom the destruction of India is more important than saving Pakistan, will get what they want``

The mythology of jihadis overthrowing Musharraf in any event is a load of BS propagated by the jihadi security paradigm folks like Hamid Gul.

Think about it, `indigenous freedom fighters` or `Kashmiri militants` as you refer to them, taking over a neighbouring country Pakistan, how is that possible?

Or much-enumerated 5% of the population which is madarassa-educated taking over the liberal moderate modern-educated Army as well ruling over 95% moderate majority including Harvard/Wellesley- returns? Are these 95% totally emasculated to be taken over by 5% religious zealots?

We see enough outrage both on chowk and elsewhere among Pakistanis at the slightest suggestion elsewhere that Pakistani can be thus ruled over by jihadis.

Its seems Pakistanis expect India should subscribe to this jihadi takeover mythology only in the context of the Indo-Pak but at no other time. At all other times, we are expected to believe that Pakistan is this progresive country with liberal leaders and liberal modern population. Its clear Pakistanis subscribe to both ``jihad will keep us safe from India`` AND to the ``jihadis have no role in Pakistan`` theory.

By modelling the Indian response based on irrational fear of the cultivated irrationality of a few thousand(or few hundred thousand) jihadis, we will be giving the jihadi security paradigm folks of Pakistani planners, the success THEY want. This will only serve to encourage them to continue with it in other parts of India in future. India has to put an end to this crap once and for all.

The latest terrorist incident with the Indian parliament exposes the fragility of the confidence that exist between Pakistan and India. Both the nations are nuclear weapons` state, but do not have the maturity to act as one and it is because of this, that there has to be a ``information bridge`` between them.

India`s rejection of the Pakistani offer for a joint investigation was immature and shortsighted. By working together, both sides could have gauged the intentions of the other party, but by refusing to work together India and Pakistan will continue to trade allegations and threats and create a ground, which will be fertile for more misunderstandings in the future.

A long time ago, there was a discusion on the topic of a ``hegemony``. If India wants to be the hegemonic power, it needs to determine the facts before it acts. A hegemon`s task is to promote stability; not undermine it.

Ciao

Sherdil:

``The response from India so far is not helpful, nor is it very well thought out. ``

I agree with you. I am not a dove by any means, but I think by going after Musharraf, the Indian gov`t is barking up the wrong tree. I think it`s more because of public pressure than anything else. It`s not that they are stupid, but the middle class does not have the patience any more, and the government is also sensitive about it`s legacy i history. Overall, they are thinking from the heart and not from their head, and I fear, playing into the hands of the Jehadis.

Sadna:

I am sorry I could not reply to individual posts. Our basic perspective at looking at the issue is different. You are concentrating on ``should``, what should be done, what should Pakistan do etc. I am looking at the ``Could``. What could be done by India, what can Pakistan do under the circumstances etc. Obviously, to expect Mussharaf to do a major crackdown on Kashmiri militants is foolhardy, Mussharaf will be overthrown, and the Jehadis will get what they want. On the other hand, if we go to war, again, the Jehadis, to whom the destruction of India is more important than saving Pakistan, will get what they want. I am well aware that successive Paki govts have said, ``deal with us or the alternative is much worse`` and it basically a hoodwinking measure. However, this is the first time I feel that it is really the case.

All I hope is that Mussharaf hands over Dawood Ibrahim. That guy is of no strategic importance to Pakistan, has no significant recognition among the Paki masses, and the gesture will soothe temperatures in India.