The Significant Unit of War

I have always pointed out that the APHC leadership to be the most sane and balanced in South Asia. Following is an article by the son of one of the members of this organization. He is married to the daughter of a similar organization in Pakistan`s Kashmir. It is a must read, and comes straight from the horse`s (or the horse`s on, in this case) mouth. A very well written article, that portrays my sentiments, as well:

``Beggars on the prowl

Sajad Gani Lone

India and Pakistan seem to be on the brink of a devastating conflict. If the bellicose language, belligerent postures and the free flow of pejoratives are any indications a war or major border skirmish may be the ugly manifestation of the present escalated tension. Is war an optimal instrument to accomplish objectives relating to Kashmir? Has it been successful as a means of resolving the Kashmir dispute in the past? Apart from adding to the army of orphans and widows of the earlier conflicts, will there be any real beneficiaries? And finally how does one describe the present state of relations between the two countries? ``Nuclear powers on the brink of a war`` or ``failed states en route to economic disaster``......

After all what is so precious about Kashmir, that it can hold the peace and prosperity of 1,200 million people to ransom? India has Kashmir and is still mired in poverty. What will Pakistan achieve by getting Kashmir and what will India lose by leaving Kashmir. The poverty variables will stay unchanged. The day-to-day problems of the average citizen will still remain the same.....

There is a gross mismatch of priorities. The two countries have a set of friends, with whom the population has nothing in common and an enemy with which the population has so much in common-cultural heritage, language, relationships, religion etc. Yet travelling to each other`s countries is controlled. It is difficult to obtain a visa. What is the plight of the millions of Indians and Pakistanis, who are related to each other? Take the recent case of Indian reaction. Again ordinary poor people are the victims of the travel restrictions. The Indian move may have yielded some results, and may be scoring high on the diplomatic scale, but it is a move devoid of moral or ethical parameters, and scores low on the humanitarian scale.....

And if Kashmir is the shah rug and the atoot ang, of Pakistan and India respectively, what is the plight of the inhabitants of this national honour ie, the Kashmiris? The Pakistani establishment seems to have encouraged the civilian Kashmiri population to fight a professional army ie, the Indian Army. And in India-the land of ahinsa and Darupudi, a cheering audience, applauds an army which has gone berserk, and is on rampage-killing armed and unarmed people alike, burning houses, humiliating ordinary Kashmiris, and molesting women. Both the countries seem to be merrily dancing to the pirated tunes of national honour and sentiments, in the ongoing dance macabre of the Kashmiris.

Qatar and Saudi Arabia, Iran and UAE, Saudi Arabia and Yemen, all have territorial disputes. But they have not allowed the acrimony to spill into other areas. Hundreds of thousands of Yemenis and Iranians are working in Saudi Arabia and UAE respectively. Qatar is a fellow member Of Saudi Arabia in the potent GCC.

A hybrid policy based on introspection of past follies and emulation of successful conflict resolution strategies of other countries is needed. There are no painless solutions. But a path involving short-term pain and long-term gain needs to be embraced, rather than a path of pain ad infinitum. The present scenario presents the most opportune moment, to shun decades of political cynicism and chart out a course for the ultimate resolution of the problem. The International community is willing to play a more pro-active role. Despite the Army background, Mr Musharraf for a change seems to be more, patriotic and pragmatic, than any of his predecessors. Mr Vajpayee, too seems to have distanced himself from his party`s rightwing gerrymandering, and has exhibited distinct, though scarce, signs of political vision. This potentially decisive combination will not be always there. The liberal and emancipated silent majority need to put their weight behind this combination and isolate the faux naif hawks, or else the hawks will isolate this region from peace and prosperity. (The News, Pakistan)

re glen

``kASHMIR IS the last muslim land where non muslims HAVE BEEN OCCUPYING IN THE 21 ST CENTURY BESIDES iSRAEL``

Kashmir is Kashmiri land. Israel is Israeli land. Elementary.Where does `Muslim` get into this business?

re:Reply #: 212

soysauce

I agree with you. BJP coming to power with 2/3rd majority is bad business. Except ABV and may be JS, i do not trust anyone. I was just making a rational observation. BJP has been spending a lot of money buying aircrafts, ammunition and so on. Now, it has mobilised the military as never before. I read yesterday that this is costing the country billions of dollars. What is all this for? Advani was on C-SPAN yesterday and gave no assurance that there will be deescalation. We are seeing something serious going on here. Musharraf has worked himself to a tightspot. The demands being asked of him are tough to meet. He may have to change the entire Kashmir policy to meet those demands. Let us see what is in store. I am not very optimistic about peace.

Sridhar

re Rsaxena 221



Sorry, didn`t mean to leave that Hindu rascal Dr APJ Kalam out. Closet Hindus, I tell you. Just like Maulana Abul Kalam Azad.

BTW, I felt bad about mentioning `that IAF chief`. His name was Idris Hassan Lateef and he served as CAS between 78 and 81. Another closet Hindu, I am sure.

re:Reply #: 222

ali1

You are despicable. You cannot argue with any logic so you resort to religious taunt. We Indians worship a Zillion gods. Do you have any problems? Just worry about ``the land of pure`` which is facing challenges similar to 1971. Leave Sai Baba out of this.

Sridhar

re Aeisha quoting

`BANGLADESH IS A ORPHAN STATE ,IT STILL LLOKS TO WEST I.E. WEST PAKISTAN FOR CUES BEFORE IT DOES ANYTHING......`

Regardless of how the author signed his name (Steven Wise?), one feels pity for a soul so overtaken by a mixture of nostalgia and hatred. The globe`s sixth biggest democracy, the top contributor to UN Peacekeeping efforts, and one of the ten fastest growing economies of thw world (Asiaweek) looks at a lot of places for guidance. A semi-rogue, bankrupt, military dictatorship is not one of those places.

re zafar

``Sigalphdada, I must say that you are absolutely without Ruth. Absolutely.)``

Yeah, ever since she left things have been tough:) Another Jewish plot, I am sure.

America At War:

India & Pakistan

With Navnita Behera

India-Pakistan Expert

Thursday, Jan. 10, 2002; 1 p.m. EST

http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/zforum/02/brookings011002.htm

Tensions between India and Pakistan remain high and there is a prevailing threat of war between these nuclear adversaries. What, if anything can be done to stabilize relations between India and Pakistan? What options are available to reverse the collision course of these adversaries? And, what will be the effect of the conflict on U.S. efforts to stamp out terrorism in Afghanistan and elsewhere?

Brookings Institution visiting fellow and India-Pakistan expert Navnita Chadha Behera was online to address these and other questions during this Brookings-washingtonpost.com discussion.

Currently with the Foreign Policy Studies department at Brookings, Dr. Behera, has been an Assistant Research Professor at the Centre for Policy Research, and Assistant Director, Women in Security, Conflict Management and Peace (WISCOMP), New Delhi. Dr Chadha has also served as a Consultant to the Ford Foundation, for reviewing their programming on the Regional Security, Peace and Cooperation in South Asia at the New Delhi office.

The discussion is part of a regular series developed by Brooking`s America`s Response to Terrorism project and washingtonpost.com to examine the key policy questions related to the U.S. fight against terrorism.

The transcript follows.

Editor`s Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.



Navnita Chadha Behera: I want to begin by thanking The Washington Post for giving me this opportunity to interact with people across the globe on an issue that is at the centre of the worl`d attention, next only to Afghanistan.



Albany, N.Y.: Could you give some general background information on the long going conflict between India and Pakistan?

Navnita Chadha Behera: India and Pakistan are locked in a territorial dispute on the state Of Jammu and Kashmir. When the two countries became independent in 1947, J&K was a Muslim-majority state ruled by a Hindu ruler. Pakistan believed it belonged to Pakistan because of its Muslim nmajority population but when the Raja supported by Sheikh Abdullah, a popularly elected Muslim leader joined India, it became a point of contention. Pakisan sent in raiders to forcibly take over the state and in resulting confrontation with Indian army, the state was divided between India and Pakistan. As of now, India has the Vale of Kashmir, Jammu and Ladakh region. Pakistan has the Northern Areas and small strip of Mirpur-Muzzafarabad belt, known as Azad Kashmir. And, China has one part of Kashmir too.



San Francisco, Calif.: What is the reaction by neighboring countries to the current escalation between India and Pakistan? In the event of war, nuclear fallout would spill out to the neighboring countries, so they have a real interest in trying to prevent another war in South Asia.

Navnita Chadha Behera: No country in South Asia wants a war and the recent SAARC summit that took place in Kathmandu served a good platform for the neighbouring countries to use diplomatic means to persuade India and Pakistan to de-escalate the situation.



New Delhi: India has taken a belligerent posture by massing its troops along the border. Pakistan continues to refuse taking action against ``jihadi`` terrorists on its soil, who it calls ``freedom fighters.`` And all eyes are set on the Pakistan President Musharraf`s television speech Saturday. India has a slight edge over Pakistan on conventional weapons, but still Pakistan has enough might to cause devastation and havoc in case of a war. If Pakistan also sticks to its Kashmir policy of aiding militant groups, how long do you think India will keep its troops on the border with tension mounting by the day? Under these circumstances, what face saving measure would New Delhi need to pull back its troops from the border for a peaceful resolution. What is at stake for the ruling BJP-led government? Will Pakistan be prepared to hand over the 20 terrorist India wants for trial?

Navnita Chadha Behera: Good question. The maximal gains, BJP is hoping for is to use this as an opportunity to convince the world that the secessioinist movement in J&K is being controlled by outsiders and is therefore a terrorism issue, not that of right of self-determination. And, in the changed international context, force Pakistan`s hands to close down all traning camps for the militants. Then, India could deal with Kashmir as an ``internal political issue.`` More realistically, its using the troops on border to keep up the pressure on US, UK and other countries to, in turn, keep up the pressure on Musharraf to crack down. The threat of war is being used as tactic not as a strategic goal or policy. I don`t think Pakistan would hand over the 20 terrorists to India as that might be percieved as publicly caving into Indian pressure and he would face trouble in his doemstic constituency. Indians have good intelligence on how many camps are operating where... and some concrete action on that score is, I believe India is looking for. The bottomline is Pakistan should give up on using terror as an instrument of state policy.



Harrisburg, Pa.: What potential roles do you see China playing in the disputes between India and Pakistan. What, if anything, should the United States be doing in anticipation of responses by the Chinese government?

Navnita Chadha Behera: China has changed its policy post Kargil affair and now taking the line that its a bilateral issue and both countries should sort it out on the negotiating table.



Mountain View, Calif.: Will there be a shift in the foreign policy of the U.S. towards India? If India proved that the militants who attacked its Parliament are based in Pakistan, would the U.S. consider the attacks similar to the ones on Sept 11?

Navnita Chadha Behera: I think USA is doing what is a difficult balancing act. The stakes are high.. Kashmir has a potential of unravelling its carefully built coalition against terrorism and there is the potential of the conflict becoming nuclear. In the more immediate context, US does not want Pakistan to shift its forces from the Afghan border and has us soldiers on Pakistan soil....in the long term, US-India relations are likely to deepen for several other political, strategic, economic factors involved. But in the present context, I don`t foresee USA attacking Pakistan. It does not need to because its getting all the cooperation from the Pakistan govt that it needs.



Bowie, Md.: How fast are India and Pakistan modernizing? Is there GDP and standard of living growth as fast as say, China? As economic and academic powers do they rate closer to the fast-developing nations of east Asia or closer to most of Africa?

Navnita Chadha Behera: Interesting... Pakistan`s economy is in deep trouble and that was the topmost priority of Musharraf govt till Sep 11 happened and even now, it has used its cooperation with US to gain all economic advantages such as debt rescheduling and more loans. It needs a big dose of investments to put the country`s economy back on track. India is a different case, its growing rapidly. By some estimates, it will be the fourth largest market by 2015. But, both are far behind China.



San Jose, Calif.: What do the Kashmiris want? Do they want to go with India or Pakistan or none? Is anyone listening to them?

Navnita Chadha Behera: I think, no one is listening to them. Given a free hand, they would probably opt for independence but the complicating factor is that the world does not realise.. J&K state has many other communities besides Kashmiri Muslims (in majority) like Paharis, Gujjars, Kashmiri Pandits, Ladakhi Buddhists, Shia Muslims of Kargil and Dogras. Each community has their own political aspirations and most do not support Kashmiri Muslims demand of severing itself from India. The picture on Pakistani side is also difficult. Although they are all Muslims, very few are Kashmiris in the sense, they don`t speak Kashmiri language and there are real differences between Shias and Sunnis. Resolving Kashmir dispute entails a lot more than just resolving the territory issue and that`s what needs to be understood.



Clifton Park, N.Y.: Despite Musharraf`s reputation as the creator of Kargill fiasco, and his obsession with Kashmir as the main issue between India and Pakistan, he seems like a man of moderation and understanding that India can make a deal with. Isn`t this a golden opportunity for India to do so?

Navnita Chadha Behera: Personally, I do agree with that assessment but Musharraf has let India down before..but the issue at stake is: Is Paksitani army going to give up its only leverage (that of using violence to bleed India to force a deal on Kashmir) it has...a very tough decision.



Walldorf, Germany: What option does Pakistan have now that it is pushed to a corner. In case of a war Pakistan would be forced to use the nukes in order to avoid a rout and disintegration of its country. Is the situation really so grim? Is there really any way out? Where do you see the situation heading to if Pakistan does not comply with the request of the international community to extradite the 42 terrorist? Do you foresee China getting involved too in this conflict?

Navnita Chadha Behera: The situation is serious. I think, Musharraf could use this opportunity to rid Pakistan of its extremist problem which is tearing it apart. He needs to follow its ``Paksitan first`` policy more seriously and delink terrorism as an instrument of policy to secure its goals on Kashmir...don`t forsake the political cause but use a different strategy and here, US and other global players could play a role.

War is not on the horizn...at least unlikey



Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: Why, inspite of India`s unwillingness to allow either the media or UN observers into Jammu and Kashmir, is the U.S. willing to beleive India`s claim of cross border terrorism?

Navnita Chadha Behera: There is considerable and credible evidence pointing in that direction, that has been shared with international community. The origins of Kashmiri insurgency in 1990s were indegenous indeed but Pakistan hijacked the movement and thathas proved to be ist bete noire...Over the years, paksitan has lost support in all key international fora such as UN and OIC...



Washington, D.C.: How does India view the United States in light of its growing relations with Pakistan? It seems the United States is only supportive to India in words and few actions. The United States seems to have two laws in dealing with Terrorism--if it`s the United States, we can go to war. If it`s India, they should not. I quote George Bush, ``There are no grounds for negotiation`` yet they ask India to negotiate.

Navnita Chadha Behera: The shift in US-Pak relations is a result of circumstances rather than structural factors. US needed Pakistan`s help to fight its war against AL-queda. What you state is precisely the dilemma of Bush administration...how to define a principled definition of terrorism? I think Bush made it clear that terrorism is not justified no matter how sacred the political cause but the situation is still evolving



Oakland, Calif.: Do you think that United States ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) would have a significant effect on the situation in India/Pakistan?

Do you think that the current India/Pakistan conflict could/will escalate to nuclear war? If so, what can the U.S. do to prevent this from happening?

Navnita Chadha Behera: No, I don`t think US ratifying CTBT would make India or Pakistan give up their nuclear weapons.

I don`t think it will escalate to the nuclear war but the danger remains, hence the urgent need to de-escalate the situation.



Silver spring, Md.: Why would a country be asked to divide again based on religion? What would happen to 140 million muslims in India, which is world`s second largest muslim population, in case another partition is a better option? How could India, with so much diversity in religion and language and culture, still survive as a nation after a second partition?

Navnita Chadha Behera: This indeed is the nub of the problem. India`s secular principles do not allow it to concede the principle that religion should become the basis of carving nations. Bangladesh proved that too.



Lexington, Ken.: India gave a list of 20 terrorists to Pakistan currently residing there, of which 14 are Indian citizens. These 14 terrorists are being seeked by interpol too. Pakistan has refused to accede to this demand. Pakistan, being a signatory to Interpol, should be handing over these terrorists to Interpol/India. Why is the U.S. not exerting pressure on Musharraf to extradite them to India or hand them over to Interpol?

Navnita Chadha Behera: I believe that US is trying to do that through private channels not publicly. The US Congressmen currently visiting the region have conveyed this message to Musharraf regime.



Washington, D.C.: Isn`t your analysis one sided regarding the history of Kashmir? I mean it was India who took the issue to the UN and agreed to hold a plebiscite in the region. Then why is India still reluctant? Wouldn`t you think that a plebiscite in Kashmir under the auspices of the UN would solve the problem forever?

Navnita Chadha Behera: While I don`t want to get into the history of plebiscite issue, it is important to remember a little known fact of UN resolutions. The first part of the UN resolution demands Pakistan to withdraw ALL its forces from what is currently Azad Kashmir and Northern Areas. As much as I don`t see India agreeing to a plebiscite, I don`t think Pakistan will ever withdraw its forces. Anyway, I do believe that plebiscite option has been overtaken by history and a solution will come with a futristic approach rather than looking into what is obviously a highly contested history.



Eatontown, N.J.: What is the diplomatic channel (dialogue) in place for solving the Kashmir dispute?

Navnita Chadha Behera: As of now, NONE. That is why the constant pressure to get the two sides talking.



Tarrytown, N.Y.: Do you think Pakistan`s claim to Kashmir is indeed ``strong`` as suggested by British Prime Minister Blair? From what I understand Pakistan was a part of India. Any claim for separate state is strictly based on grounds of religious separation of Hindus and Muslims, right?

Also, what is the Simla accord? Why does India use that as an excuse for not following the UN resolutions for a plebiscite?

Lastly, is there is a legitimate fear on India`s part regarding mass exodus of Hindu`s and pro-Indians in Kashmir that imply that a plebiscite would unfairly tilt in favor of Pakistan?

Thanks.

Navnita Chadha Behera: I have already answered the first part of Q earlier.

Second, Simla Accord was signed in 1972 after the 1971 war between India and Pakistan which latter lost, creating Bangladesh.

At Simla, both decided to resolve the issue bilaterally. There are many who believe that there was an informal agreement betwene Indira Gandhi and Bhutto that the de facto border existing now in Kashmir should be made de jure. Pakistan contests this. Indian govt argues, that Simla overtook UN resolutions...which are no longer relevant



Chelmsford, Mass.: The Kashmir dispute has caused a significant loss to all parties involved.

What are the chances of finding a political solution that will be acceptable to Kashmiris, Indians and Pakistans over the Kashmir dispute in the next decade?

With the resolution of the Kashmir dispute, do you believe India and Pakistan can become friendly nations in which borders will be open and people will feel less hatred towards one another?

Navnita Chadha Behera: A difficult question. There are two problems. One, most of solutions on the table right now have been put by India, Pakistan or outsiders. There is a dire need to bring the real people of J&K state (and, all of them, as I clarified earlier) to involve in this process.

Second, focus on the process right now rather than the content of the solution and then, there is hope.



Navnita Chadha Behera: Thank you very much. I need to leave now. My sincere apologies for not being able to answer all the questions.

Once again, I would like to thank Washington Post for giving me this opportunity.



washingtonpost.com:

That wraps up today`s show. Thanks to everyone who joined the discussion.

Stay tuned to Live Online:

Real Estate Live at 2 p.m. EST

Televise Moussoui Trial at 2 p.m. EST

Dirda on Books at 2 p.m. EST

Life Milestones: Ron Suskind at 3 p.m. EST

Live Online Special Coverage: America At War

Did you know that you can follow more than one Live Online discussion at the same time? Just open another browser window and toggle back and forth between discussions! And, if you miss one, catch up with the Live Online transcripts.

Keep up with the latest in news, sports, politics and entertainment with washingtonpost.com e-mail newsletters.

NEW! Personalize your Post with mywashingtonpost.com. Get customized news, traffic, weather and more.

http://www.brook.edu/views/papers/singer/20020103.htm

Pakistan`s Madrassahs: Ensuring a System of Education not Jihad

Analysis Paper #14, November 2001

P.W. Singer, John M. Olin Post-doctoral Fellow, Foreign Policy Studies

Pakistan`s religious schools, Madrassahs, trace their traditions back through nearly a thousand years of Islamic teaching. Over the last decades, however, they increasingly have played a role contrary to their original intent. Founded as centers of learning for the next generation of Islamic scholars and clerics, the schools now increasingly dominate the education sphere. The present danger is that a minority of these schools have built extremely close ties with radical militant groups and play a critical role in sustaining the international terrorist network. Madrassahs` displacement of a public education system is also worrisome to the stability of the Pakistani state and its future economic prospects.

re: narain

{Even if one agrees with the Kashmiri right to fight for self-determination}

...what the heck makes kashmiris so god damn special that they deserve the right to `self-determination` based on religion...my foot they do...they deserve nothing more than the rights every other indian state has...and secession is not one of them...but the right to get the f *%k out of the country if they don`t like it, is def a right they have...

The World; Pakistanis See Their Nation Transformed



http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-000002448jan10.story?coll=la%2Dnews%2Da%5Fsection

Politics: Prospect of Musharraf clinging to power doesn`t seem to disturb his people, who have been on a ride with surprising twists.

By DAVID LAMB, TIMES STAFF WRITER

KARACHI, Pakistan -- This was to have been the year that democracy returned to Pakistan. But Gen. Pervez Musharraf has changed his mind. In recent months, he has said that no matter how the October parliamentary election turns out, he intends to stay on as president.

This doesn`t entirely displease Pakistanis, who have been taken on a breathtaking ride by Musharraf. In four months, they have seen Pakistan transformed from a country that gave refuge to international terrorists and comfort to home-grown Islamic militants to one that cracks down on extremists and has become a key Washington ally in the war against terrorism.

``Musharraf has taken initiatives that would have seemed impossible a few months ago,`` said Hameed Haroon, the publisher of Dawn, one of Pakistan`s most influential daily newspapers. ``I can`t fault his instincts. The initiatives against terrorists were the right ones to make. They were essential for the survival of the world, and they have rescued Pakistan from the brink.`` Musharraf, a 58-year-old former commando who came to power in a 1999 coup, speaks these days of wanting to make Pakistan ``a dignified and responsible nation.`` In response, U.S. senators, European prime ministers and Asian heads of state laud him for ending the ``Talibanization`` of Pakistan and deciding to crack down on extremism.

Given the country`s history since it was patched together as a nation more than 54 years ago as the British empire faded, his actions put nothing less than his life at risk.

Pakistan`s first prime minister was assassinated. One ousted prime minister was sent to the gallows. One military ruler died when his plane mysteriously blew up. Another was forced to hand over power at gunpoint. For half of its life, Pakistan has been governed by dictators.

The rigid rule has brought neither peace nor prosperity. Pakistan has fought three wars with India, and now a fourth threatens in the bitterly disputed region of Kashmir, where hundreds of thousands of Indian and Pakistani soldiers are facing off against one another.

And Pakistan is saddled with a $38-billion external debt and a population in which one in three adults is jobless and two in five can`t read.

Musharraf will announce additional moves against extremists in a speech to the nation this week. His challenge will be to convince New Delhi that he is conciliatory enough to help end attacks on India from the Pakistan-controlled sector of Kashmir; to convince his people that he is firm enough not to back down in the face of Indian demands; and to convince the international community that he is committed to preventing Kashmir from becoming another terrorist-infested Afghanistan.

It is a tall and conflicting order.

At the core of every challenge Musharraf faces are two obstacles: one, that Islam has become a divisive, rather than unifying, force in Pakistan; and two, that Pakistan is a mix of ethnic groups, languages and competing forces that do not coalesce into a clearly defined national identity. Culturally, Pakistan`s heart is in the South Asian subcontinent; spiritually, it`s in the Middle East where the pillars of Islam are implanted.

Nowhere are the challenges Pakistan faces on more prominent display than in Karachi, the country`s teeming, unruly harbor city and commercial center.

Its population has grown during half a century from 200,000 to 14 million, yet its infrastructure appears to have changed hardly at all. Except for an occasional garden, everything has been paved over, coated with dust and become the color of the earth.

Nearly 250,000 of the city`s students attend religious schools, known as madrasas, that breed fundamentalism and have produced moujahedeen (holy warriors) for Afghanistan and Kashmir. The education system has fallen into such disrepair that a college English professor apologizes to an American visitor for having only the vaguest grasp of the language. Almost half the population is younger than 15.

Many of the country`s 300,000 heroin addicts live here, and drug lords run the periphery of the city. In the mid-1990s, 200 people a month were being killed on the streets, many in drive-by shootings.

Musharraf`s top announced domestic priorities are the restoration of law and order and economic development. On the latter, he has had some help from the international community because of his 180-degree policy shift in turning against the Taliban and cracking down on terrorists and religious zealots at home.

In addition to a lifting of sanctions by the United States, the Asian Development Bank has resumed making loans to Pakistan, the Paris Club has rescheduled $12 billion of Pakistan`s debt, and the International Monetary Fund has launched a $1.2-billion poverty-reduction program.

Apparently willing to put concerns about Pakistan`s lack of democracy and its nuclear armaments on the back burner while Musharraf supports the war on terrorism, Washington is also offering $600 million for social welfare projects and $73 million to help with law enforcement along the border.

Musharraf says he is still committed to a return to democracy. But as a retired general, Sayed Refaqat, said: ``The irony is that if he really wants democracy in Pakistan, what`s he doing in the presidency in the first place?``

AlphaHussain #217 You write ``With six medium-sized Muslim nations as neighbors, India might buy the idea of an independent Kashmir.``

Congratulations. Your above statement has been accepted in the Guiness Book of World Records in the category of ``Worst Argument on Behalf of Anything``.

Prem #223 Good! Good! Keep up these precision strikes on behalf of common sense.

re: prem

{How much is much? If by much you mean an overwhelming majority, then that will only show how pitiably little you know about Pakistan.}

you know prem, i somehow just don`t feel compelled to explain anything to you...just can`t get myself to give credibility to someone who considers 12-head a `bhai`...sorry dude, just can`t do it...

Prem

Help me understand what specifically is silly about routing hypocracy outof the war on terror?

Also, please comment on some new posts on Sameerjb`s board - I noticed your comments there, but I don`t think you realized that they are in relation to intellectual movements in the arts and how they inpact the social.

Thks

Even if one agrees with the Kashmiri right to fight for self-determination, I hope that everybody agrees that the presense of non-kashmiri militants (whatever their source) is a serious problem in tackling the issue. According to the BBC and other sources, more than half of the militants are non-indigeous and they account for 70% of all attacks in Kashmir. These foreigners have effectively highjacked the issue from the Kashmiris and are following their own agenda. Pres. Musharraf would be doing the Kashmiris a big favor if he took firm action against these outsiders, and allowed the Kashmiris to follow their own path once more.

-narain