The Beginning of the End of the Kashmir Problem

dost mittar #37 `` believe the incentives are there for both parties``
Let these words go from your mouth to God. :-)
I shall believe it when I see it, though.

arjunm:
The destination is peace on the subcontinent. Even the final destination for the Palestinian roadmap is not known. Someone had given the example of the process of selecting the Pope. The selectors are shut in a place and are not allowed to come out until the smoke comes out that a selection has been made. Now, I am not suggesting that the Indian and Pakistani negotiators should be shut from the outside world, but that they should have a definite mandate to arrive at a settlement, otherwise a settlement might be imposed upon them.

Mr Ahmadzai: Let me remind you that Pakistan has not officially asked for Advani through interpol. Please ask your government to do so, just as we have done with our wanted people. Then you can compare.

A couple of media reports about some god forsaken FIR (without trial) cannot be compared to a triel and conviction. By the way, when you say a crime commited in 1850 is the same as one commited now, you demonstrate your complete ignorance of the Statute of Limitations.

Mr Ahmadzai, your government is not as dumb as you. Which is why the whole Advani story was killed rather than pursued. I would welcome the sight of your government asking for Advani in exchange for Dawood Ibrahim.

re: #31 by pmishra2

++
So let me get this straight: an indian criminal commits violent crimes against indian citizens and takes shelter in Pakistan and is conferred Pakistani citizenship. According to you, he cannot be extradited to India, because there may be some FIR lying in some police station about some crime involving Advani from 50 years ago.
++

There are two problems with your case. First India and Pakistan do not have an extradition treaty. One country cannot just wake up one day and demand that certain individuals be handed over. International relations do not work that way.

The second problem is that India refused to share evidence against the 20 individuals with Pakistan. Pakistan government had valid doubts about the authenticity of evidence produced by Indian authorities in Parliament attack case. It was hard to tell (from Pakistani perspective) whether this attack was orchestrated by India to exploit the 9/11 hysteria or whether this was really carried out by Jaish/Lashkar.

When FBI offered to help in investigation of Parliament attack case, India refused. This further strengthened the suspicion in Pakistan that India was fabricating a false case to implicate Pakistan and create the grounds for confrontation.

Incidentally, Pakistan offered an extradition treaty to India during early 1990s. At that time, Benazir Bhutto was busy curbing violence in Karachi. India was imparting military training to MQM terrorists in Rajhasthan and refused the extradition treaty. Even today, the chief MQM terrorist Javed Langra is being sheltered by India.

If India is interested in a formal extradition treaty, Pakistan could reciprocate. But this would prevent India from mounting insurgencies inside Pakistan. Will Indian government agree to this??

harish-hyd:
My comments to suka apply to you as well. Pakistan may not use its nuclear weapons but do you want to bet on that if an honourable settlement can be achieved without going to an all-out war with it.

Zafar:
Thanks for reading the article.

Dost Mittar:

``How will you manage to get an MMA govt. in Pakistan?``

It is a matter of time. All others, including Army, are discredited.

``We have had 3-4 wars and still haven`t been able to resolve this problem, what makes you certain that another one will bring the matter to a conclusion? ``

I didn`t talk about war at all. My point is that every government has failed to get Kashmir. Following failure, every government has tried to do a deal, but they are limited by what the opposition will say or the Army. Now that Army and Mainstream political parties have failed, only Jehadis are left.

Let the Jehadis come to power. Even they will not be able to change the status quo. India does not need to win a war. India just needs to make sure that Pakistan does not win one either. We are quite comfortable with Status Quo. A limited border war will only disgrace the Jehadis because they will fail to hold territory. If they are stupid enough to use nuclear wepons, then India is justified in responding in kind. But how long will India live under the constant threat of nuclear attack? Sometimes you have to grab the bull by the horn.

``We need a closure and that closure will come when the two parties come to a mutual agreement. ``

We need closure and the closure will come with the acceptance of status quo. on both sides.

Zahra:
Shukriya for your thoughtful comments.
I agree that the two sides should take a business-like, problem solving approach. It would be better to set some milestones, initially less ambitious and achievable, to move the process forward. Success creates its own momentum and propels the process where the negotiators develop a degree of trust and confidence which enables them to tackle more difficult issues. I saw this process in action when Canada and the United States negotiated a free trade agreement which had strong opposition in Canada. The process was stretched out over a few years and the negotiators developed a personal chemistry which played a significant role in achieving the end result (the Canadian negotiator who failed to develop such chemistry was replaced by the Canadian PM who was fully committed to the process).
It is true that the Pakistani authorities cannot stop any AGNK from undertaking a suicide mission. But they can definitely dismantle the training camps and logistics used by them. They have so far not given any evidence of doing that. But Vajpayee in his latest statement to the Parliament acknowledged that all of the jihadis are not under the control of the Pakistani authorities.
BTW the same was true of Arafat vis-a-vis the suicide bombers. It was quite clear that he was giving one message to the Enlish language media and another one to his followers in Arabic.
As for differences, vive la difference!
There are greater differences between Indians of North, South, East and West than between North Indians and Pakistanis, although the history of the two countries since the partition has accentuated these differences due to religion being treated as much more than a personal faith.
Despite the differenes, Pakistanis who go to India for a visit return with an emotional experience which is quite unlike that they have when they go to Europe, America or even middle eastern countries.
Let me recount a small personal experience. I was visiting India towards the end of 1985 when the Indian press was full of accounts of the Pakistani support for the Khalistani separatists. We went for a New Year`s eve party to the newly opened Hotel Meridian. After the dinner, some winners of prizes were announced and the top prize happened to go to a couple visiting from Pakistan. They got such a long and loud round of applause that it will always remain part of their cherished memories. I doubt if any other foreigner would have received similar applause or they would have received similar warm applause in another foreign country.

amadzai:
To the extent that your analogy holds true, the father in this case is providing the son with the rocks, show him how to aim at the Malik`s car, lent him his bicycle to where the car was parked and when complained to, denied that his son was involved in the rock throwing.

septran:
Yes the worn-out slogans have to be discarded, whether it is atoot-ang from India or kashmiris` inalienable rights from Pakistan.

Veeresh:
Not yet, but if and when the jihadi training camps are dismantled and the Pakistani govt. agencies stop supporting the cross-border jihadis, there would be no harm in providing such certificates.

pmishra:
Yes, it is vital to foster proper public opinion on both sides. In India it has always been possible to prepare a positive public opinion under the right circumstanes; remember the enthusiasm with which Vajpayee`s Lahore Yatra was supported, even by the likes of Bal Thakray. Even now, after all the bitterness, opinion polls suggest that the majority of the public opinion supports Vajpayee`s latest initiative. I now see the evidence of some change in the Pakistani public mind as well. Even the mullahs are sounding more reasonable and they do have their fingers on the people`s pulse.

Ansari; Faridi:
Thank you very much for taking the pains to read the article and comment on it.

Let me express my congratulate the chowk staff for the amazing efficiency in printing this article. I submitted the article, went for a walk and when I came back, the article was already on chowk.
The comments so far show that if the Kashmir problem is viewed in a dispassionate manner, we could at least start to appreciate each other`s position if not agree with it. This is the purpose behind this article.

Stuka:
How will you manage to get an MMA govt. in Pakistan? We have had 3-4 wars and still haven`t been able to resolve this problem, what makes you certain that another one will bring the matter to a conclusion? We need a closure and that closure will come when the two parties come to a mutual agreement.

HisExcellency#2:
I share your sentiments.

Thamed32:
I believe the incentives are there for both parties. For India, achievement of peace on its borders is incentive enough and, if successful, Vajpayee will definitely use this achievement to fight the next election, enhance his stature in history and maybe even get a Nobel.
For Pakistani leaders, the incentives are of a different type. The Pakistani military may act as a tiger at home and even in its dealing with the Indians, but it becomes a bheegi billi when dealing with the Americans. Above all, they want to protect their precious assets from the prying eyes of the Americans and the best way to do so would be to end hostility with India and dismantle the jihadi apparatus which is needed to maintain the current posture towards India.

temporal, sameejb:
The Pakistani intellectuals have a tendency to blame the army for all their troubles. The available evidence strongly suggests that the Pakistani public opinion is solidly behind the army in its stance towards India. And the civilians have always gone along with the army in its posture towards India. The first Kabaili lashkars sent to Kashmir had the blessings of none other than Jinnah himself. The second adventure took place under Ayub but historians have pointed out that a reluctant Ayub was prodded towards this adventure by his civilian minister, Bhutto. And even if Nawaz Sharif had been left out of the planning for the Kargil operation, he was quite jubiliant, along with all of the media, when the first reports of the jihadis capturing Indian positions came out. He became nervous only when the full magnitude of the consequences of the operation became evident.
The situation is not the same in India. The Indian govt., even the current one led by the BJP, is more dovish than the general public opinion which thinks quite like our Stuka, that is, let`s do an aar-ya-paar once and for all. Arjunm, sadna, jay, pmishra and others are more representative of the Indian public than myself.

Despite economic potential and nuclear weapons, rest of the world sees Indians and Pakistanis as religious bigots. All the more reason for both nations to tone down their rhetoric, settle the Kashmir problem and work jointly toward a new tolerant and demilitarized South East Asia. In politics, there are no permanent friends or permanent enemies. There are only permanent interests.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_253387,00050001.htm

US panel on religious freedom again targets India
S Rajagopalan
Washington, May 14

The US Commission on International Religious Freedom has once again recommended that India, Pakistan and four other nations be listed as ``countries of particular concern`` for allegedly violating religious freedom.

The commission had sought India`s inclusion in the list last year as well following the Gujarat events, but the Bush administration had disregarded the recommendation.

Voicing its ``deep disappointment`` with Secretary of State Colin Powell`s stance, the commission`s report for 2003, released on Tuesday, makes out a fresh case for such a designation.

The commission`s decision, however, has not been a unanimous one. Two members, including chairperson Felice D Gaer and vice-chairman Michael K Young, dissented. They said they were appalled by the Gujarat violence, but noted that India as a whole cannot be punished.

``India is a respected democracy with a judiciary, which is independent, albeit slow-moving and frequently unresponsive, and can work to hold the perpetrators responsible,`` the two members noted.

Stressing that the violence had not spread to other states, Gaer and Young concluded: ``Thus we do not agree that in the case of India as a whole, it can be said that `systematic, ongoing, egregious violations of religious freedom` have been `engaged in or tolerated` by the Indian government to an extent to warrant CPC status.``

The 10-member commission`s majority view, however, was that the Vajpayee Government, though not directly responsible for Gujarat, was ``not doing all that it could to pursue the perpetrators of the attacks and to counteract the prevailing climate of hostility against the minority groups``.

Commenting on the religious conversion bill enacted by Gujarat, the commission said although it was ostensibly designed to prevent forced conversion, the measure targeted against conversion of Hindus to Christianity and Islam.

The six nations that have been designated by the US as ``countries of concern`` are: China, Iran, Iraq, Sudan, North Korea and Burma. The other six recommended by the commission for this classification are India, Pakistan, Laos, Saudi Arabia, Turkmenistan and Vietnam.

#27 by ahmadzai on May 14, 2003 8:56am PT

An FIR against Advani is lying registered in a police station in Sindh, Pakistan. If Pakistan asks India to hand him over to it, would India allow that under current level of hostility or even otherwise under peace even under an agreement of extradition?

Zai Uncle, where do you get such sensational news from?!*!?



#31 by pmishra2 on May 14, 2003 9:25am PT
#34 by pmishra2 on May 14, 2003 11:58am PT

Mishra Ji, Naraaz q hotey haiN. Ghussa thook dijiye na. Ghussa haraam hai.

#28 ahmadzai

I am not going to respond to your childish and nonsensical statements any further. However, for the rest of us in the real world, here is a little reminder of the ``irrelevant jihadi`` violence in Kashmir. I have not included regular attacks on security forces or, even sadder, daily hand grenades thrown in marketplaces by ``freedom fighters``. BTW, is the NYTimes also an agent of the indian goverment?


http://query.nytimes.com/search/full-page?res=9806EFD81539F933A05750C0A9659C8B63
March 23-29: INTERNATIONAL; VIOLENCE IN KASHMIR
By Amy Waldman
Most Hindus fled from the contested, and mostly Muslim, territory of Indian Kashmir in the early 1990`s, after Islamic insurgents began targeting them. But several thousand stayed on, clinging to their ancestral home and their Muslim neighbors` support.


That decision proved fateful. Late last Sunday or early Monday, 24 Hindu Brahmins, or Kashmiri Pandits, as they are known, were executed in the village of Nandimarg by gunmen dressed in Indian army uniforms. India blamed Pakistan for the attack. Amy Waldman

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F40A14F63D5D0C7A8EDDAA0894DB404482

Militants Suspected in Mutilation of 6 Kashmiris

By AMY WALDMAN (NYT) 321 words
Late Edition - Final , Section A , Page 3 , Column 1
LEAD PARAGRAPH - There was a new and gruesome spate of violence in the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir today, just days after the killing of 24 Hindus in a village there. Men believed to be Islamic militants cut off the noses of six villagers, according to police reports.

Islamic militants have been waging a 14-year insurgency for the independence, or accession to Pakistan of Indian-held Kashmir.

http://query.nytimes.com/search/full-page?res=9F0DE5DF163CF932A15751C1A9649C8B63

December 21, 2002, Saturday

FOREIGN DESK
World Briefing | Asia: Kashmir: New Lawmaker Shot To Death
By Amy Waldman (NYT)
Unidentified gunmen killed a state legislator from the ruling coalition in the state, possibly signaling a stepped-up assault by anti-Indian Islamic militants against the new government. Abdul Aziz Mir, a member of the People`s Democratic Party, was shot after he left Friday Prayer at a mosque just south of Srinagar. A new state assembly took power on Oct. 17 saying it aimed to end the conflict between militants and the Indian government. The Save Kashmir Movement, which surfaced during the assembly elections this fall, claimed responsibility. Amy Waldman (NYT)

http://query.nytimes.com/search/full-page?res=9902E5DF163CF932A15751C1A9649C8B63

December 21, 2002, Saturday

FOREIGN DESK
World Briefing | Asia: Kashmir: Three Unveiled Women Are Killed
By Amy Waldman (NYT)
Three young women were killed in Rajouri District, and local officials said it might have been because they were not wearing veils. Two of the women, Nosen Kousar, 20, and Shahnaaz Akhtar, 21, were killed in their homes; the third, Tahira Parveen, 22, was taken away and beheaded. At least two of the women were from the same village. Officials said posters from the Muslim group Lashkar-e-Jabbar began appearing in educational institutions in the district a week ago telling Muslim women to wear veils and follow Islamic strictures strictly or face consequences. No one has taken responsibility for the killings. Amy Waldman (NYT)

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F60D1EFF355D0C768EDDA80994DA404482

Foreign Desk | November 25, 2002, Monday
10 Killed in Attack on Temple in Kashmir

By AMY WALDMAN (NYT) 516 words
Late Edition - Final , Section A , Page 11 , Column 1
ABSTRACT - Islamic militants attack Hindu temple complex in Kashmir, killing at least 10 people and wounding more than 40; attack is third in three days after period of quiet; together, attacks suggest renewed determination by militants to pursue their drive for secession from India; India accuses Pakistan, which also claims Kashmir, of providing covert support to militants; two countries have fought two wars over disputed territory; photo; map (M) Islamic militants attacked a Hindu temple complex in Kashmir on Sunday night, killing at least 10 people and wounding more than 40.

One assailant also died in the three-hour battle at the Raghunath Temple in Jammu, the winter capital of the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir, and another was killed after a gun battle in a nearby temple.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F4091FF93A5F0C7A8CDDA90994DA404482

Foreign Desk | October 9, 2002, Wednesday
With a Burst of Violence, Voting Ends in Kashmir

By AMY WALDMAN (NYT) 694 words
Late Edition - Final , Section A , Page 8 , Column 4
ABSTRACT - Voting in Kashmir`s pivotal election concludes after three weeks of balloting that was staggered to improve security; photo; final spasm of violence follows waves of attacks by anti-Indian militants (S) With a final spasm of violence, voting in Kashmir`s pivotal election -- staggered over three weeks to improve security -- concluded today.

Waves of attacks by anti-Indian militants who had vowed to disrupt the voting have taken more than 450 lives since the polling dates were announced two months ago, Indian officials said tonight. Of those, almost 50 were political workers, including two candidates, 150 were members of the security forces and at least 260 were bystanders.

Zafar: Can you check out Chowk Unplugged. Go to the topic ``secular`` would like your thoughts on the ongoing discussion.

Stuka at # 29:

A crime committed in 1950 or 1850 remains same as that of a crime committed in 1990s. If the person is alive, and can be proved criminal in the court of law, he has to be sentenced.

My question again, would you hand over Advani to us or not if we asked for him given the present situation?

Also, in Kashmir, why is your para-military killing all the ones it accuses of terrorism in encounters? This holds true for those who attacked your parliament. If you see the video footage, you will notice that 5 of them were running here and there without any plan. All of them were shot. Why could not one of them be shot on leg or some thing for hard evidence.

Similarly, recently, those accused of terror attacks and taking refuge in mosque were killed after heavy fire on the mosque. Why could not your para-military wait and let the ``terrorists`` starve themselves out in the open in order to provide yourself a hard evidence?

Finally, even if a negligible number of Islamic idiots are terrorising the poor Kashmiris, why should Kashmir freedom fighters and Pakistan earn the bad reputation?

Isn`t it just because an Indo-Jewish propaganda machine has won the war?

Isn`t it because the tribal Malik has banished the poor tribesman into exile just because his goats were dirty and the Jirga forgot that he had stopped the water for people located downstream?

Isn`t it bacause you people have become innocent Germans at the hands of Goebbles? If Pakistan is involved in cross-border terrorism in Kashmir, do you believe that it is also involved in Nagaland, Tripura, Bodoland, Punjab, Gujrat, and in Dalits taking their petition to Durban conference on discrimination, etc? Are you not falling into the same trap and instead of holding the real culprits accountable, handing them over condoms?

Please ponder for your own good, as Pakistanis are also questioning themselves these days.

#27 ahmadzai

So let me get this straight: an indian criminal commits violent crimes against indian citizens and takes shelter in Pakistan and is conferred Pakistani citizenship. According to you, he cannot be extradited to India, because there may be some FIR lying in some police station about some crime involving Advani from 50 years ago.

I assume you are not trying to be funny or intentionally obtuse. But thats what the overall effect is.

Either this FIR is very important and your goverment should proceed further with it (Why doesn`t it? Why sit on it for 50 years? Is the FIR getting more and more interesting?). Or you should not waste our time with these silly diversions.