Manmohan Singh must visit Pakistan

Published: August 8, 2013

The writer is a journalist in Delhi whose work has appeared in The Christian Science Monitor and The New York Times. He tweets @DilliDurAst

Which Indian or Pakistani premier has not desperately wanted to be the one to clinch peace between the two countries? Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has reportedly been keen, for years now, to go on a state visit to Pakistan.

Before the political climate could be conducive to Manmohan’s visit to Islamabad, 26/11 took place. Pakistan’s refusal to give Dr Singh even breathing space on the 26/11 investigations, followed by the LoC tensions in January and August this year, means that in his 10 years of prime ministership, Manmohan Singh will never have visited the country of his birth.

It is unlikely that Dr Singh is going to get any concessions on the 26/11 investigations or LoC tensions from Islamabad or Rawalpindi that would make it possible for him to persuade the opposition, public opinion or the belligerent media that it’s time for a state visit to talk peace.

However, I think Dr Singh must still visit Pakistan. It needn’t be a state visit. It could be a private visit to the Gurdwara Janam Asthan at Nankana Sahib, the holiest shrine of Sikhism, just as President Asif Ali Zardari visited the dargah of Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti in April 2012.

Dr Singh’s efforts at making peace with Pakistan resulted in a new bilateral visa agreement, whose implementation by India has been stalled by forces beyond his control. The official prayers of the Sikhs include, believe it or not, a plea for visa relaxation. In their daily Ardas, millions of Sikhs across the world ask for unhindered access to their gurdwaras. The Ardas says (rough translation), “Almighty Lord! Our helper and protector ever, restore to us the right and privilege of unhindered and free service and access to Nankana Sahib and other centres of Sikhism, from which we have been separated.”

It would only be appropriate for India’s first Sikh prime minister, who worked to ease the visa regime, to go and read the Ardas in Nankana Sahib,

From Nanakana Sahib near Lahore, Dr Singh could go to Panja Sahib near Rawalpindi. This shrine has a rock believed to have an imprint of Guru Nanak’s hand. Apart from India-Pakistan peace, Dr Singh needs to pray hard to minimise the embarrassment that awaits his party in the April-May 2014 general elections in India.

Another gurudwara Dr Singh must visit is Gurudwara Dera Baba Nanak at Kartarpur in Sialkot. This gurudwara is just three kilometres from the Indian border at Jammu. Dr Singh could persuade Pakistan to create a visa-free zone for Sikh pilgrims to visit Kartarpur Sahib when they like. It was here that Guru Nanak died and because his Hindu and Muslim followers fought over how he was to be cremated, his body turned into flowers that the two sets divided. He could pray at the resulting samadhi and grave alike for a similar resolution to the India-Pakistan conflict. Jammu-Sialkot is also an important border crossing that should receive some of the increasing trade volumes between the two countries.

Pakistan took a major step in giving Pakistani Sikhs autonomy to run their gurdwaras with the formation of the Pakistan Sikh Gurudwara Prabhandak Committee. Dr Singh could make a generous donation to the committee, and over a casual non-state lunch with Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, he could persuade him to allow access to more than just 20 gurdwaras to Indian Sikhs. There are 175 gurdwaras in Pakistan. He could also visit the village of his birth, Gah in district Chakwal, and meet his old schoolmates.

Cynics will ask what this will achieve. Can’t Dr Singh make these personal visits when he is no longer prime minister? What such a visit will achieve is to send out a message to the forces of hate on both sides that unfortunately, we have no choice but to make peace, and that we cannot forget this compulsion even in the worst of times. No matter how much cross-border violence we see and how much hate we generate over territorial disputes, Nankana Sahib will remain in Pakistan and Ajmer Sharif in India.

Such a visit this winter will leave his successor with the thread to carry forward India’s policy of rapprochement with Pakistan, despite immense challenges.

Published in The Express Tribune, August 9th, 2013.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.

Reader Comments (54)

  • Pankaj
    Aug 8, 2013 - 10:06PM

    He should resign… and can go where he wants..

    Recommend

  • MSS
    Aug 8, 2013 - 10:09PM

    Almighty Lord! Our helper and protector ever, restore to us the right and privilege of unhindered and free service and access to Nankana Sahib and other centres of Sikhism, from which we have been separated.”
    Not true. Sikhs do not pray like that.
    The author is suggesting an out of this world approach to India-Pak conflicts. In real world matters, specially related with territory and military, spiritual approach takes the last seat not even the back seat. This is a wasted article.

    Recommend

  • abhi
    Aug 8, 2013 - 10:16PM

    If Manmohan wants, he can visit Pakistan next year when he is not PM of India. He should not visit pak while being PM of India.

    Recommend

  • Babloo
    Aug 8, 2013 - 10:26PM

    Mr Singh can visit all the gurudwaras , after his term is over, as a private citizen, as many times as he wants. His private religious aspirations have nothing to do with the business of the state.

    Recommend

  • ModiFied
    Aug 8, 2013 - 10:39PM

    Spare us of another Kargil please. Indian PM visited Lahore and we got Kargil. Are trouble at LOC not enough to keep media and public busy?

    Recommend

  • gp65
    Aug 8, 2013 - 10:46PM

    “Pakistan took a major step in giving Pakistani Sikhs autonomy to run their gurdwaras with the formation of the Pakistan Sikh Gurudwara Prabhandak Committee.”

    This is an internal Pakistani decision that directly impacts SIkh Pakistani citizens. IT has nothing to do with India.

    “Dr Singh could make a generous donation to the committee, “

    I assume you are suggesting that this generous donation should come from the tax paye’s kitty not from Mr. Singh’s personal money? DO you know what a secular state is? SIngh cannot use taxpayer funds to support worship places of his faith or another

    “However, I think Dr Singh must still visit Pakistan. It needn’t be a state visit. It could be a private visit to the Gurdwara Janam Asthan at Nankana Sahib, the holiest shrine of Sikhism, just as President Asif Ali Zardari visited the dargah of Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti in April 2012.

    He can make a private visit AFTER he retires. But when I read the rest of the OpEd it seems like you want SIngh to have ‘informal meetings with Nawaz’ in which formal policydecisions are taken. Well then, in that case it is no longer a private visit, it is a state visit.Recommend

  • Dasmir
    Aug 8, 2013 - 11:15PM

    Is there a bigger game plan being played after many jail breaks in Libya,Iraq and Pakistan? Al Qaeda and its affliate might be thinking in terms of activating Pakistan’s eastern border with generous help from a bumbling Indian government and Indian Army.Pakistan will have to move troops back to its eastern border.
    More attack inside Pakistan will sap security forces morale and sense ofninsecurity in general populace.
    A clureless Nawaz Sharif if doesn’t get to grips of problem. we have a very difficult winter of discontent and disturbance.

    Recommend

  • BlackJack
    Aug 8, 2013 - 11:22PM

    Another sign that these great advocates of secularism have no idea as to what the word actually means – an op-ed that is completely embedded with religious symbolism that would make the most ardent Hindutvavadi blush. Is Manmohan Singh a leader of Sikhs in India? What does his religion have to do with the business of the state. And if this pilgrimage is to be made as a private citizen, it can be done during the long retirement that awaits him after the 2014 elections, and Mr. Vij has no business to tell anyone what to do in their private life.
    @ET – pls publish.

    Recommend

  • Lala Gee
    Aug 8, 2013 - 11:58PM

    @Author:

    “Which Indian or Pakistani premier has not desperately wanted to be the one to clinch peace between the two countries?”

    Visit or no visit, peace will only be an ellusive dream without solving Kashmir dispute.

    Recommend

  • Parvez
    Aug 9, 2013 - 12:24AM

    Its not what Mr.Singh wants or what Mr Sharif wants that matters……….its what ground realities allow them, is what matters.

    Recommend

  • Asim qureshi
    Aug 9, 2013 - 12:25AM

    Hello Lala Gee, you are right that resolving Lashmir iscentral. However, question is who does not want to resolve Kashmir? Manmohan and Mush reChed an u dersranding. Manmohan is still around but the Pakistani Army has gone back on that understanding. It is rthe Pakistani establishment that does not want to resolve Kashmir.

    Recommend

  • TD
    Aug 9, 2013 - 12:40AM

    @Lala Gee, Hey forget kashmir, save Baluchistan first!

    Recommend

  • Ali Hashim
    Aug 9, 2013 - 12:59AM

    I agree completely. Mr. Manmohan Singh should visit Pakistan and try to take steps, however small, to ease the tensions between the two countries.
    Actually I think the current circumstances are as good as they can be for making a start here.

    With Mr. Nawaz Sharif’s party getting an overall majority, the recent statements by the Pakistan Army Chief that the real threat to Pakistan does not come from across the Indian border but from the Taliban and other militants groups within Pakistan, the civilian Pakistan government has the political power and space to come start meaningful discussions with India on the resolution of the Kashmir dispute.

    Both countries have hopefully realized after three wars that a military solution is not the answer. This leaves an independent Kashmir and division along the Line of control (LOC) as other possible options.

    Opinion surveys conducted on both sides of Kashmir over the period 2005-2010 have shown that less than 10% of the Moslem population of Indian Kashmir would like to join Pakistan. Some 87% of this section of the Kashmiri population does want independence from India but 80% would settle for the status quo if travel restrictions across the LOC were eased.
    Given these realities, Pakistan and Pakistani Kashmiris will lose control over Pakistani Kashmir and gain very little in return if an independent Kashmir were to be formed.

    India is already unwilling to consider an independent Kashmir as an option and Indian Kashmiris would settle for the status quo with easing of travel restrictions across the LOC.

    It therefore suits both India and Pakistan and the Kashmiri populations on both sides of the borders that the status quo be formalized.

    If the Pakistani and Indian leadership is able to sell these realities to their respective constituencies they may well become candidates for the next Nobel peace prize.

    Recommend

  • Indian Catholic
    Aug 9, 2013 - 1:28AM

    The author is living in a fool’s paradise.
    .
    What does MMS’ personal religion as a Sikh have to do with Sikh holy places in Pakistan? Why should actions taken by Pakistan towards Sikhs, and not Christians, Hindus, Shias or Ahmadis, color his perception towards Pakistan? Why should he make a significant donation towards a gurudwara?
    .
    These are all personal matters that do not affect the Indian citizen.

    Recommend

  • dr gn seetharam
    Aug 9, 2013 - 1:33AM

    The time is not appropriate for a summit level meeting between India and Pakistan. India should retaliate to the Pakistani provocation in the only language its army and ISI understand that is the language of the gun. The author is deluded and naive and is not to be taken seriously. Manmohan Singh can visit all the shrines he wants to visit after retirement. Religion must have nothing to do with the business of the state and the author is not correct in mixing religion with international realpolitik

    Recommend

  • Aug 9, 2013 - 2:38AM

    An excellent article. Looking at the bigger picture unlike the majority of comments so far.

    Recommend

  • Raj Kafir
    Aug 9, 2013 - 7:05AM

    The only national leader who should visit Pakistan at this moment is none other than Mr Narendra Modi.

    Recommend

  • C. Nandkishore
    Aug 9, 2013 - 7:36AM

    Pakistan and India just cannot coexist. It is not in their DNA whatever maybe the sweet talk of politicians or columnists. From Pakistan’s viewpoint the very existence of Pakistan rests on being anti India. The day anti India stops is the start of the countdown for the end of Pakistan. From India’s viewpoint Pakistan is an aberration. War is an alternative; peace is another alternative; war and peace will coexist; indifference is not an alternative.Recommend

  • Kashmiri (Indian)
    Aug 9, 2013 - 8:15AM

    @Lala Gee:
    I wonder why you talk ad nauseaum about India and Kashmir when Pakistan has betrayed the cause of the Kashmiris, firstly, by creating a large-scale prison out of that part of Kashmir under its control and, secondly, by giving away a large chunk of Kashmiri real estate to China. If Kashmir was a disputed region, then Pakistan had absolutely no right to give and the Chinese no right to take territory that is defined as an integral part of Kashmir. Pakistan has already lost its legitimacy and bonafides in its support for the so-called “struggle” for Kashmir’s “freedom”. Pakistan needs Kashmir to justify its own legitimacy and its own existence on the borders of a country that has survived — successfully — as the world’s largest democracy. An overwhelming majority of Kashmiris would not like to have anything to do with a failed state which is torn asunder by terrorism and religious extremism, not to mention the barbaric treatment and blatant persecution of minorities, including Shias, Ahmedis and others. Lala Gee, please wake up from your dream. There’s no honeymoon here. You might as well shed your hate-mongering of India and Hindus. It’s not going to lead you anywhere but merely intensify your already brainwashed hateful thinking.

    Recommend

  • Kanica
    Aug 9, 2013 - 8:30AM

    You make a valid argument for peace in the region. But the biggest problem with the exercise you are referring is that the PM has never been known to be a religious man. Every event that you laid out for him reeks of overtures which if taken at this point weaken India’s position. The Prime Minister has always been pro-peace but never came across as deeply religious. This might have worked at a time when A K Antony was not making statements of the kind he did, but in this atmosphere to make a donation to the Pakistani SIkh Committee makes India look foolish, at best.

    Recommend

  • anusha
    Aug 9, 2013 - 9:23AM

    we too want our PM to go to pakistan and sonia and rahul to go to italy,,,,after 8 months,,,then after a man will come and i hope he knows how to rule india like our native india and knows how to protect our culture with our development!!!!

    Recommend

  • jssidhoo
    Aug 9, 2013 - 9:27AM

    @Lala Gee: Even if the Kashmir problem is solved to your satisfaction do you think your ‘strategic assets’ will drop there weapons and get back to farming or that your army will restrict itself to the barracks and give up its business empire . Kashmir is just an illusion you have much bigger internal problems .

    Recommend

  • Abdul Malik
    Aug 9, 2013 - 9:37AM

    It was nice to know that so many Gurudwaras exist in pakistan. I would suggest that Mr.Shivam Vij include the Hindu temples too and give a bit more detailed write up including the history of those religious places, some pictures would be of great help too. There are many Gurudwaras and temples in Afghanistan too and I would be very interested to read about them and also see photographs. It is very nice of Mr. Shivam Vij to suggest visa free zones. I believe the same can be done for the temples and Gurudwaras in Afghanistan. In fact I would suggest that Mr.Shivam Vij travel to Iran, Iraq, Tajikstan, Krygystan, Turkmenistan, Kazakstan, Uzbegistan, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Sudan Libya, Algeria, Ethiopia, China, Mongolia, Russia and write about the Gurudwaras and Temples that existed there and some that still exist. After he is finished with the temples and Gurudwaras, he can start on churches, mosques, synagogues, fire temples, jain temples, Buddhist stupas, prehistorical sacrificial sites and if he still has time can study satanism, shamanism, voodoo, scientiology,moonism, mormonism, seventh day adventists, rosicrucians, freemasonary. Why do I write this ? He’s wasted my time innit ?

    Recommend

  • amoghavarsha.ii
    Aug 9, 2013 - 12:19PM

    @author, i feel ur a rightist supporting BJP & modi, that is why you want to MMS to visit pakistan so that more ammunition is ther for BJP and can attract more hate votes.
    If MMS visits pakistan only congress will suffer not india not pakistan.
    If MMS visits pakistan only BJP will gain, not india not pakistan

    Recommend

  • James
    Aug 9, 2013 - 1:27PM

    @anusha:
    That man only knows how to make tea and give hyped up speeches .

    Recommend

  • Feroz
    Aug 9, 2013 - 2:34PM

    Has the author been living in prison all these years ? Never read anything as shallow and lacking in substance. What has religion and places of worship got to do with matters of State ? Poor MMS is not interested in visiting the Gurudwara in Delhi and you want to send him to Nanakana Sahib ? If you wanted to write on Indo/Pak peace it is fine but you put your head into dung incidentally.

    Recommend

  • umais
    Aug 9, 2013 - 5:07PM

    save india from , maoists,

    Recommend

  • gujranwala789
    Aug 9, 2013 - 5:43PM

    No one in pakistan care about so-called “Ajmer “Sharif”" apart from some hippi type of sadhu like figures who present themselves as “sufi”.

    Recommend

  • gujranwala789
    Aug 9, 2013 - 5:47PM

    @BlackJack:

    Yes to me also this article sounds more like Sikhutva. I would be surprised if this person claims to be secular which means most of the people in india do not understand what secular actually means, it does not mean to be religious but rather keeping oneself a mile away from anything that can be called religious.

    Recommend

  • Syed A. Mateen
    Aug 9, 2013 - 5:57PM

    The heaven is not going to fall on earth if Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif or Dr. Manmohan Singh will not meet at all.

    The Ajmer Sharif and Nankana Sahib will still remain there.

    People around the globe have enough news to consume and meeting of two leaders of underdeveloped countries will not become news for international media, except for Pakistani and Indian electronic and print media.

    Let us see the picture picture of Pakistan and India where India accepts the right of self determination of occupied Kashmir and India should accept that yes occupied Kashmir is a seperate state, and not any more part of India.

    Recommend

  • dnk
    Aug 9, 2013 - 6:55PM

    @amoghavarsha.ii: This author is actually a leftist and highly anti-BJP. HE has been writing for years in Indian press – so that is not in question. The reason he supposedly dislikes BJP is that it is not secular enough. Then he goes on to advise the PM of the country to make a donation to a gurudwara (the fact that it is Pakistan is irrelevant) – the PM is not a leader of Sikhs alone but all Indians. He also asks MMS to be pleased about some pro SIkh legislation i Pakistan again on the premise that being Sikh, this development i Pakistan should matter to MMS. This also implies that MMS is not the leader of Christians, Ahmadis, Hindus and Shias in India because clearly their pligt in Pakistan has not drawn any response from MMS.

    All that one can say is that while criticizing what he feels are BJP’s less than secular credentials, he has absolutely no idea about what secularism means.

    Recommend

  • Aug 9, 2013 - 7:17PM

    @Lala Gee:

    “Visit or no visit, peace will only be an ellusive dream without solving Kashmir dispute.”

    http://www.traveltechie.com/news/Kashmir-faces-shortage-of-hotels-as-tourist-numbers-increase/6886

    Peace is already present in Kashmir. Tourists are just like Tourists around the world. They see a beautiful, peaceful holiday spot.

    Another beautiful tit-bit: The state of J&K gets more Tourists than the entire country of Pakistan! And, you are saying peace is eluding Kashmir!!

    But, I know what you mean. You should perhaps rephrase that line as until India hands over Kashmir on a platter to Pakistan, Pakistan will not stop supporting groups like LeT and JeM and LeJ(who have turned against Pakistan now).

    We are ok with the deal. We are status quo. We are happy with what we have. Your establishment can support what ever Terrorist group that it may want, we are convinced Pakistan will be harmed in the longer run, so go right ahead.

    Recommend

  • Aug 9, 2013 - 7:23PM

    Pakistan has missed a golden opportunity. Singh is probably the last of the era of PMs who were born before Independence of India and creation of Pakistan. They have seen unity and destruction and tended to treat Pakistan better and give benefit of the doubt to Pakistan.

    Musharaff knew this and sought to find a solution, basically a compromise on Pakistan’s position. But, too bad he lost power a year too soon.

    The next set of PMs will be in the age group of 40 to 60. I don’t think they will even entertain a Musharaff type deal with Pakistan and obviously see no sense in changing status quo, especially when the other is imploding and has absolutely nothing to give in return.

    Recommend

  • Ali Hashim
    Aug 9, 2013 - 8:34PM

    @Syed A. Mateen:
    Dear Matin sahib : I repeat a part of what I said earlier in this blog.
    Opinion surveys conducted on both sides of Kashmir over the period 2005-2010 have shown that less than 10% of the Moslem population of Indian Kashmir would like to join Pakistan.

    Given these realities, Pakistan and Pakistani Kashmiris will lose control over Pakistani Kashmir and gain very little in return if an independent Kashmir were to be formed.

    Therefore my question to you is why should Pakistan and Pakistani Kashmiris want to insist for an independent Kashmir.

    Recommend

  • antanu
    Aug 9, 2013 - 10:13PM

    excelent arti le which is bound to unleash hate-comments.truth is most of the commentators are fooling themselves. it is ironic that frequently forced incursions by china in our territory did not receive any ire from the hawks.it proves that for us hating pakistan is the only way to prove our love for the country. let the chinese pound us we dont care…and offcourse china is not pakistan….we dont have guts to even burn its flag.

    Recommend

  • BlackJack
    Aug 9, 2013 - 10:25PM

    @gujranwala789:
    There is nothing called Sikhutva – Hindutva means Indian culture, and Sikhs also fall into the category of Indian people. However, this pedestrian piece misrepresents Sikhs, who are not clamoring for this PM to go on a pilgrimage at the taxpayers expense. This article merely provides a view of the hypocrisy that masquerades as secularism in Indian politics and journalism, and I agree with the latter part of your comment.

    Recommend

  • Pashtunyar
    Aug 9, 2013 - 11:07PM

    At a time when the Pakistani nation and the army is fighting for the ‘soul of the country’ against a zealous and violent adversary and the army redefining its doctrine, India should should have extended the hand of friendship, at the very least it should have cooled its anti-Pakistani rhetoric! The recent flip-flops of the defence minister shows that their govt is completely paralyzed and incapable of making any bold moves required to kick-start the peace process! Mr Singh maybe well-intentioned but he is also uninspiring, tedious and timid PM, he neither has the audacity or the stature to ‘think big and act big!’

    Recommend

  • Naveen
    Aug 9, 2013 - 11:40PM

    @Pashtunyar:
    One reason are the upcoming elections. But a much bigger reason is what is going on at LoC, which in my view is being deliberately done by some people who don’t desire peace either due to some vested interest or due to some pathological hatred for the other side.

    Recommend

  • gp65
    Aug 9, 2013 - 11:40PM

    @Pashtunyar: This same Singh had reached an agreement with Musharraf. Musharraf left but Singh was still here. It was Pakistan that backed away from the Musharraf 4 point because the new army chief Kayani did not approve.

    Peace is desirable by all. But peace talks do not guarantee peace. If they did 26/11 would not have occurred at the height of peace talks.

    Indian government has made many unilateral gestures (they were not meant to be unilateral but in effect have become so because Pakistan failed to do its part of the agreement).

    I agree that SIngh has been weak because he has assumed that appeasing Pakistan through unilateral offerings will prevent attacks on India. He has been proven wrong. The policy of appeasement must be reviewed.

    @antanu: There have been no hate comments on this newsiteam as you allege. All that people are saying is that an Indian PM is not allowed to mix his personal faith with matters of state in a country governed by a secular constitution. This is a statement of fact and by no means hateful. Once he retires he is free to go wherever he wants.Recommend

  • truthbetold
    Aug 10, 2013 - 12:35AM

    Leftists like the author live in imaginary Disneylan, devoid of intellectual honesty, totally disregarding or ignorant of historical facts and geopolitical truths.

    Recommend

  • csmann
    Aug 10, 2013 - 1:19AM

    Most of the comments here seem to imply that Dr.Singh has accepted the suggestion ,And is all ready to go to Pakistan. Peace in the sub-continent is and will remain an elusive dream.Not that we should stop trying.

    Recommend

  • Np
    Aug 10, 2013 - 8:56AM

    @csmann:
    Not at all. Most commentators are calling out the author’s hypocrisy in claiming to be deeply secular and writing such a patently communal column.

    Recommend

  • Anand
    Aug 10, 2013 - 11:27AM

    @BlackJack

    Perfect characterisation of this article. Truly pedestrian. I hate to use the idiom ‘Pseudo Secular’, simply because on many occassions it has been hurled at so many truly secular people. But Shivam Vij is a perfect example of a ‘Pseudo secular’.

    Recommend

  • Vikas
    Aug 11, 2013 - 10:53AM

    Dear Polpot
    We are missing you here.

    Recommend

  • Agnostic
    Aug 11, 2013 - 12:41PM

    The Indians commentators ignore that the government in Pakistan wants the dialogue process to go ahead. However, there are people on both sides who have suffer from visceral hatred of the other. They will do anything to stop detente between the two countries. BJP will do more or less what the UPA is doing but they must act hawkish to win the election. Frankly speaking, the dialogue is going nowhere. The author also knows that MM Singh is not going to visit PK as prime minister. Singh has been told so by the real powers in India. Why would he even think of coming here and giving a big handle to the hate mongers. The best future for Indo-Pak is to agree to disagree. Yes to peace but no embraces please…it never works.

    Recommend

  • imran bhatt
    Aug 11, 2013 - 4:20PM

    With any mention of possible Indo Pak negotiations, we witness deadly escalation of violence. So let first subdue rough elements on both sides of the border before we start pinning any hopes on meaningful parley. If Manmohan visited Pakistan who would provide for his safety and security in Pakistan?

    Recommend

  • Gp65
    Aug 11, 2013 - 5:22PM

    ETBLOGS1987

    @Agnostic:

    It may be true that people on both sides trying to block talks. But in India, the civilian government has army under control which is not the case in Pakistan. Also India does nt have strategic assets trained by army as part of its policy. Last year India had given trade benefits but when it cam time for Pakistan to reciprocate and also for both countries to liberalize visa regime ( everything had been agreed), there was the LOC beheading. For 7 months he talks we’re on hold. As soon as India said it was ready to resume talks and Nawaz Sharif made some positive statements again Indian soldiers were killed on LOC. it is easy to see who does not want to let matters calm down because their series 7 BMWs and corner plots would come under scrutiny if anti- India feeling was reduced.

    Musharraf had agreed on the resolution of Kashmir issue with Manmohan Singh – he himself says it. Well Manmohan Singh was still here – so guess who backed out from the agreement? Kayani.

    Frankly at this point the peace time are not contributing to peace anyway so it might not be a bad index for India to just focus its energies on other issues and problems rather than wasting time on peace talks with Pakistan which do not yield any peace d indeed to India.

    It is Pakistani people who should be asking their army about its priorities. At a time when there are jail breaks and bomb blasts a galore, should the army not focus on internal matters instead of taking unnecessary pangs with India? Should your media not be a little more responsible Han describing non-violent protests by Indians which are well controlled by Ondian police as attacks?

    Recommend

  • Agnostic
    Aug 11, 2013 - 7:21PM

    @Gp65:
    The contents of your post, as of mine, can be debated. But I agree, why spend energy unnecessarily.

    Recommend

  • Lala Gee
    Aug 12, 2013 - 12:09AM

    @BruteForce:

    “Peace is already present in Kashmir. Tourists are just like Tourists around the world. They see a beautiful, peaceful holiday spot.”

    Congratulations, finally succeeding in winning the hearts of minds of the Kashmiri subjects. Now you shouldn’t have any problem in holding the much promised plebiscite, even if Pakistan does not agree on that. At-least you could do that in the Indian held Kashmir to give legitimacy to your occupation, like what you did in Junagadh, Hyderabad Deccan, Bhopal, Goa, and Sikkim. I only hope that in a Democratic Secular India, Muslims also have same equal rights as Hindus of the above mentioned 5 states who were accorded the plebiscite right after occupation to join India.

    Recommend

  • Aug 12, 2013 - 10:05AM

    @Lala Gee:

    Since you are such an expert on the Indian Constitution, tell me such such a precedent will be allowed by the Courts.

    If it does you are always to allowed to petition the Indian Supreme Court stating your case.

    Let me guess you think ill of the whole Indian system. You will even say the Plebiscite is unfair, just like the Elections are. So, why should we even bother?

    Recommend

  • Lala Gee
    Aug 12, 2013 - 1:13PM

    @Kashmiri (Indian): Or whoever is posing as Kashmiri.

    “@Lala Gee: I wonder why you talk ad nauseaum about India”

    Shouldn’t, and couldn’t, do any different. Read the provided links, perhaps you could understand why.

    “Pakistan has betrayed the cause of the Kashmiris, firstly, by creating a large-scale prison out of that part of Kashmir under its control”

    Then why there are no riots and freedom movements in Azad Kashmir and GB against this oppression and enslavement like in the Indian Occupied Kashmir going on since India occupied the territory in 1947? The good treatment of Kashmiris by India is also fully exposed in dozens of reports by renowned human rights organizations. One example is this report, “India’s Secret Army in Kashmir”, by the Human Rights Watch.

    “secondly, by giving away a large chunk of Kashmiri real estate to China”

    Quite contrary to your false statement, Pakistan did not give any large chunk of Kashmir to China, but only made boundary settlement for the sake of peaceful coexistence with our neighbor. According to the ‘Sino-Pak Boundary Agreement of 1963″, Pakistan gained some 750 Sq. miles of higher value green pastures in lieu of some 2000 Sq. miles of low value barren uninhabitable mountains. Moreover, as per Article 6 of the agreement, this arrangement is temporary til the Kashmir dispute between Pakistan and India is resolved.

    “Article 6
    The two parties have agreed that after the settlement of the Kashmir dispute between Pakistan and India, the sovereign authority concerned will reopen negotiations with the Government of the People’s Republic of China on the boundary as described in Article. Two of the present agreement, so as to sign a formal boundary treaty to replace the present agreement, provided that in the event of the sovereign authority being Pakistan, the provisions of the present agreement and of the aforesaid protocol shall be maintained in the formal boundary treaty to be signed between the People’s Republic of China and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.”

    By the way, who handed over “Aksai Chin to China”? The real major chunk of 14,380 Sq. miles. Before saying Pakistan, just check the map of Kashmir on http://maps.google.com, lest you wish to make mockery of yourself.

    Recommend

  • Lala Gee
    Aug 12, 2013 - 1:14PM

    @Kashmiri (Indian):

    “Pakistan has already lost its legitimacy and bonafides in its support for the so-called “struggle” for Kashmir’s “freedom”.”

    And what 700,000 Indian security forces in the IOK are there on picnic or shooting practice meanwhile satisfying their some special bodily needs, for which India is famous for, and not to assert legitimacy over Kashmiris and the lands of Kashmir.

    “An overwhelming majority of Kashmiris would not like to have anything to do with a failed state”

    The best time to hold the plebiscite and settle this dispute for once and all. Why are you so afraid of the plebiscite then?

    “religious extremism, not to mention the barbaric treatment and blatant persecution of minorities”

    Hypocrisy is at best when some RSS, VHP, or BJP fanatic lectures us on religious extremism. It is just like TTP terrorist calling LeJ fellow religious extremist. Regarding minority treatment, though Pakistan’s record is not enviable, but unlike India where minorities are massacred and gang raped en-mass in pogroms and genocides, Pakistan by comparison looks like heaven for them. Ask the victims of 1984 Sikh massacre and Muslims of Ayodhya, Bombay, and Gujarat what they think of you.

    Recommend

  • Surya
    Aug 13, 2013 - 6:02PM

    Lala Gee, maybe he is a Kashmiri Pandit like myself. What do you have to say?

    Recommend

  • Genesis
    Aug 17, 2013 - 9:47PM

    @Kashmiri (Indian):
    If Pakistan can give away parts of Kashmir to China why can’t it give parts of Baluchistan to Iran and parts of the frontier area to Afghanistan.that is because it is firm that land is theirs where as Kashmir is dispensable and so gift it away.Kashmir’s do not seem to see through this game and attitude.

    Recommend

More in Opinion