India cannot always be at odds with Pakistan

Published: September 14, 2011
SHARES
Email
The writer is a syndicated columnist and a former member of India’s Rajya Sabha

The writer is a syndicated columnist and a former member of India’s Rajya Sabha

Former national security adviser MK Narayanan, now the governor of West Bengal, has always been a hawk. That he differed with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on improving relations with Pakistan, does not come as a surprise to those who have followed his career from the days of his service in the intelligence agencies. Even then, his reports are said to have been anti-Pakistan. Such bureaucrats, on both sides, have not allowed normalisation between the two countries. And they are still at it.

I was amazed when Narayanan was appointed as the national security adviser (NSA). I could tell why, when I was told that he was close to the ‘dynasty’. His loyalty was tested during Mrs Indira Gandhi’s authoritarian rule and he came out on top. In the beginning, there were two advisers, one for politics and another for security. When former foreign secretary JN Dixit, heading the political side died, both segments came under Narayanan, thanks again to his proximity to the ‘dynasty’.

I admire the patience of Singh who put up with Narayanan for such a long time. Maybe, the prime minister could not convince the ‘dynasty’ that Narayanan should be moved elsewhere because he was not on the same page with him when it came to relations between India and Pakistan. Probably, the history of rapprochement between the two countries could have been different if Narayanan had not been the NSA.

A US diplomat cable released by the WikiLeaks says that when Mamohan Singh spoke about India’s shared destiny with Pakistan, Narayanan reportedly said: “You have a shared destiny, we do not.” There is no reason to disbelieve the report, particularly when India’s Foreign Office (FO) has expressed its inability to comment on it. Narayanan is the one who can throw light but he has preferred to keep silent on this aspect, although he has said that India wanted the custody of David Headley, a US citizen, who has had a hand in the Mumbai terrorist attacks.

Narayanan’s successor, Shiv Shankar Menon, was high commissioner at Islamabad. I found him to be a person who believed that India and Pakistan should be on the best of terms. I believe he has, of late, undergone a change, not on people-to-people contact, but the limit to which India should go to make up with Pakistan. He was not in favour of separating terrorism from talks as Singh had agreed at Sharm el-Sheikh. Menon is not yet a hawk, like Narayanan, but reportedly differs with Singh, who is willing to go the extra mile to make up with Pakistan.

Even during a memorial lecture that Menon delivered at New Delhi recently, he was equivocal on India’s future relations with Pakistan. He gave all credit to Singh for the positive, forward-looking policy and for his keenness in burying the hatchet with Pakistan.

But Menon was diffident to share his vision.

Therefore, our FO and the NSA are often seen at loggerheads with the prime minister’s office on relations with Pakistan. I can understand the burden of history becoming too heavy for a north Indian or a Punjabi who has suffered because of Partition. But both Narayanan and Menon belong to Kerala, the tip of the south and it is strange that the two top officials, particularly Narayanan, who even sabotaged the prime minister’s effort, should continue to occupy key positions in the government.

But them and others, who oppose friendship with Pakistan, do not seem to realise that India cannot always be preparing for a war or defense of its territory if it has to grow economically. They may come to the conclusion one day, as some fanatics in Pakistan are realising now, that there is no alternative to peace. Even a hardliner like General Pervez Musharraf, who started with a policy of fire and brimstone, ultimately came to infer that Pakistanis and Indians had to live as friendly neighbours. He agreed to the present borders but proposed how to make them irrelevant. His formula is still lying somewhere in Pakistan’s FO, accumulating dust. But the formula should have been the starting point for the talks going on behind the scenes.

That Singh remains positive is a plus point to our otherwise wishy-washy foreign policy.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 15th,  2011.

Facebook Conversations

Reader Comments (71)

  • Ali
    Sep 14, 2011 - 9:33PM

    I respect MMS, he is a man with a long term vision, i wish we had people like him in Pakistan. If India moves one step towards peace we in Pakistan should move two. Pease with India is the only way we can relegate the army back to the barracks and get on with real civillian life and civilised progression.

    Peace with India will also remove the jihadi venom that has seeped into our society as if there is no big enemy next door then there is no need for it. People in Pak probably don’t realise but we have more to gain from peace with India than India itself. More than the trade and money (also necessary) would be a much needed shift in the way of thinking in our society, when India is no longer seen as a threat but a potential trading partner and a way to make money and elevate our society then mindsets change.

    Its this change in mindset that will then pull us out of the abyss and towards becoming a productive and healthy society free of hate, but full of optimism for the future.

    Recommend

  • Asim Mubashir
    Sep 14, 2011 - 9:36PM

    At last some sanity prevails.

    Recommend

  • Was A Pakistani
    Sep 14, 2011 - 9:57PM

    Living in peace side by side is an imperative.. not a luxury. We have lost more than half the century. For Pakistan peace is more important than maybe for India which has sprung on the global scene.

    I think India had the opportunity when after Mumbai attack they could have continued to engage with Pakistan because we all know there are no hawks in Pakistan’s main stream political parties and all parties including JUI(F) believe friendly relations with India are the need of the hour. Zardari and Sharifs have openly said India is not the enemy so I think India was immature in its actions after Mumbai attacks. If they have engaged with Pakistan instead of blaming it would have taken the air off the sails of the hawkish military leaders in Pakistan. Till Indian politician keep playing politics with an issue and Pakistan Army continue to suffer from cold war hysteria on an issue so apolitical nothing will be solved.

    Recommend

  • Rsingh
    Sep 14, 2011 - 10:11PM

    Mr. Nayar what more you want us Indian to do. PM Vajpaee goes to Pakistan on peace mission on bus and he gets Kargil. Since then there has no stoppage of terrorist attacks against Indian civilians, planned and aided by Pakistan.
    PM I K Gujral no only asked RAW to stop covert intelligence activities against Pakistan but also gave Pakistan the list and names of RAW’s field agent who were working in Pakistan. Pakistan wisely killed all those operatives and never reciprocated as it should have.

    Could the author care to describe why doesn’t show the same brotherly love to Bangladesh that he showers upon Pakistan, if MMS is such a dove.

    Why you want us Indians to engage with such a nation which probably has not any shred of humanity left in it. For Pakistan to be at peace with us it has to be at peace with itself first. Recommend

  • Abdul Rehman Gilani
    Sep 14, 2011 - 11:00PM

    The day india solves the Kashmir issue as per the UN resolution it itself agreed to under Nehru, is the day we can finally hope for peace in South Asia. Afterall, what is it afraid of?

    The ball is india’s court, if it wants peace it can get it, but unfortunately, its not interested. But rather wants everyone to be subservient to it.

    Recommend

  • Abdul Rehman Gilani
    Sep 14, 2011 - 11:03PM

    The day india solves the Kashmir issue by the UN resolution is the day peace will become a reality in South Asia.

    Recommend

  • antony
    Sep 14, 2011 - 11:17PM

    @abdul,How arrogant you are ! How can you say Peace in South asia that includes other countries apart from India and pakistan is tied to Kashmir issue and that too as per pakistan’s preferred way that is taking away Indian kashmir from India . You sit ,stand ,prostrate ,beg,cry,scream and laugh all you can till your last day and you will still see Indian kashmir with India . If you want peace make what you have that is pakistani kashmir a land of milk and honey and show to the world how good you manage kashmir and then we can think about Indian kashmir.

    Recommend

  • Kishan Arura
    Sep 14, 2011 - 11:28PM

    In the same vein the day Pakistan simply forgets about Kashmir and rolls over, we will have peace not only in the region but all over the world.

    Recommend

  • Bigboy
    Sep 14, 2011 - 11:41PM

    India & Pakistan both claim Kashmir. But even Bangladesh should be party to the Kashmir issue. No reason why they should not raise a claim, as they were East Pakistan and were always the majority. Dhaka played the major role in the Pakistan movement.

    Recommend

  • SM
    Sep 14, 2011 - 11:41PM

    “Manmohan Singh spoke about India’s shared destiny with Pakistan, Narayanan reportedly said: “You have a shared destiny, we do not.”—hahaha hilarious! Well said and respect for you Mr. Narayanan.

    Mr. Nayar could not disagree with you more. Manmohan Singh is a great economist but he has not proved yet that he has qualities of a statesman and should not have been the prime minister. Narayanan is not a hawk. He is a realistic. Unless the pakistani establishment agrees that Kashmir is an integral part of india, does away with the expertise of infiltrating terrorists into Kashmir, acknowlegdes that pakistani state actors are hand in gloves with the terrorists that attacked Mumbai and that continues to kill innocent Indians be the recent bombings in the Delhi High Court or any other bombings in India there can be no genuine lasting friendship.

    Mr. Nayar you should know to wish peace one needs to learn to defend peace.

    Kudos to Narayanan for being honest, bold, and firm in his opinion.

    Recommend

  • Babloo
    Sep 14, 2011 - 11:43PM

    West Pakistanis should realize that there intense desire for Kashmir , resulted in enimity with India and contributed to Pakistan losing its eastern wing and rise of militancy in W Pakistan which has put the existence of the country at risk. The question is , will Pakistan take care of its western wing or will its intense desire for Kashmir contribute to losing what it currently has ? What do readers think ?

    Recommend

  • N
    Sep 14, 2011 - 11:46PM

    @Abdul Rehman Gilani:

    If you are so hungup on UN resolutions then do a couple of things consistently:
    1) Be prepared to make both India and Pakistan abide by the resolutions, per the situation in 1947.
    2) Quit making us explore any other ideas. No back room channels; no flexibility.
    3) Stop talking like you want independence from both India and us. Why should we invest so much time and resources when a plebiscite just may result in you abandoning us? If that is what you want, you can get there faster without us. We are keeping what we have. Why lose that.

    Recommend

  • MD
    Sep 15, 2011 - 12:15AM

    Mr.Kuldip Nayar,
    I am all for peace between India and Pakistan, but, sir, you don’t carry any credibility with me, because I never saw you lit any candles in the sad memory of our fellow Indians who were killed by the terrorist sent into our country by your beloved Pakistan. For you Punjabis, Pakistan may be an emotional attachment for the historic reasons, but, for us rest of Indians Pakistan means little. All we want is to be left alone. We wish to see Pakistan behaves like a normal country and stops creating problems for her neighbors.
    As for Mr. M.K Narayanan, please don’t brand him as hawk or hardliner etc. because he is one of the distinguished bureaucrat of India and a patriot as well who accomplished his job professionally without any prejudice, emotions or personal agendas.
    Recommend

  • Salman Shah
    Sep 15, 2011 - 1:05AM

    Both sides have made mistakes. India being a big country should take the first step towards peace. I say A BIG STEP. Like doing some favour to pakistan in Afghanistan. Stp pulling legs and then i think the hawks in pakistan will realise that this is a new india. Confession on the highest forum about the partition and the communities used against each other will help us.

    I know there are more rational thoughts in India and is more stable country so Im asking India to take initiative.

    Recommend

  • Vish
    Sep 15, 2011 - 1:54AM

    Very poor write-up. I am sure Mr.Nayar is enough of a journalist to know that Indo-Pak relations are no longer viewed purely through a North Indian/Punjabi prism. Whether the Foreign secretary & NSA are Punjabi/North Indian or from Kerala, they represent India and necessarily a national outlook. Of course they bring in their own nuances but must follow laid down government/national policy.

    Blaming specific individuals for lack of progress in India-Pakistan relations not only shows a poor understanding of ground realities, but is also rank bad journalism (playing to the gallery). Does Mr.Nayar seriously believe that Menon and Narayanan are the root cause of lack of progress in India-Pakistan relations.

    After the Mumbai 2008 incident, it is near impossible even for Mr.Manmohan Singh (however positive he may be) to take an independent line on relations with Pakistan.

    Recommend

  • rehmat
    Sep 15, 2011 - 3:34AM

    @Salman Shah:
    India aleady has done the following:
    1. In 1971, it retrned 90,000 Pakistani prisoners of wars without imposing any difficult treatyon Pakistan
    2. Has conistetly followed a policy of No first attack. All wars were initiated by Pakistan. Your own air marshal Asghar Khan would confirm that.
    3. Has granted Most Favoured Nation status to Pakistan since 2005 which Pakistan ahs not reciprocated
    4. In 1998 itself India said announced a policy of ‘No first Use’ of nuclear weapons. Pakistan is yet to reciprocate.
    5. In 1999 Vajpayee even went to Minar-e-Pakistan and what did he get in return? A stab in the back called Kargill. Even your own ex-PM (who was PM at that time) Nawaz Sharif admits to that.

    Unfortunately, all these steps have not resulted in reduced hatred for India and in particular for Hindus in Pakistan. If by big step you mean handing Jammu and Kashmir over – that will not happen.

    Mr. Nayyar,

    I agree with Narayanan that we do not have a shared destiny with Pakistan, we do however have a shared border. YEs. We do not want to start a war but we can and will protect ourselves when attacked. Unlinking talks from terrorism implies that it is Okay if we are attacked, we will just turn the other cheek. I think that Narayanan reflected the mood and will of all Indian people when hepushed back on the Sharm-El-Sheikh resolution..

    Recommend

  • Sajida
    Sep 15, 2011 - 4:16AM

    India broke water agreement by building dams on rivers meant for exclusive use of Pakistan. Little wonder the hawks want to stay hawkish to cover this misconduct. The water issue needs to be settled and India should demonstrate it doesn’t break its word.
    I am not surprised Pakistanis are suspicious after this. Indian farmers are so over using tube wells they are causing farmers to leave the land. The overuse of tubewells was even the subject of an international water conference. Indians should provide water conservation lessons to the farmers, including the ones in West Bengal-the state where the hawkish gent is from which announced its farmers were highly productive.They were not productive using sustainable farming practices for certain!

    Recommend

  • Ali
    Sep 15, 2011 - 4:37AM

    @Babloo:
    kashmir is just one issue. India has alot more to answer for than just occupation of kashmir.
    We dont have an obsession with Kashmir, it was you who blocked exports to pakistan in 1947

    Recommend

  • vasan
    Sep 15, 2011 - 6:11AM

    I am not for any enimity with Pakistan. That does not mean we throw open our country for all their mischiefs, visa free entry, and listen to all Pak’s beggings etc. We can treat it like we treat Burma. Keep 10 arms distance and just ignore it . But who will tackle terrorism originating from Pakistan?

    Recommend

  • ayesha
    Sep 15, 2011 - 7:24AM

    Destiny is the outcome of decisions. Since the decisions that India and Pakistan have made abuot the nature of their country are different, their destiny cannot be a shared destiny. Some examples:
    1) India has chosen to be secular. Pakistan has chosen to be an Islamic republic.
    2) India has chosen to be a democracy. Pakistanis are not sure if they want a democracy or military rule or live under a Khalifa.
    3) India values diversity and tolerance is encouraged. In Pakistan, there is little tolerance even for Muslims who are not Deobandi Sunnis.
    4) Role of weapons in societu- It is a common sight to see private security people in a city like Karachi with kalashnikovs. In Mumbai which is a city of similar size and stature, the chowkidars barely have a danda. Even the traffic cops do not carry weapons
    5) India owns its entire history – te Hindu, Buddhist and Mughal history. Many Pakistanis do not even want to own their South Asian origin

    I am not saying one set of decision is better than others but the decisions are unquestionably different. How then can the destiny be identical?

    Menon is quite correct to say what he did. No-one in India wants a war with Pakistan or even wants any harm to come to Pakistan. But the notion of separating talks from terrorism that Singh committed in Sharm-El-Sheikh wasn’t acceptable to a majority of Indians who were fed up from the repeated terror attacks that major Indian cities had faced from 2006 through 2008. I do not think there is anything hawkish about demanding that the 26/11 culprits be held accountable.

    You feel that such a ‘hard line’ (which by the way I do not consider a hard line at all) would have been more understandable from a North Indian who had undergone the travail of partition and are surprised to see it from a South Indian. The fact however is that unlike ManMohan Singh , people from other parts of India were not born in the current Pakistan, do not have friends and family there and are not emotionally invested in keeping up a relationship at the cost of safety and security of innocent Indians. Those issues cannot be ignored as you seem to be suggesting.Recommend

  • Rock
    Sep 15, 2011 - 7:29AM

    I think kashmir issue – Giving kashmir to any one of the two country will create balkanisation in the region. how many of you agree with me?

    Recommend

  • abhi
    Sep 15, 2011 - 10:55AM

    i think it’s quite understandable why mk narayanan gave that statement.most south indians dont understand the northie’s love hate relationship with pakistanis.however he should understand the fact that india cant continue to progress economically if it continues to be surrounded by 2 hostile nuclear armed neighbors.

    Recommend

  • chandran
    Sep 15, 2011 - 11:20AM

    we Indian try to put a equal claim on balochistan LOL haha
    even though it is not a dispute between India and pakisthan
    for the tit for tat diplomacy for claim sake.

    Recommend

  • Beta
    Sep 15, 2011 - 11:33AM

    @Abdul Rehman Gilani:

    The day will never come as Kashmir is an integral part of India, let us see who will became what, continue harping about Kashmir.

    Recommend

  • Beta
    Sep 15, 2011 - 11:51AM

    Dear Kuldip sir,

    Before advising us for peace with Pakistan, I would request you to spend five minutes in Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus platform, the lost souls will tell you something.

    Recommend

  • R S JOHAR
    Sep 15, 2011 - 12:20PM

    Pakistan has an excellent chance to improve relations with India during the Manmohan Singh’s tenure as PM. Nobody can predict the next PM of India since there are many in waiting and to name a few are Rahul Gandhi, Narender Modi, Nitish etc etc and its not certain if anyone of them would take the lead for the same.

    Not-withstanding above, whether the Pak military would allow normalisation of relations between the two countries, still remains a million dollar question.

    Recommend

  • Abdul Rehman Gilani
    Sep 15, 2011 - 12:37PM

    @SM:

    Your own government is saying indian extremists are involved in the attack. indians are so obsessed with Pakistan, that if a day comes when a cow does not give milk there, they will declare it an evil doing of ISI. Heck, they even consider pigeons spies! Also, remember Madhoori Gupta?

    @antony:

    Well then, I havent seen Amnesty International declaring mass graves being found in Azad Kashmir have I? I dont get it, what are indians so afraid of?!

    @N:

    So you agree Kashmiris dont want to be part of india, so why do we hear, “Kashmir is an integral part of india”? Wheres the democracy now?

    @vasan:

    If your not so obsessed about Pakistan, why are you and your indian brethren spewing your comments on this website?

    @chandran:

    There’s a difference, in Balochistan, in 1947 the people agreed to be part of Pakistan, there’s no doubt about it. But in Kashmir, india itself went to the UN and agreed to hold a plebiscite there to see if the people really want to join india. So your claim is baseless.

    @Beta:

    If it is in reality, then why not let the people over there speak their opinion by having a plebiscite there as you agreed to in the UN?

    Recommend

  • Manoj
    Sep 15, 2011 - 1:19PM

    Mr. Nayyar, India is not only Punjab, it extends from Kashmir to Kanyakumari. Indian policy towards pakistan will be decided by whole country after weighing the pros and cons. The policy formulation is too serious issue to be left to few old generation punjabi whose mindset is frozen in pre 1947 joint punjab. One needs to get rid of emotions while deciding the policy of the country. Country’s interest is supreme and personal emotions and opinion if unable to get alligned to national interest, should be sacrificed.

    Recommend

  • Pakistani in US
    Sep 15, 2011 - 2:16PM

    Bored. Typical responses. This whole india pakistan debate is such a drag. Is there a point in talking to people who insult and ridicule us on every chance they get? Who can’t separate an average Pakistani from a fundamental terrorist. I am sorry there is no point talking about this cause. That’s coming from someone who has lived with indians from all over india. They obviously changed over time, but few out of billion is useless.

    Recommend

  • Paras Vikmani
    Sep 15, 2011 - 2:19PM

    Finally a nice article by this man.

    Recommend

  • vasan
    Sep 15, 2011 - 2:49PM

    Abdul Rehman Gilani : Forget about obsession with Pakistan. We are not . Oh we are. The last poser in my previous message will answer your question. On other aspects of Pakistan, we couldnt care less. Indians spewing comments in this website?. I think you didnt understand “www. ” in any website. It is WorldWideWeb”, Gotcha?

    Recommend

  • Hari Sud
    Sep 15, 2011 - 3:44PM

    No, Mr. Nayyar, It is not India at odds with Pakistan. It is otherway around.

    You have an uncanny skill to bring Nehru and dead and gone leaders to justfy your arguments. Never for a moment you have been able to think that all this tension in the region is Pakistan’s doing.

    Now the world has been begining to understand that Pakistan for generations developed a skill to doublecross and lie. Americans are the first to learn this truth in last year or two.Recommend

  • observer
    Sep 15, 2011 - 3:50PM

    @Pakistani in US

    Who can’t separate an average Pakistani from a fundamental terrorist.

    Well, help me here. Were the garlanding Lawyers and the 40 thousand strong marchers in favour of Qadri, ‘average Pakistanis’ or ‘fundamental terrorists’?

    Recommend

  • Sep 15, 2011 - 4:47PM

    @vasan:
    Please dont use language like Pakistani begging etc. It is not fair! We are all human beings first then Indians, pakistanis etc. I am half brahmin and brahmins are only high caste, but most of them were never treated well. Half the brahmins begged. Most of us were desperately poor since thousands of years, remember Krishna’s friend Sudaama and Dronacharya who were very poor. God help everyone. Hopefully Pakistan will be a good business partner of India. I have seen pakistani goods like spices and clothes. They are of the finest quality. We should have rivalry is sports,business etc and if Pakistan becomes a good business partner then atleast India would not spend those billions of dollars on those rubbish defence contracts with France and other countries [you know who] and waste precious money.

    Recommend

  • Ali Tanoli
    Sep 15, 2011 - 5:36PM

    With due respect to all but Mr Monmohan singh sahab is right because he know if war happend then there will be no more punjab will left and he right about share destiny.
    about south india they dont even look indian they are africano…

    Recommend

  • Irshad Khan
    Sep 15, 2011 - 5:39PM

    Good relationship between two countries is based on volume of trade and travelling ie visa policy. You mostly write very good, realistic and logically based articles but always neglect travelling on either side, particularly for senior citizens and more particularly who borne on either side and wish to see their birth place once and only once for the last time, but procedures and requirements are too much.

    Recommend

  • Abdul Rehman Gilani
    Sep 15, 2011 - 5:46PM

    @vasan:

    Dear, come out of your confusion. I think you forgot to see that the link has .PK in it as well. So it means it is a Pakistani website, got it?

    And by the way, your comments prove how much obsessed indians are regarding Pakistan! :D

    Recommend

  • R. Khan
    Sep 15, 2011 - 5:55PM

    Excellent Article! He is truly man of Peace.

    Recommend

  • BruteForce
    Sep 15, 2011 - 6:16PM

    @Abdul Rehman Gilani:

    You have to pardon the Indians for not giving you an answer yet.

    I’ll attempt it. Kashmir already has a plebiscite-kind of exercise and that is called the Elections. Election Commission in India is free and its members even invited to Pakistan to advice and how to conduct free and fair elections.

    http://tribune.com.pk/story/249811/indian-election-commission-asks-ecp-to-improve-credibility/

    The type of “elections” or what you call plebiscite cannot be under taken for 2 reasons.
    1) Pakistan cannot fulfill the conditions laid by the UN, which includes removing all traces of the Army from all parts of Kashmir and also, Pakistan has given away a part of Kashmir to China, which I dont think China will ever give back.

    2) Constitution of India, a holy text for Indians, cannot be overridden. That is the reason for our prolonged bout of Democracy while Democracy has eluded in Pakistan ever since its existence. Our Constitution does not allow the kind of plebiscite that you and others ask for. But, there is an alternative and that happens every 5 years in Kashmir. You can ask the Hurriat to stand and prove their majority support. Then, you can claim that Kashmir you dream of.

    Even Islamists in Pakistan, like the Hurriat in Kashmir, can raise hell, bring people onto the streets and bring cities to a standstill. But, they cant win more than 10% of the votes.

    Recommend

  • Ali Tanoli
    Sep 15, 2011 - 6:23PM

    @ Hari Sod;
    Who is master of these things we use to hear (Bughel me churry moo me ram ram).

    Recommend

  • Ron
    Sep 15, 2011 - 7:03PM

    Mr. Kuldip Nayyar has sought to use the Pakistani media to air his leftist views which do not have any support in India. MMS is a unelected “bureaucrat” prime minister and Narayanan may have been appointed to keep a check on MMS’s impulsive actions which may be detrimental to India. Good relations with neighbors is a desirable state, but it must be based on mutuality.

    Whether people like it or not, India is the largest country in Western Asia among the Non-European Caucasians and will have a unique status as China is in the Mongoloid world. It is reality for others in the region to accept, not for India to manage.

    Recommend

  • Nate Gupta
    Sep 15, 2011 - 7:28PM

    Rehmat ji and Ayesha ji,

    Very well said. I could not have said it better myself. The problem is, an average Pakistani does not consider all those issues you raised. They are too busy discussing the conspiracy theories fed to them.
    Abdul Rehman Gilani ji,

    We don’t blame your country for everything that happens in India. Just stop sending terrorists to our country and leave us alone. We couldn’t care less about what happens in Pakistan. We have our own sets of issues and goals that we need to work towards.
    As far as commenting here is concerned, it is called Freedom of Speech, a supposedly fundamental right for mankind. But then, you are from Pakistan where leaders like Taseer are killed just for speaking up for the rights of minorities and the murderer treated like a hero!
    I understand why you would question Indian readers posting here.

    Sincerely!Recommend

  • ukmuslim
    Sep 15, 2011 - 7:36PM

    @Abdul Rehman Gilani
    sorry mate, to visit the newspaper site without having pakistani visa.

    Recommend

  • Abdul Rehman Gilani
    Sep 15, 2011 - 7:39PM

    @vasan:
    The link also has (dot) PK in it. Got it?

    Your comments prove how obsessed indians are! :)

    Recommend

  • Abdul Rehman Gilani
    Sep 15, 2011 - 7:41PM

    @Ali Tanoli:
    Good one!

    Recommend

  • pk_paris
    Sep 15, 2011 - 9:07PM

    @Abdul Rehman Gilani:

    Pakistan had been in and out of democracy a number of times from the time of its inception. The successive dictators never had any future vision for Pakistan nor the civilian governments had. Eventually they have pushed the country perpetually backward. The only popularist agenda they had was “Hate India”. They have used religion as a tool to continue their hatred against India keeping famous ‘K’ word on the top of agenda other than real domestic issues such as basic health, education, economy etc.
    Just read any news paper of Pakistan (not urdu) on any day and compare with India. Pakistan has lot to do and unless it identifies the issue, NO one including yourself will be able to find out the solution.

    Recommend

  • rehmat
    Sep 15, 2011 - 9:12PM

    @Ali Tanoli:
    “:about south india they dont even look indian they are africano…”
    SO now a Pakistani will tell us who is Indian and who is not? Also do you realize your statement is highly racist?

    Recommend

  • rehmat
    Sep 15, 2011 - 9:19PM

    @Ali Tanoli:
    “Who is master of these things we use to hear (Bughel me churry moo me ram ram).”

    You tell us.

    -Who sent 800,000 people to India in 1965 pretending they were local Jammu Kashmir people – precipitating a war when Indian governmen realized they were Pakistani soldiers.

    Whose army killed more than a million people of their own country in 1971?

    Who sabotaged the 1999 peace agreement that Vajpayee had initated by doing Kargill. Initially the Pakistan government was not even prepared to take back the dead body of its sldiers by claiming that Pak army was not involved and they were mujahideens. Ofcourse later Musharraf even admitted in his book that Pak army was involved.

    who was supposedly on point of reaching an agreement with India on Kashmir in 2008 when they sent terrorists to Mumbai?

    You will get the answer. It is not a people of a particular religion ut the people of a particular natioality.

    Recommend

  • Ali Tanoli
    Sep 15, 2011 - 11:16PM

    @ rehmat
    This all happend and you indians remember very well and accurately what about killing in
    jammu kashmir and killing of west pakistanis in the hand of indian forces and mukhti bani
    they were originaly indian and killings of innocent sikhs in east punjab and u know what
    when ever india close to lose kashmir it become so innocent like they are little kitty.Recommend

  • Azharuddin Masood
    Sep 15, 2011 - 11:29PM

    @Ali Tanoli:
    South Indians may look like africano but they are innocent and harmless not like Nadas who tie bombs inside their shalwar and kill innocent people.

    Recommend

  • nasir
    Sep 16, 2011 - 1:00AM

    @Rsingh:
    u r no better than those u hate.stop this holier than thou attitude. u r preaching the same creed u r hating the pakistanis for.

    Recommend

  • Rify (India )
    Sep 16, 2011 - 2:08AM

    Ali Tanoli im south indian muslim. and proud of being indian , tamilian and a muslim ( read in this order ). You may call us blacks or africanos. Well, it is good to be a black man than an terrorist. FYI, the president of a country you beg every fortnight for money, is actually a half african. No wonder, the land of pure is the most talked nation in recent years, and for all wrong reasons. Keep begging, keep shouting, rather, we keep adding another trillion dollar in our pocket with in this decade, which you cant even dream atleast in another 50 years.

    Oh ! The hadith says, some of islamic prophets were actually dark skinned person. God created humans with water from jannat and sand from every part of the world that he created,,thats why we have humans with every kind of skin color, ranging from white, brown, yellowish, black, red..just like different color of sand..

    Recommend

  • vasan
    Sep 16, 2011 - 6:42AM

    Ali Tanoli : Ask your dear friends in Srilanka as to who invented the technique of suicide bombing. Indians have not invented it. And in India we consider ourselves as Indians by geographic boundaries and not by religion/language/race etc. I presume you are a Pakistani and hence you may not understand this concept of nationality as you guys are still deeply immersed in Ummah and Global jihad.

    Recommend

  • Rock
    Sep 16, 2011 - 7:29AM

    @Ali Tanoli: Now you say why entire world treat pak people like terrorist though there are so many terrorist organisaion exist in pak because of one terrorist organisation LTTE you call tamils as killers god knows how you intereste other social problems. Start thinking positivelt Mr. ali tanoli life is beutiful.

    Recommend

  • Aizaz Moin
    Sep 16, 2011 - 12:53PM

    Of course Pakistan must try to work out it’s differences with India and live in peace and harmony, making it a better world for future generations. After all is it worth fighting or living in peace? Is it worth all the bloodshed, all the grieving mothers and sisters the so called martyrs leave behind? Sadly the old guard will not allow young blood to come forward and take the lead because they are so entrenched in making money themselves from the single most lucrative trade of arms supply and purchase. Why do you think USA and Europe are so rich? It is because of the profits earned from the sale of this merchandise of death and destruction. So it is in Pakistan and India’s interest to stop arms racing each other into bankruptcy and embrace each other as brothers. Come together now before it is too late. The young generation on both sides of the border must seize this opportunity and strive for peace in this sub-continent. I was an officer in the Pakistan Army, I am from the old guard and I am a practicing Muslim but I preach love and a farewell to arms now. The old days are gone, let us draw a line under it and move forward towards a better future for ourselves and for our children. Love and Peace to all my brothers in India as well as Pakistan, be they Hindus, Muslims, Christians or Buddists.

    Recommend

  • Ali
    Sep 16, 2011 - 3:08PM

    “We had given our pledge to the people of Kashmir, and subsequently to the United Nations; we stood by it and we stand by it today. Let the people of Kashmir decide.” JAWAHARLAL NEHRU, (Statement in the Indian Parliament, 12 February 1951).

    “But so far as the Government of India are concerned, every assurance and international commitment in regard to Kashmir stands.” JAWAHARLAL NEHRU (Statement in the Indian Council of States; 18 May 1954).

    and this is just icing on the cake. Whether you agree or not about the resolution of Kashmir issue but the fact of the matter is Kashmir, its inevitable. You can’t play cricket without a ball :)Recommend

  • Abdul Quddus
    Sep 16, 2011 - 6:20PM

    @Aizaz MoinI Totally agreed.

    Let me appologise to the younger generation. We your elders inherited a rich and great country with huge potential, but we misused our inheritance and left the our country desolate. Please forgive us, your elders. We failed you. We will be gone soon, it is for you carry the burden and reverse our mistakes. Good luck.

    Recommend

  • Ali Tanoli
    Sep 16, 2011 - 6:29PM

    @ Rify india
    I am sorry guys it was i said it in sense of humer nothing bieng racist its like jokes in
    funny soap operas in west we see these kind of things you guys are so emotional i does
    not know that i will be care full now on man if its hurts you sorry guys.

    Recommend

  • Abdul Rehman Gilani
    Sep 16, 2011 - 6:44PM

    @BruteForce:

    Hmmmm, so your trying to bring a case point by saying that through FAKE elections a degree of freedom is given to Kashmiris. Then I wonder, why is india so afraid to have a UN-sponsored plebiscite if it knows it has gauged public opinion!

    Secondly, doesnt your constitution say india is bound to accept foreign agreements? Didnt india agree to hold a plebiscite in Kashmir under Nehru? So are you saying that tomorrow india can sign one international agreement and then NOT be bound by it?

    Three, lets just see, compare the size of the indian army in Kashmir to Pakistan’s. We are ever ready to hold the plebiscite and reduce our forces, but india isnt even moving a budge to even try reducing the number of its armed forces!

    Recommend

  • N
    Sep 16, 2011 - 6:50PM

    @Ali Tanoli:

    South Indians – Africano! *
    Seriously – you are better than this. This is a forum to exchange information with respect – not express ignornace and bigotry.

    You know, the Arabs say the something similar about us – we don’t look Arab (even though we claim to) – we look Indian (and they are right).

    Be cool bro. Recommend

  • Ali Tanoli
    Sep 16, 2011 - 6:58PM

    @ Vasan & Others
    So whats a big deal if some body tells us they dont look themself what they doing every one of you become chicken no one count there crimes who created this whole mess and
    who give a right to russia ti invade poor afghanistan why secular india did not support that
    time to afghans…………………….the world is game of intrest thats all.

    Recommend

  • vasan
    Sep 16, 2011 - 7:47PM

    Ali Tanoli: Frankly I do not understand your most recent massage and the stuff you want to convey . Could u care to explain?

    Recommend

  • Ali Tanoli
    Sep 16, 2011 - 10:59PM

    @ N
    @Vasan
    i dont look niether am indian ok.
    and vasan if the world tells us extremist what about them they are free to do any thing
    second india was involved very well in sri lanka this is a truth and thats why they got
    reaction when rajive feroz nehru died.(PM).

    Recommend

  • swet ji anand
    Sep 17, 2011 - 2:22AM

    @Abdul Rehman Gilani: you are again and again talking about UN resolution here, but you know nothing about this. according to UN resolution

    As the presence of troops of Pakistan in the territory of the State of Jammu and Kashmir constitutes a material change in the situation since it was represented by the Government of Pakistan before the Security Council, the Government of Pakistan agrees to withdraw its troops from that State.

    2-The Government of Pakistan will use its best endeavour to secure the withdrawal from the State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistani nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purpose of fighting.

    3.. Pending a final solution, the territory evacuated by the Pakistani troops will be administered by the local authorities under the surveillance of the commission.

    pakistan never acted on these conditions put by UN. it gave some part of its kashmir to china, you have to take it from china and on conditions put by UN first, then you should talk about UN resolution.

    The resolution recommended that in order to ensure the impartiality of the plebiscite Pakistan withdraw all tribesmen and nationals who entered the region for the purpose of fighting and that India leave only the minimum number of troops needed to keep civil order. The Commission was also to send as many observers into the region as it deemed necessary to ensure the provisions of the resolution were enacted. Pakistan ignored the UN mandate and continued fighting, holding on to the portion of Kashmir under its control.[5] Subsequently India refused to implement the plebiscite claiming the withdrawal of Pakistan forces was a prerequisite as per this resolution.[

    Recommend

  • swet ji anand
    Sep 17, 2011 - 8:06AM

    many people who talk about UN resolution do not what it is and it’s terms and conditions.

    The resolution recommended that in order to ensure the impartiality of the plebiscite Pakistan withdraw all tribesmen and nationals who entered the region for the purpose of fighting and that India leave only the minimum number of troops needed to keep civil order. The Commission was also to send as many observers into the region as it deemed necessary to ensure the provisions of the resolution were enacted. Pakistan ignored the UN mandate and continued fighting, holding on to the portion of Kashmir under its control.[5] Subsequently India refused to implement the plebiscite claiming the withdrawal of Pakistan forces was a prerequisite as per this resolution.[

    Recommend

  • observer
    Sep 17, 2011 - 8:39AM

    @Ali Tanoli

    every one of you become chicken no one count there crimes who created this whole mess and
    who give a right to russia ti invade poor afghanistan why secular india did not support that
    time to afghans…………………….the world is game of intrest thats all.

    Yes. I like your spirit of inquiry. Now, your query is, ‘who give a right to russia ti invade poor afghanistan’? You can find the answer in an article by Dr Mohammad Taqi in the Daily Times. I have quoted the relevant portion and also given you the link.
    The setting up of the Frontier Regions and Tribal Affairs ministry, headed by Major General (retired) Jamaldar Khan under Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in the early 1970s was not a result of the US presence in Afghanistan. President Daud Khan responded by creating a similar ministry in Afghanistan. It was around the same time that Pakistan took in the very first batch of Islamist militants like Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, Burhanuddin Rabbani and Maulvi Nabi Muhammadi and put them under the patronage of Major-General Naseerullah Babar in Peshawar. General Babar was to later take pride in creating the present-day Taliban and affectionately called them his ‘boys’!

    http://dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=20119\15\story15-9-2011pg3_3

    PS. Your statement, ‘no one count there crimes who created this whole mess’ is not true. Dr Taqi just did.

    Recommend

  • observer
    Sep 17, 2011 - 11:29AM

    @Ali Tanoli

    india was involved very well in sri lanka this is a truth and thats why they got
    reaction when rajive feroz nehru died.(PM)
    .

    Absolutely right. But you need to remember two things,

    A. Indians realised their stupidity and folly very early and tried to make amends by sending in the IPKF to neutralise the LTTE. India paid a price in the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi.

    B. Has Pakistan realised its folly even after more than 20 years and at least half a dozen assassinations (BB/Taseer/Bhatti included). If yes why are the Haqqanis still in NWA.

    PS- And the Indian PM was named Rajiv Gandhi not Rajive Nehru. You really don’t have to put your ‘knowledge’ on display all the time, you know.

    Recommend

  • Ali Tanoli
    Sep 17, 2011 - 5:23PM

    @ Observer
    This is true and that time it was russia back govt in afghanistan and they were trying to make a another balony pukhtunistan (as a pakhtun i am against this idea) if some one
    dont wanna live pakistan go to afghanistan we dont care. what was my point who give russia to invade poor afghanistan and start terrorizing why these great games only run
    on poor peoples why dont they play these in there countries and second thing india was
    in russian block they did not even bother to help these poor peoples and now ………….Recommend

  • Ali Tanoli
    Sep 17, 2011 - 5:26PM

    @ Azarudin masood
    what if i call to European do u guys will mind like you did in telling africano????????
    so why is this,,,,,,,,,,

    Recommend

  • Abdul Rehman Gilani
    Sep 18, 2011 - 2:16AM

    @swet ji anand:

    Just answer me a single question, who chants Kashmir is an integral part of india? Who is in denial of the UN resolution? Both answers is INDIA!

    Pakistan has no probs reducing the force, but is india ready to even reduce the hundreds of thousands of their army men? We dont have any problem with the commission, its india which has been objecting so!

    When will the hawks in delhi realize its not the Pakistani army but themselves who dont want peace!

    Recommend

  • swet ji anand
    Sep 18, 2011 - 9:56PM

    @Abdul Rehman Gilani:

    Pakistan can’t say kashmir is its integral part, till when people of kashmir decide to which country they associate themselves or till the plebiscite is taken place. but India can at least say this bcz the then king of kashmir acceded his kingdom to india so when India say kashmir is it’s integral part it may be called morally wrong by someone but it is legal at least.

    where does this question of, pakistan ready or not to reduce its force, arise. pakistan have to remove all its force and migrated people from POK and give it to under an independent commission before any step toward plebiscite. by the way, how you can say that pakistan is ready to reduce its force, they never did this and that’s why plebiscite never took place. and one thing more india have its force in kashmir bcz there is an infiltration of from the side of pakistan and pakistan must not have a problem, as you say, in reducing the force bcz india is not the country who export terrorist.

    Recommend

More in Opinion

-->