Siachen News & Discussion

[abhishek_sharma]

>> For every nutty Zaid Hamid you have a Nadeem Paracha and for every Hamid Gul you have a Najam Sethi.

So Nadeem Paracha and Najam Sethi are examples of good Pakis in your world? That explains your understanding of Pakistan.

[Viv S]

>> For every nutty Zaid Hamid you have a Nadeem Paracha and for every Hamid Gul you have a Najam Sethi.

So Nadeem Paracha and Najam Sethi are examples of good Pakis in your world? That explains your understanding of Pakistan.

You tell me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7jbFrOrBJU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52-B30smo20
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFpB0PSnoz0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZ8f3s24ZoM

[abhishek_sharma]

I have not watched the videos you posted (I will watch them later). But I have not seen any mainstream Paki reporter who favors normal* relationship with India.

By "normal" relationship I mean, they would accept following points

1. No interference in J&K (not referring to PoK).
2. No terrorism
3. No Jizya.

The best deal you can get from them (or Bangladeshis) is the following

1. We will not support terrorist attacks in your country.
2. In return, you give us money.

Paki Journalists (like JNU jholawallahs) just provide academic arguments (in terms of human rights, etc) to support Paki irredentist agenda. When a few stray away from the official line, they are halaled. If a Paki journalist is alive, it implies that he has published more than enough anti-India venom*.

*Some may argue that they are forced to do so. That is an entirely different matter. We have no way of knowing whether they really believe what they write or not.

[vishvak]

Do a politician has any locus standi on region where there is no one and therefore no elections and therefore related political activism? So there is no one to protest == at Siachen, is it so? But we have border states too.

The defense of such a strategic position lies with defense personnel in any case.

Politicians can take take terrorism or another issue for doing == which is much larger and more important. There is no logic to do == at strategic locations, and giving pakis hope to use it later as excuse for anything. paki is not a normal country.

Are there any situations where Indians can do == where pakis are at an advantage, however it may be.

[Supratik]

One of the things I often had to impress upon my friends when I was abroad was that there are very few stereotypes one can make about India or Indians. There is no Indian accent and there is no pan-Indian language. Yet its our Indian identity that has thrives in this myriad of cultures. Like India, Pakistan is not a monolithic state. Unlike India, there are three factors that distinctly unite it - religious nationalism, occasional military rule and an opposition to a threat from India.

The country swayed from moderate liberalism (under Ayub) to severe conservatism (under Zia) and is slowly but surely drifting away from religious nationalism. Not least because dozens are dying every week bringing the violence away from their TV screens and into their living rooms. For every nutty Zaid Hamid you have a Nadeem Paracha and for every Hamid Gul you have a Najam Sethi. Worried about Islamic fundamentalism, well they can keep trying to poison the waters of the ocean. Its not Indian tanks or fighter aircraft or nuclear weapons that drives their religious fundamentalists mad. Of course not, they're all means to martyrdom. What really gets their blood boiling is Bollywood, Star TV, Roadies, Kaun Banega Crorepati, Ekta Kapoor, IPL cricket and other 'corrupting influences'. JNU types infuriate you? Get a quota for Pakistanis in its admission ASAP. Is POK anti-India? Wait till the local economy depends on Indian tourists. Sindhis collaborating with Punjabis to oppose Indian inroads? Wait till its domestic trade with Gujarat outgrows that with Punjab. Open the floodgates and see which way the river flows.

Well this is mostly off-topic, but if you're interested we could discuss it on a more appropriate thread.

OT
Your optimism is appreciated. However, the reality is very different. We are ideologically antagonistic just like Communism and Capitalism. It doesn't mean that all Russians or all Americans are bad. Pakistan was created on the bedrock of ethnic cleansing and genocide. And there is yet no evidence that it has as a "society" moved away from these tendencies. Unless we see that change (I see that change in some Bdeshis which is why I am more optimistic about Bdesh) it is largely wishful thinking by "JNU types".

[Viv S]

I have not watched the videos you posted (I will watch them later). But I have not seen any mainstream Paki reporter who favors normal* relationship with India.

Watch from 3:10 -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZ8f3s24ZoM

Its just about three minutes long if you're short on time. Najam Sethi is very much a mainstream journalist and an influential one at that.

[brihaspati]

Viv S wrote

I believe we've come to a fundamental disagreement. If physically holding on to Siachen is a stepping stone to capturing or gaining POK by other means, sure your argument is valid. Which brings us to the larger question - do you think we will someday in the future capture POK? The nationalist NDA govt with all the provocation in the world instructed the IA not violate the LoC in 1999 (let alone start an offensive in Gilgit-Baltistan). The 'treacherous' UPA certainly will do nothing of the sort. So what course of events play out with India gaining POK as a result, but without experimenting with nuclear red lines?

The short answer is - yes, in the future, I believe, we will take POK back. One of the urgencies in pushing for legalization and demilitarization is also the fact that POK insurrectionists or anti-Pindi-wale have been using leaning over to India as a tactical pressure point. This need not be their sincere intent but enough to get Pindi panicking.

I dont think it is necessary to bring in NDA/UPA here. My posts from the beginning of my presence here has always been neutral about NDA and never that of a fanboy.

What 'changing' arguments have been placed? The govt is simply carrying on with what has always been its position i.e. authentication of the AGPL and a withdrawal thereafter.

Changing arguments on this thread - like "cost benefit" analysis.

That's someone else's argument, not mine. I don't believe the IA's opinion is sacrosanct even in matters of national security. This is as much a foreign policy decision and the IA may well be less involved in the bigger picture.

I had only shown that a highly selective quoting of IA ex-personnel was being quoted here - and only those that seemed to support withdrawal. The counter-current of opiiuon from the very same IA origin personnel had been ignored and not posted at the same time. Selective use of material like this - is always connected to hidden ideological or other motivation, which is not expressed for fear of losing legitimacy.


I guess your argument is actually illustrative. If I understand you correctly, in this context you are saying - that the anti-withdrawal opinions of IA personnel is not sacrosanct in matters of national security. When it is inconvenient, IA opinion can be dissed too in the name of foreign policy decision and bigger picture. Thus JJS's opinion on this thread when criticized becomes a hugely emotive issue for harangue - because JJS's opinion favours "withdrawal". In that case "foreign policy decision" and "bigger picture" issues do not arise.

[rohitvats]

A few more questions. What was India's claimed line or the "cartographic expression" line north of NJ9842, pre 1984?

Indian claim line has always been "thence north to the glaciers" as per the Shimla Agreement. Contrary to popular perception, there are three actors in this Cartographic Aggression - Pakistan, China and USA.

(a) First act - Sino-Pakistan Boundary Agreement - it was through this agreement that Pakistan ceded the Trans-Karakoram Tract or Shaksgam Valley to China. Here is the link to the agreement:http://www.tpprc.org/documents/agreements/1963-A.pdf

Last para of the agreement reads thus:

Thence, the boundary line, running generally southward and then eastward, strictly follows the Karakoram range main watershed which separates the Tarim river drainage system from the Indus river drainage system, passing through the east Mustagh pass (Mustagh pass), the top of the Chogri peak (K-2), the top of the broad peak, the top of the Gasherbrum mountain 8068, the Indirakoli pass (names on the Chinese maps only) and the top of the Teram Kankri peak, and reaches its southeastern extremity at the Karakoram pass

While Pakistan was physically in possession of land in Northern Areas, it could well enter into agreement with China on demarcating and settling the boundary between Northern Areas and Chinese Turkestan. But on what basis did it demarcate the line east of Mustagh Pass and said that the alignment ran till Karakoram Pass? It would not have done this unless it considered these areas as part of Pakistan/Northern Areas.

And there is an evidence to this - from wiki:

In 1957 Pakistan permitted a British expedition under Eric Shipton to approach the Siachen through the Bilafond La, and recce Saltoro Kangri.[9] Five years later a Japanese-Pakistani expedition put two Japanese and a Pakistani Army climber on top of Saltoro Kangri.[10] These were early moves in this particular game of oropolitics.

(b) ADIZ (Air Defense Identification Zone) Map - this is the real culprit. Again from wiki:

The United States Defense Mapping Agency (now National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency) began in about 1967 to show, with no legal or historical justification or any boundary documentation, an international boundary on their Tactical Pilotage Charts available to the public and pilots as proceeding from NJ9842 east-northeast to the Karakoram Pass at 5,534 m (18,136 ft) on the China border.[11] Numerous governmental and private cartographers and atlas producers followed suit. This resulted in the US cartographically "awarding" the entire 5,000 square kilometers (1,900 sq mi) of the Siachen-Saltoro area to Pakistan.

Here is the ADIZ Zone map taken from the presentation by Gurmeet Kanwal and ex-PA officer:



I have a theory as to how the above could have happened - As the Sino-Pakistan Boundary agreement was up to Karakoram Pass and the last drawn reference on the 1949 CFL Agreement was til NJ9842, some analyst sitting in USA would have done the obvious and drawn an straight line in NE Direction connecting NJ9842 with KK Pass. And pakees being true pakees, simply grabbed at the opportunity.

BTW, definition of ADIZ is as follows:

An air defense identification zone (ADIZ) is an area of airspace defined by a nation within which "the ready identification, the location, and the control of aircraft are required in the interest of national security".[1] Typically, an aircraft entering an ADIZ is required to radio its planned course, destination, and any additional details about its trip through the ADIZ to a higher authority, typically an air traffic controller.

So, there was no doubt in the mind of the person who was drafting the ADIZ Map.

Are there ANY validating references to the fairly new statement by Lt. General Prakash Katoch (retd), that Pakistan violated an agreement on Gyong La in 1987? This is a pass that always was in Pakistani control as 19 Kumaon Column, could not reach there in time on foot, due to an avalanche?

Well, this is a case of "Bagal mein chora, gaon mein dhindora" - the excellent article on BRM has the source - here goes:

I handed over command of the 10 Corps to Lieutenant-General Zahid Ali Akbar Khan on 31st March 1984 after completing my tenure of four years. I gave him a detailed briefing about this operational plan and particularly stressed the importance of Intelligence keeping a watch on Indian moves beyond Leh. However, I learned later that when our troops approached the Baltoro Ridge passes during the third week of May 1984, the Indians were already in occupation of Gyong Pass in the south, strategically important because it could interfere with the enemy's line of logistic support. As it was impossible to dislodge the Indians, we had no option but to occupy the next highest feature opposite them. This was a great setback for Pakistan, although all plans, including the timing of troop movement, had been laid down at the highest level. We had obviously failed to appreciate the timing of the Indian move and our intelligence agencies had failed to detect the movement of a brigade-size force in this area. It was learnt that the Indians had moved up their troops from Leh in the second half of April 1984.

[ShauryaT]

Rohitvats: Thanks for the reply, but my questions were different.

1. What was the Indian view of the line north of NJ9842, do we have a cartographic expression of the same pre-1984?

2. The high ridges around Gyong La being in Indian control that prevents TSPA from using the using the pass is known. What was not known is this specific issue of a violation of an agreement that TSPA reneged on for Gyong La in 1987. I was looking for references on the same.

[rohitvats]

Rohitvats: Thanks for the reply, but my questions were different.

1. What was the Indian view of the line north of NJ9842, do we have a cartographic expression of the same pre-1984?<SNIP>

From here: http://www.tribuneindia.com/2012/20120421/edit.htm#4

The delineation of this segment of the CFL was, however, unambiguous: NJ 9842, “thence north to the glaciers”. If everyone of 30 or more earlier directional commands were meticulously followed in tracing the CFL, there was no reason whatsoever for any departure from this norm in the case of the very last command. “Thence North” could only mean due north to wherever the boundary of J&K State lay. The very next section crucially directed that the line be drawn “so as to eliminate any no man’s land”. Therefore, the Line could in no way be left hanging in the air. Certain sectors along the CFL were also to be demilitarised but if deployed, troops would remain “500 yards from the ceasefire line.…”

Earlier in 1956-58, during the UN-designated International Geophysical Year, an Indian scientific team led by the Geological Survey explored the upper Nubra and Shyok Valleys, mapped and measured the Siachen and other glaciers and publicly recorded its findings

[Viv S]

OT
Your optimism is appreciated. However, the reality is very different. We are ideologically antagonistic just like Communism and Capitalism. It doesn't mean that all Russians or all Americans are bad. Pakistan was created on the bedrock of ethnic cleansing and genocide. And there is yet no evidence that it has as a "society" moved away from these tendencies. Unless we see that change (I see that change in some Bdeshis which is why I am more optimistic about Bdesh) it is largely wishful thinking by "JNU types".

I'd have agreed with you ten years back. Today while its true of course that a sizable section of the media and intelligentsia is advocating peace with India with varying levels of passion, more important is the political leadership especially those with grassroots support. Their political structure is not very unlike India's - PPP is similar to the Congress - secularish, pro-farmer and devoted to the Bhutto family (which includes Zardari), the PML(N) is similar to the BJP - pro-business, slight religious tilt and then you have various regional parties - PML(Q), MQM, ANP, JeI etc. The big difference is the politically influential military in Pakistan.

The PPP was originally virulently anti-India (under ZA Bhutto), moderately anti-India in initial years of Benazir's govt and then pro-peace once it broke from the army's influence. Its the same with the PML(N) - it came to power with the support of the army, but as soon as it found its legs, it cut ties and started pursuing a settlement with India. Pervez Musharraf seized power in '99 while pursuing a hard-line but made a U-turn just a few years down the line. Every one of them came to power espousing confrontation with India right until they were in chair - then reality sunk in and they realized what that meant.

Here on BRF its popular to think of their leaders as mad men, but the truth is they are by and large rational individuals and can read the writing on the wall. It was different back in 80s and early 90s when at least they were fairly prosperous while India was poverty stricken with stagnant economy. Today, not only are they up against an economy that is 10 times larger but one that's also growing 3 times as fast. There's now a broad consensus across their political spectrum that Kashmir can no longer be resolved on their terms. Their military too is reaching the conclusion that maintaining even the traditional 1:3 military balance with India will soon become nonviable.

Point is, Pakistan is moving in a direction a lot similar to Bangladesh (which too has its fair share of loonies) - given the ongoing turmoil its less evident right now but you study the news coming out and read between the lines it does become evident.





Watch from 0:40 for about three minutes. I was stunned at how candid if not blunt, he was.

[abhishek_sharma]

This is Najam Sethi in 2001

General Musharraf can rein in the jehadis in Kashmir if the situation so warrants. That is the message he is sending to New Delhi. And that will be his strong card at the Agra Summit. Is New Delhi going to stop playing bloody games?

India is forestalling hopes by referring to Kashmir as ang (or part of its body). Pakistan can respond by terming Kashmir its shahrag (jugular vein). But the truth is that both have to show flexibility on Kashmir. India’s view of Pakistan may be that of a deadbeat state now desperate to sign on the dotted line. But Pakistan has the bomb and General Musharraf can bleed India in Kashmir for some time to come. New Delhi should also realize that Agra is not Simla and General Musharraf is not negotiating the release of 90,000 POWs. But if “deadbeat Pakistan” actually goes under as some Indians would like, India and Pakistan will be at the receiving end of jehad like never before. Therefore neither can afford to stick to the status quo.

By the way, any source where Najam sethi says that Hafiz Sayeed should be punished?

And in 1993.

So much for their liberalism.

[abhishek_sharma]

Okay..this is fairly OT here...but please indulge me.

This is after 26/11 attacks

On Sunday, Indian media began reporting that the only attacker captured alive, a Versace-T-shirted 21-year-old by the name of Ajmal Amir Kamal, was Pakistani, and that he had identified all his fellow militants as being trained by the banned Pakistan-based militant group Lashkar-e-Toiba. Pakistanis are suspicious of these claims. "There is simply not enough evidence at this point to blame Pakistan," says Najam Sethi, editor of the English political weekly, the Friday Times. "No statement made under duress can be counted as 100% fact, and you can imagine the conditions under which this confession was made."

However, Sethi adds, "the Pakistan connection certainly can't be ruled out. These attackers were not hijackers negotiating with hostages. They knew they were on a suicide mission, and you can certainly find a lot of suicide bombers in the tribal areas." At the same time, the attackers clearly had a local connection, he argues, because out-of-towners could have had the intimate knowledge of the layout of Mumbai and of the targets to have caused so much carnage.

Amir Rana, an expert on Pakistani terrorist groups with the Pakistan Institute of Peace Studies, says he has heard some troubling reports, but says that no accusations should be leveled before a thorough investigation is completed. He cites several recent terrorist attacks in India that were initially blamed on Pakistan, only to have investigations later reveal that the perpetrators were aggrieved Indian Muslims, and in at least one case, Hindu extremists. Early accusations such as these, he worries, may only impede the close cooperation between the two countries necessary to resolve the issue.

"What we may actually be seeing here is an incident of transnational terrorism," he says. "The ideology is shared across borders, from Pakistan to India to Bangladesh." Terrorists these days are just as likely to meet in Dubai to discuss logistics, or in Katmandu to plan strategies. Training can take place not only in the ungoverned tribal areas of Pakistan, but also in Bangladesh, which also faces a mounting challenge from Islamic extremism. Weapons, distributed by a network of arms dealers that supply Sri Lanka's Tamil Tigers, Indian separatists groups and even Nepal's Maoists, are in easy reach. Neither the weapons, nor the tactics, of the Mumbai attackers point to any one country, says Rana. "For these kinds of attacks there is no need for training camps. There were no heavy weapons or guerilla tactics. The kind of training they needed could have been done in a single room."

Both Rana and Sethi agree that the Indian accusations are more likely to be driven less by evidence than by political imperatives. India is to hold elections in the coming months, and the ruling Congress party has taken a beating over the attacks — rival parties are saying the government was poorly prepared and had not cracked down hard enough on previous terrorist activities. "Elections are coming," says Rana, "So there are internal pressures to blame someone, and to show that it is not the government's fault. Pakistan is the obvious scapegoat."

The scapegoating of Pakistan may backfire, Sethi fears. Up until now, Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari has taken a keen interest in normalizing relations between the two countries, at great risk to his own standing. India and Pakistan are closer now to an enduring peace than at any point in their 61-year history together. "If anything happens, if India moves troops to the border, or threatens an attack, it could destabilize his government and derail everything," says Sethi.

Still, he hopes that calmer heads prevail, and that the Indian government response is little more than posturing, unlike in 2001 when a December attack on the Indian parliament was attributed to Pakistan, and the two nuclear-armed countries nearly went to war. India's Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has threatened to send Indian troops to the border with Pakistan if solid evidence emerges of Pakistani involvement. In that case, Pakistan would be required to move its own troops from the border with Afghanistan, where they are making headway in the fight against al-Qaeda and Taliban-linked militants, to the Indian frontier. "That would play into the hands of these terrorists," says Sethi. "If Pakistan and India start fighting, then the whole focus on the war on terror would be lost, and those militant groups would succeed. That would be tragic."

Asim Javeid, a 23-year-old student in Rawalpindi, agrees. "The Mumbai attack shows that terrorism is a common threat to both India and Pakistan. Unless both countries join hands and take measures to combat terrorism, we will not be able to defeat this curse."

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/ ... z1u2LrNKJk

[nachiket]

^^Haha nice way to puncture the JNU wallahs' bubble. Viv S, all you have managed to prove is that even their most liberal journalists (by your definition) are nothing more than double-talkers at best.

[abhishek_sharma]

Google cache

Najam Sethi After 26/11

Foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi has asked the Indian government to send a delegation to Pakistan to map out the next steps. This is a good and constructive idea. Given the growing mood of defiance in Pakistan, it is not advisable to keep this critical process on “hold” or “pause”. What is needed is immediate re-engagement, not gradual distancing or even “halt’. India must think in terms of self-interest and not honour or pride. The Indian government acted maturely by not reacting militarily to the Mumbai provocation and precipitating an un-winnable war. Now it must go the extra mile to kick-start and fast-forward the peace process that had stalled during the last year of President Musharraf’s rule. Neither Pakistan nor India can afford to fall prey to the designs of state and non-state actors in both countries who want to plunge the region into anarchy and chaos.

[eklavya]

Today while its true of course that a sizable section of the media and intelligentsia is advocating peace with India with varying levels of passion, more important is the political leadership especially those with grassroots support.

Hafiz Saeed is moving around freely, mocking and showing his utter contempt and hatred for India and the US, and his Pakistan Defence Council is openly declaring war on India and the US.

Hafiz Saeed, lets be clear, is just a pawn of the ISI, the Pakistan Army, and General Kayani. Lets also be clear, in Pakistan, the army calls the shots, not the civilians. The courts in Pakistan let Hafiz Saeed walk free, and there is NOTHING that the "media and intelligentsia [that] is advocating peace with India with varying levels of passion" can do about it.

Imran Khan, another Pakistan Army pawn, calls Hafiz Saeed, "a preacher of peace in the world".

http://www.tehelka.com/story_main52.asp ... 12Khan.asp

Hafiz Saeed, not Najam Sethi, represents the direction of the prevailing wind in Pakistan.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0f956c20-9376 ... z1u2GBIqBz

But for now, it is Pakistan’s fragile democracy that faces the most immediate threat. Mr Saeed’s growing profile reflects a drift to conservatism in a country of 180m people where the red-hot rhetoric of religious extremism has cowed moderate voices into silence.

[Kanishka]

OT
As always, Nijam Sethi speaks for the Americans.
Listen carefully to the video posted by Viv S 3.10 onwards.
Permanent settlement of Kashmir is not the agenda. They are only buying time.
Ever wondered why Hillary meets the Hu rats when she is in India?

[Viv S]

This is Najam Sethi in 2001

General Musharraf can rein in the jehadis in Kashmir if the situation so warrants. That is the message he is sending to New Delhi. And that will be his strong card at the Agra Summit. Is New Delhi going to stop playing bloody games?

By the way, any source where Najam sethi says that Hafiz Sayeed should be punished?

And in 1993.

So much for their liberalism.

You've missed the point altogether. It wasn't about Pakistan being a liberal country or their media being a liberal media. I started my last point saying - I would have agreed with you 10 years back. The point was about the changing narrative over the last few years.


Najam Sethi is not a liberal he's a realist. He said and I'm paraphrasing here, that persisting with jihad or confrontation by other means is mistake not because its goes against his liberal beliefs but because recent history shows it hasn't worked even if it was a good idea at the time.

[abhishek_sharma]

>> You've missed the point altogether.

hardly. It just shows that they are doing taqqiya. If the situation changes, they will show their true colors. In any case, see his comments after 26/11.

[Viv S]

Hafiz Saeed is moving around freely, mocking and showing his utter contempt and hatred for India and the US, and his Pakistan Defence Council is openly declaring war on India and the US.

True. And Afzal Guru, Kasab are still alive as are those responsible for the anti-Sikh riots and Gujarat riots. Mafioso and thugs contest and win state and national elections. What makes you think the justice system is any less broken on that side?

Hafiz Saeed, lets be clear, is just a pawn of the ISI, the Pakistan Army, and General Kayani. Lets also be clear, in Pakistan, the army calls the shots, not the civilians. The courts in Pakistan let Hafiz Saeed walk free, and there is NOTHING that the "media and intelligentsia [that] is advocating peace with India with varying levels of passion" can do about it.

That's a wonderfully simplistic way of looking at issues. Black and white, no shades of grey. Don't care to study the pressures or fissures internal to the establishment or the army's interaction with various political forces. Easier to make a blanket statement - army controls country, army hates us, therefore country hates us. Dig in heels. Therein lies the bliss.

[abhishek_sharma]

True. And Afzal Guru, Kasab are still alive as are those responsible for the anti-Sikh riots and Gujarat riots. Mafioso and thugs contest and win state and national elections. What makes you think the justice system is any less broken on that side?

Thanks for bringing in Gujarat riots. How can you be fair and balanced unless you do a giant ==.

And yes, Hafiz Sayeed and Kasab are both alive. Equating these two situations is another Lahori Logic gem which can be surpassed by very few luminaries.

[Virupaksha]

So alive in jail == freedom, for you.

And what is the last refuge of the leftists who cannot provide logic, yes 2002 gujarat riots. Thank you for accepting you have no logic left.

(Indian Godwin's law)

[Viv S]

>> You've missed the point altogether.

hardly. It just shows that they are doing taqqiya. If the situation changes, they will show their true colors. In any case, see his comments after 26/11.

The situation isn't going to change. India is on a sustainable growth path and will always dwarf them.

Regarding 26/11 yes he thought there no or insufficient evidence at that point. Once the actual facts became known he changed his position and accepted that there was Pakistani role in the Mumbai attacks -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7jbFrOrBJU

6:20

[abhishek_sharma]

>> he thought there no or insufficient evidence at that point.

He did not know about the taped phone conversation between Pakis and terrorists which were being played everywhere?

>> and accepted that there was Pakistani role in the Mumbai attacks -

And did he demand that Hafiz Sayyed should be punished for it? Link?

[Viv S]

True. And Afzal Guru, Kasab are still alive as are those responsible for the anti-Sikh riots and Gujarat riots. Mafioso and thugs contest and win state and national elections. What makes you think the justice system is any less broken on that side?

Thanks for bringing in Gujarat riots. How can you be fair and balanced unless you do a giant ==.

And yes, Hafiz Sayeed and Kasab are both alive. Equating these two situations is another Lahori Logic gem which can be surpassed by very few luminaries.

My post wasn't about the Gujarat riots or any individual. It was about a broken justice system which anyone influential is exempt from. The govt can put a lid on it, restrain him, constrict him but cannot convict him. Things may improve in the future, but that is the unpalatable reality today.

[abhijitm]

Those who are watching pak for more than a decade will vividly remember how during kargil these liberals were initially truimphant, and when reality started biting then first became confused and eventually frustrated, and then finally resumed their normal pakistan system thrashing.

[Viv S]

>> he thought there no or insufficient evidence at that point.

He did not know about the taped phone conversation between Pakis and terrorists which were being played everywhere?

Was it being played everywhere? I didn't hear them until quite a bit later.

>> and accepted that there was Pakistani role in the Mumbai attacks -

And did he demand that Hafiz Sayyed should be punished for it? Link?

He didn't express any personal opinion but said that Pakistani govt's response should be to prosecute those involved. Excerpt in one of the four videos initially posted.

[abhijitm]

True. And Afzal Guru, Kasab are still alive as are those responsible for the anti-Sikh riots and Gujarat riots. Mafioso and thugs contest and win state and national elections. What makes you think the justice system is any less broken on that side?

aha, hence we should trust pakis. Thanks for scoring self goal by doing ==

[Viv S]

Those who are watching pak for more than a decade will vividly remember how during kargil these liberals were initially truimphant, and when reality started biting then first became confused and eventually frustrated, and then finally resumed their normal pakistan system thrashing.

I'm not a liberal. Far from it. Against China for example, I'd like to see a growing coalition between India and East/SE Asian nations. If I were in the US, I'd probably be voting Republican.

I'm just not too bothered by Pakistan anymore, because we've prevailed in that tussle. Its time to move onto the next phase - employ soft power.

[abhijitm]

He didn't express any personal opinion but said that Pakistani govt's response should be to prosecute those involved. Excerpt in one of the four videos initially posted.

oh thats the line repeated by almost every paki "we will punish those who involved.......proof please.....dossier?"

[abhijitm]

I'm not a liberal. Far from it....

I was talking about paki liberals like Hajam Sethi, on goodness of whom you are willing to bet your fortune.

[Prem]

^^Haha nice way to puncture the JNU wallahs' bubble. Viv S, all you have managed to prove is that even their most liberal journalists (by your definition) are nothing more than double-talkers at best.

The guy Hassn Nisar in 80s was also acting like Lurcher than a liberal. Its just that few sensible have sensed the situation accurately that Poaq present path leads to Djahannum they thought was reserved for Kuffar.
Sympathising with deadly enemy is fundamental mistake of Prithiviraj scale. Any softness have to be tactical in nature. Peace will prevail once the upper portion Poaqiosonous snake is separated from the bottom used part.

[abhishek_sharma]

He did not know about the taped phone conversation between Pakis and terrorists which were being played everywhere?

Was it being played everywhere? I didn't hear them until quite a bit later.

You did not know? You should pay more attention to the news. It was certainly known to this forum on Nov 29, 2008. (It was known to the media on Nov 28).

A clear Pakistani hand is evident from the interrogation of an arrested terrorist and from the intercepts of the terrorists holed up in Taj Hotel speaking to their handlers in Karachi.

And Najam Sethi could not find "enough" evidence on Nov 30, 2008. (Article posted above.)

[Viv S]

He did not know about the taped phone conversation between Pakis and terrorists which were being played everywhere?

You did not know? You should pay more attention to the news. It was certainly known to . (It was known to the media on Nov 28).

No recording anywhere that page or elsewhere in the media. It wasn't until I watched the Channel 4 documentary that heard the entire intercepted communication. The page says two coast guard officers were killed and the survivor was referred to as 'Azam'.

And Najam Sethi could not find "enough" evidence on Nov 30, 2008.

While there was no dearth of rumors floating around by Nov 30, Indian govt was still analyzing the evidence collected and hadn't released it to the media. Point is once the facts were revealed to him, he accepted Pakistan's role in atrocity, even if he didn't do it 'soon enough'.

[abhishek_sharma]

>> While there was no dearth of rumors floating around by Nov 30, Indian govt was still analyzing the evidence collected and hadn't released it to the media.

The article is based on the sources in the intelligence community. Is that not enough? It is hardly a rumor.

[abhishek_sharma]

long War journal on Nov 28

Reports indicate signals intelligence has linked the attackers back to Pakistan. Intelligence services are said to have intercepted the terrorists' conversations via satellite phone. The men spoke in Punjabi and used Pakistani phrases.

Outlook on Nov 29

Top security sources have also told Outlook that the intercepts made by the intelligence agencies while the NSG commando assault was underway clearly indicates that the terrorists were speaking to their handlers in Pakistan.

Of course, Najam Sethi makes up his mind only when he hears the original tape. (I hope this evidentiary standard is maintained when he writes about other issues. For example, I am sure he watches videos (and verifies their authenticity) before commenting on any event in J&K.)

[ShauryaT]

From here: http://www.tribuneindia.com/2012/20120421/edit.htm#4

The delineation of this segment of the CFL was, however, unambiguous: NJ 9842, “thence north to the glaciers”. If everyone of 30 or more earlier directional commands were meticulously followed in tracing the CFL, there was no reason whatsoever for any departure from this norm in the case of the very last command. “Thence North” could only mean due north to wherever the boundary of J&K State lay. The very next section crucially directed that the line be drawn “so as to eliminate any no man’s land”. Therefore, the Line could in no way be left hanging in the air. Certain sectors along the CFL were also to be demilitarised but if deployed, troops would remain “500 yards from the ceasefire line.…”

Earlier in 1956-58, during the UN-designated International Geophysical Year, an Indian scientific team led by the Geological Survey explored the upper Nubra and Shyok Valleys, mapped and measured the Siachen and other glaciers and publicly recorded its findings

If a straight line due north is drawn from NJ 9842, it joins Terram Shehr II glacier, which would put Sia La, eight degrees west of this line. It will also put Indira Col, west of this line. Using this logic, we would control only about 2/3 of the Siachen Glacier. Now the Indian argument shall be the watershed principle should hold, which will bring the Saltoro in the picture. But, this is still unilateral and the charge against India of a violation of Shimla will hold. However, the LoC is itself not a result of some principled border. It was demarcated based on the AGPL in 71 and 1949, held through force. The issue with the settlement of the LoC on the basis of the "thence North" of NJ9842 is the fact that the entire state is in fact disputed and hence no "settlement" of the final boundary in the glaciers can be made in isolation of the Kashmir issue. The only solution is to demilitarize the Glaciers. AGPL is a sore sticking point for the PA, as it will legitimize an aggression in their eyes.

[ramana]

I was under impression that ridgeline is the border in all mountain lands. For instance that is the basis with PRC and Nepal and off course when it comes to India its not followed!

[Roperia]

PM picks Army chief who will accept Siachen pact

Oh dear! One way of looking at this would be that this article sort of connects the dots as to why did MMS govt. took the stand it did on Gen VKS's age row. That may well be a conspiracy theory!

Anyway, why should India make a peace gesture to Pakis on Siachen when the Pakis have not demilitarized PoK to win India's trust by the same logic? Didn't they invade Kashmir to preempt Maharaja Hari Singh's move to accede to India? The only difference is that they failed in 47 while we succeeded in 84.

I see no reason why Siachen shouldn't be linked with LoC. The only difference is PoK is inhabited while Siachen is not.

On a broader context, India is the status quo power in all the disputes but terrorism. Why not just stick it to the Pakis by conducting covert ops to raise the cost for Pakis doing Jihad in India?

This unilateral surrender by a peacenik PM to fulfill his dream of leaving a "peace mark" on Indo-Pak relations is a big folly.

[manjgu]

ShauryaT....

a) India never says Kashmir is a disputed territory..the official postion is whole of J&K is integral part of India. J&K being disputed is the Pakistani line fyi..

b) We dont care if AGPL is a sore issue with Pak Army. We are not here to placate Pak Army. Pl tell me we have so many sore sticking points with Pak army ( which predate/postdate siachen) and how many of these have been addressed by PA? why are u so keen to placate Pak Army. kya tumahre chaacha /mama hai pak army?

c) fyi... India said lets authenticate the AGPL without prejudice to either parties position on J&K 'Issue' not J&k Dispute. Making India accept J&K as a dispute has been the foremost agenda point for the Jehadis including Hafeez Sayeed and the Hurrirats !! Are you by any chance pushing that agenda? pl let us know upfront.

d)my dear ShauryaT countries are forged thru force, blood and guts ..which cuckoo land are u living in. Did not pakistan use force in 1947 which forced us to go into J&K? Did not the CHinese use force to teach india a lesson etc etc. Try teaching ur lessons there... Pl get off ur high horse , the sooner the better.