Sunni Terrorist Fragments of Unstable Pakistan-Nov 21, 2015

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 03 Jan 2016 23:56

Answer to that is obviously yes...it is sufficiently reduced, relative to what time frame - that is debatable.

So, what does that prove? If their capability goes down from 75 (during the peak in J&K and Punjab) to 55 now, how does that make a difference?

JwalaMukhi · Post by **JwalaMukhi** » 04 Jan 2016 00:05

There is no way to curtail pakis intent. They are incorrigible and are welcome to lay in their beds they made.
Is the reduction permanent or reversible?
But what needs to be done is to reduce their capability towards 0 in a hurry. It just proves, that the direction is generally correct, but it should be permanent feature.
P.S.: Guaranteed way to make it zero is to have no pakistan.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 04 Jan 2016 00:23

There is a multi generation consensus among the power holders in Pakistan to never let go of the unfinished business of partition. This posture is supported by the majority of the population. The peaceniks are small in number and have zero power. In India by contrast there is this wide eyed belief that there can be peace. This illusion is held both by the Congress and the BJP. The unfinished business of partition is that all Muslim majority areas in India will be ruled by Muslims and the division of India. It is not just about Kashmir. I can guarantee you that if tomorrow India hands over Kashmir to Pakistan on a platter, the terror will stop for some time and then resume.

The never ending cycle of terror attacks and the confused Indian response, to talk or not to talk etc. etc. should be seen in the light of the above.

Dipanker · Post by **Dipanker** » 04 Jan 2016 00:37

That is why it is important to disabuse them of the notion that we would ever hand them Kashmir. As long as we give them hope, they will be at it.

prahaar · Post by **prahaar** » 04 Jan 2016 00:39

Dipankerji, Pakistani elite has no hope of getting Kashmir. The drama is continued to keep the PA and Islam role as the glue for Pakistan.The same drama is continued by a section of Indian elite to give an impression of Kashmir is negotiable to garner wealth and votes from a fraction of Indian society.

member_28990 · Post by **member_28990** » 04 Jan 2016 01:01

I had written this exactly a year ago, before I joined BRF. Reproducing this considering recent events

http://maxratul.blogspot.in/2015/01/loo ... ategy.html

Sunday, January 4, 2015

Look West: Formulating a politico-strategic doctrine to solve the Pakistan problem

Part 1: The search for a political endgame to the Pakistani threat

Madness has been famously defined as doing the same thing again and again, expecting different results. Going by the evolution of the Pakistan policy of India since 1971, it would seem that the entire Indian political establishment, strategic think tank and the “parallel diplomatic circuit” is infused with a madness that Lewis Carrol himself would have been proud to conceive. How else can one explain four decades of inaction which allowed this eternal enemy (make no mistake, Pakistan is one) to shake off a crushing military defeat, build strategic partnerships with two world powers, arm itself with stolen nuclear bombs, gifted fighter jets and copied missiles, incite massive insurgency in Kashmir that directly leads to ethnic cleansing of the Pandits, create a jihadist infrastructure on its soil, carry out minutely planned terrorist strikes incessantly and have the audacity to pass the blame on to “Non State Actors”? Our official policy in regards to Pakistan over the last twenty years has been reactive at best, confused at worst and a failure at all times. Between the endless bouts of track two, track three dinner parties, diplomatic stand offs and meaningless tokenisms, very little thought has been given to actually solving the Pakistan problem once and for all.

Another anniversary of the outrage committed by Pakistani terrorists on one mildly chilly November night in Mumbai passes this cathartic nation by – candles are lit, speeches are given and TV channels are flooded with faded photographs of the hapless victims. A sense of closure is attempted by hanging Ajmal Kasab, the only perpetrator who was caught alive by the Indian authorities. However, while the punishment was much deserved, in terms of impact it was similar to applying an antiseptic cream to a cancer tumour. It is clear to anybody who can read the warnings of history - as long as the Jihadi terror factories across our western border continue to operate under state patronage, India will struggle under the heavy burden of this asymmetric warfare.

The time is ripe to form a fresh, long term, pro-active roadmap to solving this eternal crisis using our overwhelming economic superiority and conventional military edge. However, this issue cannot be solved by military might alone, especially since the nuclear card is on the table. A long term political vision has to be the basis of all future actions of the Indian state, regardless of the regime in charge at New Delhi. We need to take a fresh look at the underlying social fabric of Pakistan, drawing from the experiences of 1971 and the situation in Balochistan, Sindh, Waziristan, the Pashtun Valley and Pakistan Occupied Kashmir.
A strategic doctrine also needs to encompass a wider geo-political vision beyond the immediate objective of dealing with a troublesome neighbour. We must define three goals that it will work towards – military, strategic and economic. Together, these goals will dictate the Endgame to the story of Pakistan.

The first and foremost goal will be military - to achieve long term regional stability and ensure security of Indian citizens from Pakistani Jihadis. India, as a nation, cannot be held hostage to the whims and designs of Rawalpindi backed terrorists. No self-respecting country bearing ambitions to be treated as a super power will accept the senseless, perennial human cost of this proxy war. This perennial tension between India and Pakistan acts as a drag whenever New Delhi attempts to take a more assertive stance in the world stage – notice the border skirmishes which flared up during the Prime Minister’s recent address to the UN General Assembly, or the recent attacks aimed at derailing the successful democratic electoral process. The primary, non-negotiable goal for the Indian state must be the total and complete annihilation of the Pakistan backed terrorist leadership and infrastructure.

The second, strategic goal is one of power projection and regional hegemony. Right now India finds itself in the unenviable position of being surrounded by overtly or covertly hostile states on all sides. This constricts India, denying her both breathing and living space in the region. Strategic and tactical manoeuvres are only possible when one is acting with a friend – and in this case, that friend is Afghanistan. India needs a direct access to a rock solid ally on either one of her flanks – history and current global power structure dictate the rest of the course to us. The wider economic prospects of India can only be served by the re-opening of the ancient Silk Route and extending our sphere of influence west, where we have civilizational ties from antiquity. In the same token, the land beyond the Himalayas have always been out of the Indian civilizational sphere. Even in Mahabharat, the legendary warrior Arjuna did not proceed beyond the Himalayas during his journeys. The paramount consideration for India on the east must be consolidation of its borders, and deepening ties with China. Thus, the new politico-strategic doctrine for India will lie in non-confrontation with Chinese interests in Tibet, and the creation of an Indo-Afghan axis in west.

Finally, the long term economic goal of India should be to create a stable trade and goods link to friendly regimes in Afghanistan and Iran, as well as initiate deeper ties with the resource rich Central Asian Region. This is essential to not only get access to raw materials and energy, but also to create markets to be flooded by Indian goods. A nation aspiring for superpower status needs a strong, virgin export market for its consumer goods and civilian industries, especially infrastructure, manufacture and transport.
Based on the above goals, a new political re-organization of the subcontinent needs be imagined. Achieving that reality will require unprecedented political will and long term strategic vision, something which is perennially in short supply our country. However, that is the one miracle which one must hope for.

Part 2: The path to Victory

The “Two Nation Theory” espoused by the erstwhile Muslim League in the run up to the partition of the British Indian Empire has been proven to be a failed doctrine. The survival of India as a secular, multi-cultural democracy, warts and all, and the creation of Bangladesh as an independent nation in 1971 underscore the fact that mere religion cannot be the basis of the formation of a country in the context of the subcontinent – a strong cultural and social identity is as important to create a sense of belonging to a political entity.

The oft derided “Unity in Diversity” motto that India adopted post 1947 has acted as a credible safety valve which allows a federation of dissimilar states to function, survive and somewhat prosper as a modern nation state. However, in the Pakistani context, we see an overbearing dominance of the Punjabi faction in the majority of political, cultural and military discourse, and of militant Saudi funded Wahhabism in terms of religious influence. From its very founding, the powerful in Pakistan have inexorably veered towards homogenisation attempts of a diverse cultural landscape under a Punjabi-Wahhabi umbrella. This is the phenomenon which directly led to the separation of the eastern arm of that country. The exclusion of the Sindhi, Baloch, indigenous Kashmiri and Tribal populations of modern Pakistan from the power structure is documented widely. This trend has led to marginalisation of alternative schools of thought like the Sufis, sectarian conflicts against the Shias and the Ahmadis, marginalisation of minorities and mistreatment of the Mohajirs. Above all, it has led to the perception of Pakistan as a radical Islamic banana republic armed with the bomb.

It is through this lens of sub-surface cultural and ethnic tensions that we need to relook at our strategy of dealing with the Pakistani state as it exists now.
The problem of Pakistan is not that it is a Muslim state bordering a secular India – the problem is that hatred for India is one of the fundamental pillars keeping Pakistan’s various deprived factions united under a single alpha group i.e the Wahhabi Punjabis. The biggest flaw in Indian foreign policy (apart from sheer naiveté and ineptitude), during peace and in times of crisis, has been to deal with Pakistan as a single homogenous state even after 1971. The very fact of the successful creation of Bangladesh should have told us that the Endgame with regards to Pakistan lies in the opposite direction.

That Endgame, quite simply, is the dissolution of Pakistan as it exists now, and the creation of three new, independent states – Sindh, Balochistan and Waziristan. These will exist along with a rump Punjab and the semi-independent protectorate of Kashmir, which will share an open border with India in lieu of the existing Line of Control.

The “Akhand Bharat (Greater India)” idea, something which excites a lot of Hindu right wing political formations, is politically unachievable as things stand. The reality of partition is a baggage that cannot be discarded as of now. If there is one thing that history teaches us, it is that a decisive military victory is impossible without a favourable political situation – case in point the 1971 Bangladesh campaign. The Baloch and Sindhi population will be less than enthusiastic about embracing an Akhand Bharat – however there will be natural space in their local polity for an idea of independence from the current Pakistani state. The creation of a self-balancing neighbourhood on the western border will give India the much needed strategic options to consolidate its western arm and open up a stable channel to Afghanistan and Iran.

The roadmap to bring about this Endgame will involve waging three different types of war – cultural, political and finally, military.
First of all, India must start a cultural and propaganda war using any and all means at her disposal – from speaking at the United Nations to releasing successful Bollywood romances that highlight the division within Pakistan and the plight of the Sindhi and Baloch populations. The objective will be to create awareness of the aspirations of the Sindhi and Baloch populations across the world and get recognition form the international community that these are “disturbed, oppressed” regions.

At the same time, India must give overt political, financial and covert military assistance to Baloch and Sindhi separatist movements, and work with Afghan tribals to incite the Waziristan region. Indian leaders must be seen overtly interacting with Baloch and Sindhi leaders – leading to official formation and recognition of Sindhi and Baloch governments in exile. This will prop up India as a stakeholder in the conflict, as well as give legitimacy to the military action which will follow.

This existential crisis will invariably escalate to a final, desperate showdown – and this is when the Indian military must give a death blow to the Pakistani state and complete the above mentioned political objectives. This war must start and end at India’s choosing – a period of building up war fighting capability, including military presence in Afghanistan must be embedded with the overall plan. It will be up to our armed forces to decide how to effectively win this final war without allowing the subcontinent to go nuclear.

The biggest threat to these operations will come not from the Pakistani army, but from the international pressure that China and USA will bring. One must count on our Russian friends to block any shenanigans in the Security Council. Solving the diplomatic tangle that will arise is beyond the scope of this piece – but human nature teaches us that the powerful can be told to look the other way if they get something precious in return. At no point should India be in a position to have to fight a two front war – a series of trust building exercises with China - military, financial and political, is a must in the lead up to the final showdown.

The path outlined above is not easy, nor is it a quick fix to the issues at hand. However, adopting this long term plan will give India a political goal to aspire to and build towards – something beyond empty rhetoric and knee-jerk reactions of “teaching Pakistan a lesson.” Status quo in India-Pakistan relations, as it stands, will only end up harming both countries. India must seize the initiative and ruthlessly execute a long term vision, potentially spanning decades, to solve the problem once and for all. That is what “super powers” do.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 04 Jan 2016 01:19

Dipanker wrote:That is why it is important to disabuse them of the notion that we would ever hand them Kashmir. As long as we give them hope, they will be at it.

They have been disabused, they know that, and thats why this relentless terror.

Previously, when India said talks, TSP would say only core issue.

Gradually, TSP has climbed down from its position to all issues including core issue, but make no mistake, core issue is front and center in every Paki mind. (Thats because of the s!it they are in, and would love to soak up and benefit from India's growing economy but keeping their Kashmir dreams alive).

India said talks on all issues, but first terror has to stop and no meeting harried rats.

Gradually India climbed down from its position and agreed to all talks (with some window dressing on the red lines), with the hope or maybe some understanding from someone in TSP political establishment and perhaps 3.5 that once India agrees to talks, terror will be curtailed.

But for TSP stoppage terror means essentially giving up on Kashmir and allowing p!ss process to continue. The have NOT. And thats where we are.

So not to re-iterate the obvious, but unless India makes TSP pay, either militarily or economically (Uncle's help is needed on this), TSP is not going to back off. And with many Indian elite holding the same position as TSP (look at the "debates", many elites are more worried if ModiJi can hold back his "Bhakts" (derogatory term) in the wake of this attack), my fear is that unless TSP is made to pay, just as India climbed down on talks before terror ends, on Kashmir too, India will be forced to relent. Lets see what Indian govt's response is to this latest outrage. The contours will then become clear.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 04 Jan 2016 02:28

Tarek Fatah says it is Ghazwa-e-Hind:
http://tarekfatah.com/why-does-pakistan ... nd-stupid/
"Why does Pakistan’s Mullah-Military seek a War with India? It’s Ghazwa-e-Hind, stupid"

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 04 Jan 2016 03:09

Meanwhile NaPakis also attacked the Indian consulate in Mazar a Shariff.

All well at Indian consulate in Mazar-i-Sharif: Envoy

see our own psychology at BRF as we rarely discuss if there are no causalities or if the operation is not like a reality show.

The summary truth of the fact is Pakistan tried to first show a showbiz in Punjab and it failed to show bang for the buck. Then it tried in Afghan theatre. It will keep trying in these trying times. If Foreign sec meet and SAARC meet happens then it will shown as Badmash calling the shots. At that time they may try to overthrow him.

For NaMo if Badmash survives, he keeps talking about TAPI and POK. If Badmash does not survive, we go back to regular programming. As a status report to the world it will be we tried our best. If Badmadh survives and thrives on then also the show continues.

The bottom line is that we need to improve the defenses and also the coordination of various state governments and central agencies.

Dipanker · Post by **Dipanker** » 04 Jan 2016 03:45

If Paki still think Kashmir is the "core" issue that means we haven't been successful in disabusing of the notion that they can get Kashmir from us. We need to persist in this process till Kashmir becomes a non issue in any India Pak dialogue.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 04 Jan 2016 04:25

Dipanker wrote:If Paki still think Kashmir is the "core" issue that means we haven't been successful in disabusing of the notion that they can get Kashmir from us. We need to persist in this process till Kashmir becomes a non issue in any India Pak dialogue.

What process are you referring to? "Uninterruptred" and "Uninterruptible" p!ss process?

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 04 Jan 2016 04:26

deleted duplicate

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Jan 2016 04:29

He means disabusing Pakis on Kashmir.

Dipanker · Post by **Dipanker** » 04 Jan 2016 04:36

CRamS wrote: What process are you referring to? "Uninterruptred" and "Uninterruptible" p!ss process?

More like "Uninterrupted" and "Uninterruptible" bombing...whatever it takes.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 04 Jan 2016 05:17

Pathankot attacks: Swaraj holds meeting on Pakistan policy - Nayanima Basu, Business Line

External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj, on Sunday, held a detailed meeting with a group of former High Commissioners and ex-Ambassadors to discuss the government’s strategy and foreign policy initiatives with Pakistan and their likely impact on bilateral ties, in the aftermath of a terror attack at the Pathankot Air Force base.

While the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) remained tight-lipped about the meeting, sources said that the government wanted to have informal “diplomatic consultations” on its Pakistan policy. The main issue that was discussed during the meeting was whether to allow the talks between Foreign Secretaries to take place in Islamabad as scheduled on January 14-15.

Meanwhile, Pakistani diplomatic sources told BusinessLine that New Delhi has not yet hinted at any rescheduling or cancellation of talks.

Swaraj’s meeting was attended by SK Lambah, G Parthasarathy, Shyam Saran, S Menon, Satyabrata Pal, Sharat Sabharwal and TCA Raghavan.

Although the meeting with former envoys was already scheduled, it assumes significance after the recent terror attacks.

While the official position of MEA was that “the immediate focus of the government was on “resolving the situation” at Pathankot”, sources indicated that the government is now being forced to think twice whether it should continue discussing the Comprehensive Bilateral Dialogue with Pakistan. The dialogue includes all outstanding issues of Jammu and Kashmir, Sir Creek, controlling terrorism and maintaining peace at border areas.

Pakistan view

On the other side, Sartaj Aziz, Pakistan Prime Minister’s Foreign Affairs Adviser, told Radio Pakistan that there is “visible improvement” in India-Pakistan ties.

The recent attack at the Pathankot IAF base, by terrorists allegedly belonging to the Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) outfit, comes a week after Prime Minister Narendra Modi made an impulsive visit to Pakistan on December 25 to wish his Pakistan counterpart Nawaz Sharif on his birthday, when both sides decided to restart the peace dialogue.

Meanwhile, in a press conference on Sunday, Home Secretary Rajiv Mehrishi said so far the terrorists have killed six IAF officers and injured eight others. An NSG commando was also killed during the operations. But they were unable to destroy any vital assets of the Air Force.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 04 Jan 2016 05:19

Not only has Pakistan not had success in fulfilling the unfinished business of partition, it has been broken up as a country in 1971 by India. So it seeks to avenge that loss by pursuing a similar fate for India. A vengeful Pakistan has been trying to get even for what it perceives as two past wrongs. And if it cannot pursue that objective by overt military means, it is pursuing them by covert means. Hence the relentless wave of terrorist attacks on India. Indian politicians have to understand that Pakistan will only have put it's past defeats behind them when the COAS of the Pakistan Army and the head of the ISI together publicly renounce in New Delhi their use of terror as a state policy. The probability of that happening is the same as the probability of the sun rising in the west.

It serves absolutely no purpose to talk to a figurehead civilian head of government in Pakistan. They have never had power and never will . I have no idea why Modi is talking to Nawaz Sharif. And once an Indian Government is invested in the latest "peace process", it cannot easily backtrack once the inevitable terror attack happens. So Mr. Modi is now tripping all over his own feet by describing Pakistani state aided terrorists as "enemies of humanity".

Cricket, the Lahore bus and train, cultural exchanges, trade, biryani summits, mean nothing for Pakistan. They are all designed to lull India into a false sense of hope for an illusory peace which the gullible Indian politicians with no sense of history of even the past 70 years fail to see. The Pakistanis on the other hand have not forgotten their history and hence this undying thirst for revenge.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 04 Jan 2016 05:28

non-stop dumping on Modi continues....this time without references to how MMS/IG/Nehru/Rajiv/Ik Gujral/Deve Gawda/Chandra Shekhar/Charan Singh/Gurjarilal Nanda were so much more better than Mr. Modi...

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 04 Jan 2016 05:29

^^
When you are politician it goes with the territory.

sum · Post by **sum** » 04 Jan 2016 05:32

^^ Only silver lining is that if Myanmar ops are an indication of this govt and its thinking, there would be a lot of wheels started in the background and we may have some action in coming days ( like how there was a lull before the Myanmar storm for 5-6 days after the 18 armymen were ambushed in Manipur)

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 04 Jan 2016 05:33

In other words, what I am saying is that India and Indian politicians have looked at Pakistan with rose tinted glasses, hoping for a real peace. When there is no chance of that ever happening.

Look at the US. When they realized that there was a chance that Pakistani nukes could fall into terrorists hands and threaten US interests, it gave Pakistan PAL safeguards. Why? To protect their interests. So the PAL safeguard allows the PA to target India and yet safeguards the US from that threat.

Similarly India has to be realistic in what it can get from Pakistan. IMO there will be no peace and it is foolhardy to pursue it. At best India should pursue a dialogue to ensure that a hot war does not break out. Nothing more, nothing about Kashmir, a peace process etc. etc. There is far too much pent up anger in the Pakistani establishment and it's core Pakjabi support base against India for them to want real peace. They just want revenge. And you cannot talk peace with people who want your blood.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 04 Jan 2016 05:42

When US deals with Pakistan it deals with only pakistan...if anything it gets benign Indian support for US's objectives.

When India deals with Pakistan, their leaders tell openly that they are powerless and we need to get sponsors, such as US/UK who play malign role, on board as well..

We still have to play a role to empower their civilian govt....it is literally like aiding your own son become a man who is under bad influence just so he can take care of his family...

There is hardly any other solution than becoming them...which is what I suggested earlier or continue with current path of organic /incremental changes on a long time frame . This will mean we will have to bear the kicks from the likes of <all and sundry> who will get to kick Modi for doing something as well as not doing something...

Just that kicks will go on to obnoxious level should the PM be (assertive) Hindu.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 04 Jan 2016 06:11

RSS, SAD back talks but Sena hits out at engagement - Vikas Pathak, The Hindu

Even as the Shiv Sena termed the Pathankot terror attack a “security failure” and said there should be no talks with Pakistan, the RSS and some key BJP allies stood by the Narendra Modi government’s attempt to engage Pakistan days before the terror strike in the Punjab town.

The Pathankot terror attack comes days after Prime Minister Narendra Modi made a surprise visit to Lahore to wish his Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharif on his birthday, on Christmas. “We are against talks with Pakistan. We had said when Mr. Modi went there that we had apprehensions Pakistan would backstab India. These have come true,” Shiv Sena leader Sanjay Raut told The Hindu .

“The Pathankot attack is an example of intelligence failure and internal security failure.”

The Sena, a BJP ally, has not been on the best of terms with the BJP in recent times.

The BJP’s line during the UPA days was that talks and terror could not coexist. However, the BJP government has tried to engage the neighbouring country in talks after it came to power.

The Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD), which shares power with the BJP in Punjab, however, supported the talks.

‘Talks only solution’

“We [Punjab] are in the direct line of fire. We know that the only solution is talks. We must continue to talk to civilian authorities and civil society in Pakistan but offer a strong reply to any misadventure by the ISI and Pakistani army,” SAD leader Naresh Gujral said, drawing a clear distinction between Pakistan’s civilian government and military authorities.

Meanwhile, Minister of State for External Affairs Gen. (retd.) V.K. Singh was quoted by PTI as saying the civilian government in Pakistan needed to be strengthened. While talks were a good thing, Pakistan needed to control terrorists, he added.

The RSS backed the Modi government’s engagement with Pakistan.

I don't understand at all of this idea of 'strengthening of civil society' in Pakistan. The so-called civil society is an extension of the Deep State and as evil as them. Those in the direct line of fire such as the Punjab, J&K, Gujarat, Rajasthan etc would face problems, talks or no talks. I also do not believe that there is no alternative to talks. Yes, talks must be held eventually but the way to talks is paved with a strong multi-faceted anti-Pakistani action that includes military, political, cultural, diplomatic, religious and moral areas. We should not hasten to have talks without setting up the environment. The fact that the government is now holding internal talks on whether to continue with the re-started dialogue or not is an indication that they had not thought through the process. The exact parameters of what would constitute a transgression that would automatically trigger a stoppage of talks and counter-measures need to be worked out. And, the Foreign Minister must announce the status of talks openly. These must be institutionalized mechanisms.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 04 Jan 2016 06:38

Sushma consults veteran diplomats on talks with Pak. - Kallol Bhattacharjee, The Hindu
Excerpts

Former Foreign Secretary Kanwal Sibal said the consultation showed that the government had taken note of the hardening opinion against Pakistan after the Pathankot attack. “Obviously, the government has committed to talks with Pakistan, knowing well that terror strikes like the one in Pathankot might take place as Pakistan is a very difficult country to handle for any Indian government. Pakistan has also condemned the attack showing its commitment to talk, but it is under less pressure to have a dialogue with India. The issue is how long India can manage public opinion through consultations when terror strikes continue. However, the government seems to be aware that it is not the first Indian government to conduct dialogue with Pakistan while terror strikes continue. A similar situation existed in the past also {That is a worrying proposition. GoI has remembered a wrong precedent at a wrong time},” Mr. Sibal said.

‘Firm response’

He said the government should be imaginative with a firm diplomatic response to the Pathankot attack, as otherwise, the talks held under such circumstances would establish the old Pakistani position that terror should be delinked from dialogue. “India’s diplomatic response has to deter Pakistan from future attacks,” Mr.Sibal said, underlining that the government did not have a wide range of choices as the clock was ticking for the Foreign Secretary-level talks to be held in Islamabad on January 15 and 16.

A veteran journalist, Vijay Naik, said the consultation showed that the government was worried that the Pathankot terror strike might affect ties with Pakistan and related international commitments. {What are these international commitments? Promise given to the US? Full membership of SCO? Membership in NSG, MTCR, WA, AG, APEC, TPP etc. ? I am sure that no international commitment can be bigger than the national commitment. National commitment demands 'iron fist in velvet gloves'.}

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 04 Jan 2016 06:58

ldev wrote:In other words, what I am saying is that India and Indian politicians have looked at Pakistan with rose tinted glasses, hoping for a real peace. When there is no chance of that ever happening.

Absolutely. We will always be at war and must always keep ourselves fit to fight.

I think that for too many Indians, including me and most of us, we have had installed in our minds a mythical concept called "lasting peace". I suspect this is a mixture of historic antecedents to this mindset - one being Gandhis tactic of non violence, and Nehrus' naive sucking up of the theory that WW 2 was a war to end all wars.

There will never be total peace. We will need to wage war to maintain relative peace and keep out fighting arms well fed and fit,

Avinash R · Post by **Avinash R** » 04 Jan 2016 07:33

Allah has bestowed Pakistanis the honour to destroy India, kill Hindus: Islamic cleric

Sunday, January 3, 2016 - 18:01

New Delhi: Columnist and author Tarek Fateh on Sunday shared a video of a prominent Islamic cleric and former banker Irfan-ul-Haq provoking Pakistanis to destroy idol worship in India and kill Hindus.

In a lecture which the author said was held in 2011, the cleric said that if there is a place on earth where people worship stone idols, it is the Indian Subcontinent.

“Pakistanis should consider themselves fortunate that Allah has bestowed the honour to wage war against India to them,” the cleric said.

The cleric further went on to claim that the Prophet had said that there will be a war in India that will be 'Ghazwa-e-Hind'.

“The genesis of Pakistan was prophesied to defeat India and Hinduism at the hands of Pakistan,” he further added.

https://youtu.be/e56J5d7KmG4

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 04 Jan 2016 07:34

Reminds me of one of the 20 precepts of Nijū kun in Shotokan Karate:

When you step beyond your own gate, you face a million enemies.
一、男子門を出づれば百万の敵あり

{Translation: you are always at war}
The sooner Hindus internalize this, the better their survival chances.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 04 Jan 2016 07:35

http://www.zemtv.com/2016/01/04/three-h ... ted-islam/

They all look so sad,crying and very obviously under pressure from these Poakanimals.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 04 Jan 2016 07:39

Satya_anveshi wrote:
When India deals with Pakistan, their leaders tell openly that they are powerless and we need to get sponsors, such as US/UK who play malign role, on board as well..

No doubt US/UK lean on India to make p!ss with their munna, but I wonder in times like this what might a conversation with Obama/Cameron and ModiJi will look like. When they say, please don't stop talks, and ModiJi says I tried but India gets stabbed in its back through such terrorist attacks. What would their response be? Oh non state actors. TSP is front line all-lie? TSP has lost so many people also to terror? etc etc. And then how does ModiJi respond? Does he ask for sanctions on TSP? Does he ask them why military aid to TSP?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Jan 2016 07:51

CRS, Muppalla has some idea but forum wont like it. Lets wait for blog post.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Jan 2016 08:07

NaMo gives 72 hours warning:

http://news.rediff.com/commentary/2016/ ... 88a9e69883

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 04 Jan 2016 08:33

At the end of the 72 hours, if Pakistan had still been dithering, India must retaliate in ways other than just suspending talks. Merely suspending talks is not punishment enough.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 04 Jan 2016 08:42

SSridhar wrote:At the end of the 72 hours, if Pakistan had still been dithering, India must retaliate in ways other than just suspending talks. Merely suspending talks is not punishment enough.

SSJi, I agree, but its a good start though. Also, on this red line, I am pretty sure, Indian opposition will be on board. Need to watch for some WWK scum bags like Aakar Patel, MSA types, but this would present a united India. At least I hope.

Baikul · Post by **Baikul** » 04 Jan 2016 09:40

ramana wrote:NaMo gives 72 hours warning:

http://news.rediff.com/commentary/2016/ ... 88a9e69883

I would dearly love to know whom the warning is aimed at, and also whether the consequential threat of no talks has any real meaning.

If we are to believe that the PA/ ISI nexus is responsible, the 'threat' is not much of a threat because no talks is likely what they want anyway. Now what?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 04 Jan 2016 09:52

Pakistan only understand the pain of a bayonet up their backside. The gall of a retd. Brigadier on the Arnab show threatening us with massive mil retaliation of we dared to cross the border and not to underestimate the ISI,shows clearly that they do not understand words,gestures,kindness-which is mistaken for weakness. Bullets in the bellies of Paki pigs is the only language that they will understand.Continuing a dialogue at this moment is to me foolhardy and would give them the impression of weakness. The envoy should be kicked out and sanctions imposed ,normal relations suspended until terror stops.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 04 Jan 2016 09:52

In hindsight, even if an assumption of normalized Paki state is taken into consideration, there is really nothing at all to talk with them. J&K - what will you talk with them. Who in JK will want to go and live with Pakistan as Pakistanis when everyone from Baluch to POK are fighting separation.

Siachen, Sir Creek are all just strawman for optics.

About Pak giving up Dawood or Hafiz types - It will just unravel the nation called Pak to smithereens as a compromise on this is such a H&D loss that they can't explain to abduls. OBL was easy.

Now really what crap is there on table to talk.

MFN - what will Pak sell other than ganza and terror. ?

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 04 Jan 2016 09:57

I only see one thing - this is all about the uncle wanting India to engage and try by taking some hits. India obliging them thinking some great stuff will come in the long run.
Alternatively - just unravel the Paki state as soon as you can even in adverse conditions. Talk to them to expose and then hit them hard using the Alibi.

Guddu · Post by **Guddu** » 04 Jan 2016 10:05

Wow what a redline... take action within 72 h or no more dosas!. Obama took a lot of flak for putting up Syrian redlines that were eventually crossed. Hopefully Modi/Doval have something better up their sleeve. Blowing up a few huts in POK is the minimum to show resolve...that will satisfy the people. Why is this deadline not being reported by the larger news papers ?

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 04 Jan 2016 10:34

ramana wrote:NaMo gives 72 hours warning:

http://news.rediff.com/commentary/2016/ ... 88a9e69883

the note seems suspicious. how and why would unpad gawars leave a "note" in english??

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 04 Jan 2016 11:05

CRamS wrote:Need to watch for some WWK scum bags like Aakar Patel, MSA types . . .

CRS, it is one thing to analyze here often, for the sake of pastime, those two scumbags you mentioned, but quite another thing to take them seriously and worry about them. They cannot even be a blip on the Indian radar. Do not invest extraordinary powers in them or similar people, including media like ToI or The Hindu etc. Ultimately, GoI has to do whatever that needs to be done. Have you seen today's The Hindu editorial? I suggest you don't.

arun · Post by **arun** » 04 Jan 2016 11:50

ramana wrote:NaMo gives 72 hours warning:

http://news.rediff.com/commentary/2016/ ... 88a9e69883

Wait and watch.

Source is unnamed.

What constitutes “ultimatum” can mean different things to different people

.