Indian Response to Terrorism

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 03 Dec 2008 22:02

Raju wrote:
Rahul M wrote:we will surely bash BJP then !
not everyone will.

of course ! not everyone bashes congress now do they ?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 03 Dec 2008 22:03

neelkamal wrote:I just watched the interview with Gauhar Ayub Khan (former Foreign MInister)
NASTY man. I hate that guy. When he was asked what PAK is doing to get LET out, he says there is no credible info, it could be cooked up, you got your own security officer killed, your intelligence failed....
and he was laughing..

another statement from the present foreign minister - Pranab Mukherjee's aggressive statement will make issue worse...

I am going to watch Rice's statement now...

All this has happened in the past. So, why is MMS and Pranab Da revisiting this stupidity?

Khan's response is very, very predictable.

Is'nt there someone outside of Pranab Da? MMS is hybernating as usual, unfortunate. He must be having very low blood pressure.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 03 Dec 2008 22:03

Lalmohan wrote:zardari is getting hideously gubo'ed in military headquarters by all the korpse kammandus for stepping out of line. he is now doing a sharief at kargil - i.e. being told he has to go be defiant and nice to the world's media all at once. meanwhile under the table, someone his squeezing his crown jewels with a pair of pliers

he is buying time and H&D for the military to reorganise and redeploy... and he may even be playing a double game... hoping to precipitate a limited war so that Unkil and India can defang the jehadis and faujis in one go and make him shah-en-shah-i-gubo

perhaps the pakistan end game has finally begun?

Lalmohan ji,

I think Americans have sat in Afghanistan all these 7 years, and have had almost no benefit out of it. They have been pouring in money like a rive into the Pakistani pit, and in all these years Pakistan has probably delivered 3-4 high value Al-Qaida people. $15 billion and 628 dead GIs is too high a price for 3-4 beards. Afghanistan War has reached a stalemate. What Americans want is a game-changer, something you allude to.

This is a fresh opportunity for America to rethink American strategy in Afghanistan. It cannot simply be to save some Karzai's ar$e the whole time. It is time for them to think, what are the Americans doing in Afghanistan. Their stay is becoming one of diminishing returns.

It is OK, that India did not lash out on the first day itself. May be now India and USA can think of a viable and coherent strategy to bring the Pakistani House down. Pranab da has also become a bit more aggressive in the last 2 days, and SG is also muttering something. Don't yet know, whether India has got any strategic inputs from USA on this. Back on 3rd March 2007 when Bush came calling, he muttered something about India's help in solving Afghanistan. That time India did not seem very interested. India should be interested this time around!

sum · Post by **sum** » 03 Dec 2008 22:08

Rahul M wrote:
Raju wrote: not everyone will.
of course ! not everyone bashes congress now do they ?

Democracy at work!!!!!

I'm more interested as to what possibly different would a non-Kangress govt do in this situation? I think that we are condemned to being a punching bag of a nation due to spineless politicos cutting across party lines.

neelkamal · Post by **neelkamal** » 03 Dec 2008 22:10

so rice's statements, Highlights:

-pledge to cooperate
-get to the bottom of what happened
-prevent terrorism who continue to plot and plan
-we need to organise differently for counter terrorism
-all responsible nations to cooperate Pakistan has a special responsibility
-Zardari has promised his cooperation
-Feel the support of international community you are not alone in this fight
-we stand united

nice ms rice

bart · Post by **bart** » 03 Dec 2008 22:13

neelkamal wrote: nice ms rice

To put it in Americanese: She can talk the talk (well somewhat anyway), lets wait and watch if they are willing to walk the walk.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 03 Dec 2008 22:13

sum wrote: Democracy at work!!!!!

I'm more interested as to what possibly different would a non-Kangress govt do in this situation? I think that we are condemned to being a punching bag of a nation due to spineless politicos cutting across party lines.

perhaps this is not the right thread but one problem that INC has is they don't come to power on an internal security plank and as such have no prior commitment to the issue beyond regular governance.

BJP OTOH, has security as one of their main election USPs and if they come to power, they would be expected to do better.

to be fair to congress, once they have dismantled much of the security apparatus over the last few years(which is unpardonable IMO), at the moment there isn't much that any govt could do.

edit: the problem gets compounded by the fact that some of their allies and supporter media equate anti-terrorism to anti-minority. they themselves are also guilty of floating this canard.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 03 Dec 2008 22:13

vera_k wrote:
RajeshA wrote:This Govt. can perhaps get the UNSC to pass a Resolution saying ...
No UN please. We should not legitimize the UN until we are part of the security council. It will be 1948 and Kashmir all over again.

The Resolution has two objectives:

o Give Americans a legal cover to undertake their operations in FATA.
o Give Indians to go after the terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan.

Your skepticism of UN is shared by many, but the situation is different between 1948 and 2008, and it comes down to today's reality and not some abstract principles.

You want to keep the sentiments of Indian Muslims in check, which could again turn pro-Pakistani, even though they may at the moment be against the attack.
You want to keep the Arab majority satisfied.
You want to have the moral high ground.
You want to be militarily involved in Pakistan, and still avoid the re-hyphenation.

For all that a Resolution under Chapter 7 would be extremely helpful. Obama would not want to commit the same mistakes as George W. Bush. He will be willing to play ball, especially if there is a UN Resolution on Pakistan.

sum · Post by **sum** » 03 Dec 2008 22:15

neelkamal wrote:so rice's statements, Highlights:

-pledge to cooperate
-get to the bottom of what happened
-prevent terrorism who continue to plot and plan
-we need to organise differently for counter terrorism
-all responsible nations to cooperate Pakistan has a special responsibility
-Zardari has promised his cooperation
-Feel the support of international community you are not alone in this fight
-we stand united

nice ms rice

Whats so special in the statements? I think that they more or less match Amriki statements after every attack..or is it only me seeing nothing earth-e-shatter in Ms. Basmati's words?

neelkamal · Post by **neelkamal** » 03 Dec 2008 22:19

it is not that, you should watch our politicians deliver speeches. compared to that it is MUCH better.
I really liked the part when she said "we stand united".

and she did not look at any paper like Pranab did. he was reading out. she was delivering a speech.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 03 Dec 2008 22:21

It was NDA's jassoo mithaiwala service (quoting: Umrao spinner ji) who gave away those terrorists back to pakibans. Why is that many millions who died in India inferior to who we would have probably lost at kandahar? Is Major Sandeep soul inferior to the captain of AI flight at Kandahar?

Everybody fks up!~ cause, every one is living in fear. This time the terrorists didn't hold hostages, they just went rampaging, keeping human defence thats it.. saved a few faces for k-angrez.

The fact of deep regrets is in the administration.. how long they take to react to events. And the carnage is way too much to ignore. Any party would go to hell allowing such things to happen.

Warnings ignored.. improper security, no plans to smother loopholes, all plans create new loopholes, to favor political gains.

One aspect is voting and governance, the other aspect is policies and administration. We can definitely delink these two future generations to live more peacefully. Vote the men just to take positions first., and ensure they get the job done.. basically like a person who stands in front of a building watching it being built and nothing is done improperly. If they can't do this, don't even have them in the future.

We can have a duma of an official representations of people IAS, IPS, etc.. to take policy route. commissions setup and bring policy changes. We vote on policies and not on people.

Policy based democracy, and not babooo centric. Baboos could get monthly salary to execute their jobs..

Ordinary graduates can do the job effectively.

Change the constitution.. move over to policy based administration and voting system. No numbers, no parties, no politics.. its all about individuals who are good get voted, for positions, for 2 years.. good pay packet, and continues to another term, if he wins votes. He has no power on the policies which are set by a separate team, experts, and respected people.

remove the power from babooze!~ that is the only response we can do!~

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 03 Dec 2008 22:24

Would be nice if our kirket team also came out for a small foto shoot with solidarity placards and made a statement.

They are looked upto by many among our youth and rival the bollywood WKKs in popularity.

BTW, has GoI downgraded relations with TSP at all levels yet or not? IIRC, some rail-road link suspension noises were made. Also, kindly put a FULL STOP to all cultural, sporting and people to beebal exchanges as well. Downgrade trade relations, consular services, the whole hog.

GoI has to take the lead in naming TSP publicly and unambiguously as the enemy. Aam janta and aam babu can take over from there coz law will then take its own course and shut down all official and semi-official channels of exchange.

Aaj, dept chief caught me in the cafeteria and mentioned - 'Abt that Mumbai thing, how terrible! Were your people all safe in Mumbai? How far is it from your place? etc.' Was nice of her to ask, IMO. I made it a point to say we'll bounce back and that we are vulnerable because 'they' are right next door to us. Chief was nodding away vigorously like she understood perfectly what moi was saying. Bottomline - word is getting around to even aam joe n jane in massaland that Pakistan is bad news. Gauhar khan might find that funny perhaps, and can laugh away at that for all I care.

vasu_ray · Post by **vasu_ray** » 03 Dec 2008 22:28

if the threat of 'air strikes' is real, do you think the chinese made plastic explosives can get past airport scanners? if any of this is true we have a serious risk at hand.

All pakistani officials perhaps see a opportunity of pulling out troops from western border, a brainchild of ISI. They will repeat these attacks until that is done, i.e., until India wages war.

They know that any escalation of this imminent war will be contained by US. Adha is border pe, Adha us border pe, useless for either foreign party both in support and fight, but very helpful posturing for jihadis inside pakistan.

For us to repeatedly strike their terror strongholds,

1) we need to get PAF and Subs out of the picture

2) functioning ABM defenses

3) Unkil's acceptance, perhaps at the cost of placing our troops in Afganistan paving way for American pullback. They have their domestic compulsions

4) Get their nukes out

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 03 Dec 2008 22:37

I have never thought of this as a response, but i think we should have such things all around our country:

Quit India! Mumbai says again

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 03 Dec 2008 22:39

neelkamal wrote:so rice's statements, Highlights:

-pledge to cooperate
-get to the bottom of what happened
-prevent terrorism who continue to plot and plan
-we need to organise differently for counter terrorism
-all responsible nations to cooperate Pakistan has a special responsibility
-Zardari has promised his cooperation
-Feel the support of international community you are not alone in this fight
-we stand united

nice ms rice

No "actionable ..........."?

This too is very predictable and useless.

Zardari can do nothing. PA controls Him too.

At this point Paki: 1, India: 0, Terrorism: 100

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 03 Dec 2008 22:42

lakshmikanth wrote:I have never thought of this as a response, but i think we should have such things all around our country:

Quit India! Mumbai says again

Interesting take. Cannot tell MMS to resign or Sonia Gandhi to move back.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 03 Dec 2008 22:43

If you think about it the Mumbai attack is challenge to American leadership. If they go about suppressing Indian response then they have forsaken their leadership psotition and will also melt away.

MMS aka Mumble Mumble Singh is India's Nevile Chamberlain. A product of failed British education that deprives one of moral fortitude.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 03 Dec 2008 22:43

Trying to beef up my suggestion of a UN Resolution with some help from Robert Kagan.

The Sovereignty Dodge: What Pakistan Won't Do, the World Should by Robert Kagan: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

"We don't think the world's great nations and countries can be held hostage by non-state actors," Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari said yesterday. Fair enough. But what is the world to do when those non-state actors operate from the territory of a state and are the creation of that state's intelligence services?

One can feel sympathy for Zardari's plight. He and his new civilian government did not train or assist the Pakistani terrorist organizations that probably carried out last week's attacks in Mumbai. Nor is it his fault that al-Qaeda, the Taliban and other dangerous groups operate in Waziristan and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas of western Pakistan, from which they launch attacks on U.S. and European forces trying to bring peace to Afghanistan. For that we can thank elements of the Pakistani military, Pakistani intelligence and the late military dictatorship of Pervez Musharraf. Reversing decades-old policies of support for these groups may be impossible for any Pakistani leader, especially when the only forces capable of rooting them out are the same forces that created them and sustain them.

So if the world is indeed not to be held hostage by non-state actors operating from Pakistan, what can be done? The Bush administration is right to press Pakistan to cooperate fully with India's investigation of the Mumbai attacks. But that may not have much effect. Pakistani intelligence services have already balked at sending their top official to India to help. Nor is mere cooperation by Pakistan likely to satisfy the outraged Indian people. They, like Americans after Sept. 11, 2001, want to see some action taken against the groups that carried out the attacks. So all the warnings in the world may not be enough to forestall an Indian attack, especially given the Indian government's political vulnerability, even if it risks another Indo-Pakistani war.

Rather than simply begging the Indians to show restraint, a better option could be to internationalize the response. Have the international community declare that parts of Pakistan have become ungovernable and a menace to international security. Establish an international force to work with the Pakistanis to root out terrorist camps in Kashmir as well as in the tribal areas. This would have the advantage of preventing a direct military confrontation between India and Pakistan. It might also save face for the Pakistani government, since the international community would be helping the central government reestablish its authority in areas where it has lost it. But whether or not Islamabad is happy, don't the international community and the United States, at the end of the day, have some obligation to demonstrate to the Indian people that we take attacks on them as seriously as we take attacks on ourselves?

Would such an action violate Pakistan's sovereignty? Yes, but nations should not be able to claim sovereign rights when they cannot control territory from which terrorist attacks are launched. If there is such a thing as a "responsibility to protect," which justifies international intervention to prevent humanitarian catastrophe either caused or allowed by a nation's government, there must also be a responsibility to protect one's neighbors from attacks from one's own territory, even when the attacks are carried out by "non-state actors."

In Pakistan's case, the continuing complicity of the military and intelligence services with terrorist groups pretty much shreds any claim to sovereign protection. The Bush administration has tried for years to work with both the military and the civilian government, providing billions of dollars in aid and advanced weaponry. But as my Carnegie Endowment colleague Ashley Tellis has noted, the strategy hasn't shown much success. After Mumbai, it has to be judged a failure. Until now, the military and intelligence services have remained more interested in wielding influence in Afghanistan through the Taliban and fighting India in Kashmir through terrorist groups than in cracking down. Perhaps they need a further incentive -- such as the prospect of seeing parts of their country placed in an international receivership.

Would the U.N. Security Council authorize such action? China has been Pakistan's ally and protector, and Russia might have its own reasons for opposing a resolution. Neither likes the idea of breaking down the walls of national sovereignty -- except, in Russia's case, in Georgia -- which is why they block foreign pressure on Sudan concerning Darfur, and on Iran and other rogue states. This would be yet another test of whether China and Russia, supposed allies in the war against terrorism, are really interested in fighting terrorism outside their own borders. But if such an action were under consideration at the United Nations, that might be enough to gain Pakistan's voluntary cooperation. Either way, it would be useful for the United States, Europe and other nations to begin establishing the principle that Pakistan and other states that harbor terrorists should not take their sovereignty for granted. In the 21st century, sovereign rights need to be earned.

This article originally appeared in the Washington Post.

neelkamal · Post by **neelkamal** » 03 Dec 2008 22:43

some more statements from rice
-even if they are non state actors, tough action must be taken against them.
-Pakistan has to be transparent

Pranab says, India would use any means to protect its territirial integrity
------
there was an email sent that on Dec 6 there will be a terror attack, hijack a plane from chennai , b'lore or delhi. hence the alert.
passengers should report atleast 3 hrs before, lot of checking

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 03 Dec 2008 22:54

X-posted...

ajay pratap wrote:Folks, No one is going to help us, if we are thumb twiddling ourselves.
India will have to act, then others will help according to their respective self interests.

Order Pakistan to hand over their ISI and TFTA Jarnails including Kayani.
within a fixed time period.

make sure the world knows that we want the culprits not the Civillian GOP.

Order all Pakistanis in India to leave within 48 Hrs.
Stop exports of Allo, Onion, Tomato at bhaichara rates.
Seal the borders.
Announce all water treatise with Pakistan null and void.
and finally go to war and destroy what is Pakistan, do a
Balkanization.

Well if wishes were horses.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 03 Dec 2008 22:56

US sets stage for strikes if Pak does not act
3 Dec 2008, 2230 hrs IST, Chidanand Rajghatta, TNN
Print Email Discuss Share Save Comment Text:
WASHINGTON: The United States has set the stage for punitive internationally-backed strikes by India against terrorist camps in Pakistan if
Islamabad does not act first to dismantle them by rejecting President Zardari’s alibi that non-state actors were responsible for the last week’s carnage in Mumbai.

The game-changer, outlined by Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice, among others, robs Islamabad of the fig leaf that Zardari used in his interview on Larry King Live that ''stateless actors'' are holding the whole world hostage and Pakistan was not to blame. Rice said in effect that the excuse does not absolve Pakistan responsibility for terrorist acts that originate from its territory,“ Rice said.

Although US officials have not outright approved immediate punitive Indian strikes against terrorist targets in Pakistan, it is clear Rice has bought time for Islamabad to prove its bonafides. Pakistan has a ''special responsibility'' and needs to act ''urgently'' she said, even as India has indicated it will wait for a Pakistani response to its demands before any punitive action.

In Washington, experts pressed the administration to expand the scope of punitive strikes to an international level to avoid making it an India-Pakistan issue, particularly since the death toll included citizens of ten countries.

''Rather than simply begging the Indians to show restraint, a better option could be to internationalise the response. Have the international community declare that parts of Pakistan have become ungovernable and a menace to international security,'' Robert Kagan, an influential analyst with the Carnegie Endowment, said.

''Would such an action (strikes) violate Pakistan's sovereignty?'' Kagan asked in an op-ed, and answered, ''Yes, but nations should not be able to claim sovereign rights when they cannot control territory from which terrorist attacks are launched.''

Rice echoed this outlook more discreetly and cautiously.

Pakistan's civilian government has sought to portray its helplessness in governing its own territory. In fact, in a startling slip noted by the Economist, Zardari said in a television interview last week that ''if any evidence points towards any individual or group in MY PART OF THE COUNTRY,'' he would take action. The implication, it said, was Pakistan was already severed if with parts of the country out of federal control.

While US position towards Pakistan has hardened perceptibly after the Mumbai attack, Indian officials are still leery about Washington’s approach. The hard part to swallow for New Delhi is that the Bush administration, while pushing for a strategic relationship with India, has bankrolled what some are already dubbing a terrorist state to the tune of $ 10 billion since 2002. Most of the money, according to the US government’s own audit, has gone towards building Pakistan's military muscle against India.

On Tuesday, even as Rice counselled patience and restraint in New Delhi, India’s Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon made the rounds in Washington, explaining India’s position and the growing anger across the country after Pakistan’s latest provocation.

Menon packed more than a dozen meetings, including with former intelligence czar and Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte, Under Secretary of State William Burns, House speaker Nancy Pelosi and several top lawmakers as Washington struggled to contain Indian outrage. New Delhi’s message was uniform: India’s patience is wearing thin.

The Indian Embassy said later that ''unequivocal condemnation of the (Mumbai) incident and the need for the perpetrators to be held accountable was reiterated,'' at the meetings. It was also indicated that there would be full cooperation and support at various levels, including government, from the US to India as it dealt with the consequences of the incident, it added.

From all accounts, India too appears to be preparing ground for punitive action if Pakistan fails to respond and act adequately.

ToI

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 03 Dec 2008 22:59

Perhaps that is what Rice was saying..

If knuckleheads don't react, there would be international response. Cause their men have been massacred too.

The jews, the germans, the khans, japanese, Oz et al have lost people in this carnage.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 03 Dec 2008 23:01

Yes but India cannot react. read the whole report. The poor TOIlet reporter thinks sauce for goose is sauce for gander. And is thus giving false hope to Indians.

I think India should let the US know they are going in.

a_kumar · Post by **a_kumar** » 03 Dec 2008 23:08

ramana wrote:If you think about it the Mumbai attack is challenge to American leadership. If they go about suppressing Indian response then they have forsaken their leadership psotition and will also melt away.

I thought it would be a kick in the ass and INC would wake up.. but I see few signs..

The situation is that, even if US is willing to support (Rice and certain sections of media are certainly giving positive signals), our netas have too many bangles.

In the end, US will not fire missiles into Pakistan.. It has to be India, but MMS/SG are smarting at that. They are not alone, half of our media is taking the wind out of this sentiment, and Commies ki nautanki bee shuru..

Maybe we want US to support us and then launch Spec Ops attacks into Pakistan for us and then fire missiles into Pakistan to keep the jingos happy. And then, our commies and Barkha and Arundhatis can yell that its a violation of UN charter.

samuel · Post by **samuel** » 03 Dec 2008 23:11

Updated Proposal for Action

Summary: We must resolve to go in, now and act when the snow thaws.

Steps

Very long term (15 years)
1. End of Pakistan as a nation state.

Long Term (10 years)
2. Joint Ops to eliminate Pakistani Nukes.
3. Reintegration of POK.

Mid Term (5 years)
4. A national law to eliminate terror in the neighborhood.
5. A counter terror organization, the means and mandate to strike anywhere, by law.
6. No terror debt policy with healthy interest paid for each error attack from Pakistan. No statute of limitations for repayment.
7. Build national memory, public opinion against terrorists.

Short-term (1 year)
8. Hand all terrorists wanted by India over.
9. Block Karachi port till desired outcome.
10. Eliminate LeT and JeM headquarters.
11. Eliminate known ISI centers.
12. Eliminate NLI, move border up towards Skardu. Squeeze the neck shut. Hold everywhere else. If victory,
12a. Redo Indus Water Treaty.
12b. No claim to Kashmir Instrument.
12c. End Article 370 (internal).

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 03 Dec 2008 23:12

What audacity porkis have to openly publicly protect terrorists?

Let the international missile strike happen first!.. you see the rest, in an organic approach to provincial divisions there.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 03 Dec 2008 23:14

If we need 10 years to build weaponry and go at it, so be it, that should be the plan. But this idea of going to the UN is not on - we don't need a fig leaf when we have been attacked.

RajeshA wrote:This Govt. can perhaps get the UNSC to pass a Resolution saying ...

The Resolution has two objectives:

o Give Americans a legal cover to undertake their operations in FATA.

This is an American problem, no? Under what resolution are the drone attacks happening today? What resolution was used to cover for Clinton's strikes on the Taliban or for the invasion of Afghanistan?

o Give Indians to go after the terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan.

Where is the infrastructure? If this is in POK as it is said, then it is Indian territory. We can even conduct Pokhran 3 there if we are able to.

Your skepticism of UN is shared by many, but the situation is different between 1948 and 2008, and it comes down to today's reality and not some abstract principles.

In 1948 we were not members of the security council and had uncertain support in the council. The situation is exactly the same today.

You want to keep the sentiments of Indian Muslims in check, which could again turn pro-Pakistani, even though they may at the moment be against the attack.

Uh, Indian Muslims will then have to be treated the same as Pakistanis won't they?

You want to keep the Arab majority satisfied.

Same answer as with the Indian Muslims.

You want to be militarily involved in Pakistan, and still avoid the re-hyphenation.
You want to have the moral high ground.

H&D operations. Hyphenation is unavoidable as long as Pakistan exists and we share a border with them.

For all that a Resolution under Chapter 7 would be extremely helpful. Obama would not want to commit the same mistakes as George W. Bush. He will be willing to play ball, especially if there is a UN Resolution on Pakistan.

If you believe the part where nations are said to have permanent interests, then it does not matter whether it is Bush or Obama. What matters is if US interests have changed because of the one terrorist attack on Mumbai. Unlikely in my opinion.

milindc · Post by **milindc** » 03 Dec 2008 23:26

ramana wrote:Yes but India cannot react. read the whole report. The poor TOIlet reporter thinks sauce for goose is sauce for gander. And is thus giving false hope to Indians.

I think India should let the US know they are going in.

Ramana,
After watching the press conf and the Q&A session about 3 times, it was very explicit and clear in diplomatic terms.
Pranab stopped just short of saying there will be war if you don't act.
In answer to one of the question, he said that based on Paki response on the demarche, India will take 'decisive' action to protect India's territory and peace of Indian citizens.
Basmati in so many ways said that Pakis need to act. There was no 'US appreciates India's restrain and maturity' crap. She cut thru the Paki spin of 'non-state' actors being responsible.

Also, I found the body language between Pranab and Basmati was very positive and they seemed to complement each other on responses.

I believe, now its up to Indian leadership to define the time line of Paki response and also our own response.

I was very studiously watching for any word/sentence from Basmati that would be construed as restrain on India, but frankly I didn't find any...
If the transcript is published, we can further analyze it.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 03 Dec 2008 23:27

I think that the government of India is waiting for a Pervez Musharraf type announcement from Pakistan to let if off the hook. The Dork media is already brain dead enough, and will paint such a move by Pakistan as a MAJOR MAJOR victory for India.
Alongwith letting off pakistani terror pressure at least until the elections and the new government comes into office might be the deal that GOI is working towards.

This will allow the Congress party to say that they took a tough stand against terror and Pakistan capitulated and look no terror strikes now (atleast going into the elections). Win-win for all concerned parties, The US, congress Government. Pakistan will take some hit, but this will be taken by Zardari, who as is the norm in pakistan will be the sacrificial goat a-la Nawaz Sharif. Win-win for General Kiyani also.

My question is, what terror camp will India attack?
- the ISI Headquarters? This will surely mean war with pakistan - a prospect that Sonia Gandhi balks at.
- Muridke? Kill off a whole town? What will Amnesty International and Arundhati Roy think?
- those collection of huts in POK? There won't be anybody there.
India is not going to take out military or civil infrastructure in Pakistan with any military retaliation.

The US may also be trying to persuade India to finally deploy in afghanistan for a joint move against pakistan - so to put pressure onlee, and meanwhile the US is planning to slither away from there at the first available oppertunity.

Ultimately, the only form of retribution that India can deliver within pakistan is covert destabilizing of that nation, paying back the Jihadis in kind and maybe maybe an attack on one of its military assets.

But one big announcement by pakistan will be required to soothe all the frayed voting public in India, if the congress party is going to pull this off.

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 03 Dec 2008 23:29

milindc,

Is there any link available of the said Q&A to watch online pls? TIA!

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 03 Dec 2008 23:33

Quite a few people are getting their hopes us here. This is nothing but media management of public anger. The following things will happen

chai,
biscuit,
media statement

and these will be followed by

chai,
biscuit,
media statement

Nothing else is on the schedule.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 03 Dec 2008 23:33

vera_k,

Re: UN Resolution

You are basically saying let's walk from Delhi to Islamabad, and I am saying let's take the car, parked outside.

milindc · Post by **milindc** » 03 Dec 2008 23:33

RajeshA wrote:Trying to beef up my suggestion of a UN Resolution with some help from Robert Kagan.

If we go to UN for anything, you can kiss any form of response good bye.
No way our leadership should get stuck in that swamp.
Too many players and actors will be involved in that Circus, even NZ will get a platform to voice opinions. We should definitely avoid that like plague.

e.g. What will India's response be if UN states that the scums need be tried in Haque. Just imagine the circus around the proof we produce to convict these mofos.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 03 Dec 2008 23:34

vsudhir wrote:milindc,

Is there any link available of the said Q&A to watch online pls? TIA!

Usually MEA and SD websites have the text of such remarks. First look at MEA website.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 03 Dec 2008 23:35

http://cnnwire.blogs.cnn.com/

December 3rd, 2008
Mukasey calls Mumbai a ‘lesson’
Posted: 01:24 PM ET
By Terry Frieden
CNN Justice Department Producer
WASHINGTON (CNN) — In his first comments on the Mumbai, India, terrorist attacks, Attorney General Michael Mukasey on Wednesday called the “horrendous” incident an “object lesson” on the need for continued vigilance, including surveillance of suspected terror groups.

The nation’s top law enforcement official also told reporters that the team of FBI agents on the scene continues to assist Indian authorities.

“The FBI is looking into whatever evidence they can get,” said Mukasey, who added that if sufficient evidence is collected the United States could bring criminal charges against any conspirators.

“I believe we have jurisdiction,” he said, but he declined to comment on the likelihood of eventual U.S. indictments. Six U.S. citizens died in the attacks.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 03 Dec 2008 23:37

milindc wrote:
RajeshA wrote:Trying to beef up my suggestion of a UN Resolution with some help from Robert Kagan.
If we go to UN for anything, you can kiss any form of response good bye.
No way our leadership should get stuck in that swamp.
Too many players and actors will be involved in that Circus, even NZ will get a platform to voice opinions. We should definitely avoid that like plague.

Why should we go? This is something USA can do. If they succeed, fine and well. If not, we proceed as per our plans.

Remember there were citizens of ten countries or so who died.

It is also important to note, what the UN Resolution says. Mumbai Attacks need not be even mentioned in the UN Resolution.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 03 Dec 2008 23:37

RajeshA wrote:vera_k,

Re: UN Resolution

You are basically saying let's walk from Delhi to Islamabad, and I am saying let's take the car, parked outside.

No you are saying let's rent the car instead of taking our own car. Problem with this is that you are liable to get stuck with an Aveo when you asked for a Hummer.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 03 Dec 2008 23:40

http://publication.samachar.com/pub_art ... extIndex=3

India has right to protect its territorial integrity: Pranab

Nidhi Razdan
Tuesday, December 02, 2008 4:42 PM (New Delhi)
In an exclusive interview to NDTV External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee has not ruled out the option of military strikes against terror camps in Pakistan.

Mukherjee said that every country has the right to protect its territorial integrity and take appropriate action when necessary. He also said that it has become difficult to continue the peace process with Pakistan in this atmosphere.

NDTV: Are we thinking about the military option at all?
External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee: As and when it takes place, people will come to know, it's not publicized.

NDTV: So, you are not ruling it out?
External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee: I am not making any comment on the military option, what I am saying is that every sovereign country has the right to protect its territorial integrity and take appropriate action and when it feels necessary to take that appropriate action.

NDTV:Has the peace process suffered a big setback?
External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee: Yes it has vitiated the atmosphere. There was also the Kabul attack and now Mumbai attack; naturally the atmosphere is vitiated. While we have no intention of not carrying on with the peace process, but definitely when peoples' sentiments are affected and it creates an atmosphere not to carry on business as usual, it has some impact. These incidents and if these are not adequately addressed by the other side, create an atmosphere that's difficult to carry on normal business including the peace process.

India asks Pak to hand over fugitives

PTI adds: Sending a tough message, Mukherjee said India has demanded the handing over of LeT chief Hafiz Mohammad and other fugitives in Pakistan in the wake of Mumbai terror attacks and would await Islamabad's response.

"Now, we have in our demarche asked (for) the arrest and handover of those persons who are settled in Pakistan and who are fugitives of Indian law," External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee said on the sidelines of a function to inaugurate the India-Arab Forum.

Pakistan's High Commissioner to India Shahid Malik was summoned by the Ministry of External Affairs yesterday and issued a demarche (protest note).

"...there are lists of about 20 persons. (These) lists are sometimes altered and this exercise is going on and we have renewed it in our demarche," Mukherjee said adding India "will await" Pakistan's response.

India has handed over to Pakistan a list of 20 terrorists, including Lashkar-e-Taiba chief Hafiz Mohammad and Jaish-e-Mohammad chief Masood Azhar besides Dawood Ibrahim, who are based in that country and are suspected to be behind terror attacks in India.

Investigations into the three-day Mumbai terror strikes that left 183 dead have shown that the plan to carry out the attacks was hatched in Pakistan, suspectedly by Lashkar-e-Toiba and the perpetrators of the ghastly act came from Karachi by ships and boats.

Asked about US President-elect Barack Obama's suggestion that India has a "right to protect" itself, Mukherjee said "what will be done, time will show and you will come to know."

Islamabad has been in a denial mode but India says it has hard evidence to show Pakistani link.

New Delhi's outrage was voiced by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh who said India will not tolerate use of territories by its neighbours for launching attacks in this country and that there will be a "cost" to it.

The US is also building pressure on Pakistan, with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice who arrives here tomorrow for talks with Indian leaders, saying Islamabad must "follow evidence wherever it leads" and lend "absolute" and "transparent" cooperation to New Delhi in the probe into the Mumbai terror strikes.

On the solidarity shown by the world leaders, including the US President-elect, with India in the aftermath of the Mumbai incidents, the External Affairs Minister said: "We appreciate the responses which we have received from all over the world, including Obama."

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 03 Dec 2008 23:40

Shreeman wrote:This is nothing but media management of public anger. The following things will happen

[*] chai,
[*] biscuit,
[*] media statement[/list]
and these will be followed by...
Nothing else is on the schedule.

I fully agree. But GOI will also nervously be looking behind the shoulder at the fast approaching general elections.
The elections in Delhi came right in the middle of the terror attacks. The result of these elections will give some idea of the people's thinking.
I too think that GOI is trying its best to manage the crisis without having to fire a single bullet, the US concurrs. Full pressure on pakistan to let them capitulate in the form of yet another statement demonstrating Pakistan's resolve to uproot terrorism from its soil, and an understanding with India that there will be no terror strikes until elections.

Don't expect anything more.

samuel · Post by **samuel** » 03 Dec 2008 23:41

Is it possible for Americans, Indian-Americans or Indians in America to sue Pakistan in America and can the damages be used to freeze its assets here? Can that be used to prevent military aid to Pakistan by the US? Can similar law suits be started in UK?