csharma, you are right. India never knew how to handle Pakistan. Initially, we felt that Pakistan was at the most of a nuisance value and it would soon see the light. We thought much generosity would change the attitude of Pakistan and signed the way one-sided IWT. The influx of modern arms under US aid to Pakistan forced us to take up the matter with the US but we had to be content with false promises that they won't be used against us. Of course, we had no leverage with the US in those days. Then, it was felt that PA, PAF & PN were no match to us and can be managed if they over-reach. Later, we felt secure under the support of the USSR.csharma wrote:I doubt if there is any deep , chankiyaan policy towards Pakistan. The main thrust of both NDA and UPA govt was/is to rely on US and the so called international community to mount pressure on Pakistan to stop terrorism against India. Now US is relying on Pakistan to get itself out of the Afghan situation. Pakistan is fully resolved to use terror as a weapon against India. Now what is India going to do? The great powers like US UK expect India to negotiate with Pakistan for terror tap to be turned off (for how long?).
Does India/MMS have any solution to this? I doubt it.
After 1971 and the Simla of 1972, we thought Pakistan had learned its lessons. After 1974, we felt even more secure. When the events of Dec. 1979 happened and soon the US money, arms and training started pouring in, we felt confused. The Pakistanis and the Americans hit us in the Punjab and we never reacted. Later, the Pakistanis unleashed terror in J&K, the US continued to morally support the Pakistani terror by remaining silent on terror but questioning India on the validity of accession, and the supposed human rights violation. We entertained the likes of Robin Raphael and Madeline Albright as we felt we had nothing to fear as we were clear. We hoped and hoped that the US would see Pakistani perfidy, but, to this day, that has not happened though the US has seen that perfidy vis-a-vis herself in matters relating to Al Qaeda, Afghanistan and Taliban. The collapse of the Soviet Union made matters difficult for us. Our dire economic situation and later Kargil forced the US on us. Clinton promised to make the Pakistani troops withdraw (even as India was beating the pulp out of them) but ingrained the US in the India-Pakistan issue.
The 9/11 was used by Pakistan only to attack India more and more through terrorism. We were mortally afraid of retaliating for several reasons, including angering the US. Like a piece of sponge, we have been absorbing blow after blow even as Pakistan brazenly accuses us for our own misfortunes. For its part, the US promptly condemns every terror attack and sympathizes with us but goes ahead to protect Pakistan's interests at our cost. It keeps advising us to engage with the Pakistanis in dialogue and the US lackeys in the Indian press repeat it ad nauseam. We even willingly impleaded ourselves in the Balochistan issue to placate the US. Under US pressure, we feel that we must wish for peace (Aman ki Asha) and deceive ourselves that a stable and prosperous Pakistan is in our interests. We are looking for alibis to restart the dialogue; God knows if there is already a Track-II dialogue that has covered much ground. It looks increasingly certain that there would be a Thimpu-declaration. We never hit back and of late, we are paralyzed by the interference of the US. Like Kayani & Co deceiving the Pakistani masses by threatening to shoot down the CIA drones, while secretly facilitating them, our Government refuses Holbrooke to visit us but nevertheless concedes ground to US demands.
