Bharat Rakshak

Gagan wrote:CRamS ji
But you complain toooooo much about evrything!
You're always dhoti shivering, or cussing india's leadership.

CRamS ji is the opposite of "Harpal" Bector

I would love to meet you in person to get to know u better sir-ji

CRamS wrote: I won't complain from now on assuming of course ModiJi stays the course. And I would like him to be even more aggressive, like cutting of pee pee contact as much as possible by making life hard for TSP RAPE to get visas, reducing diplo contact etc.

SwamyG wrote:Gagan and A.G. thanks. I do not know if you watched the video, can you explain why she stressed so much on the word 'Vartha' and tried to differentiate it with others? I am not looking at the Hindi (or Sanskrit) meaning of it; but importance of that word. Thank you.

• - We are neighbors and can’t wish away each other
  - India has to backtrack from Kabul and let Pak have freehand (implied).
  - Kashmir plebiscite is the only solution as Kashmir is of neither countries.
  - Without Kashmir solution nothing will happen
  - The people of Pak are completely behind Kashmir cause.
  - New generation is also learning about Kashmir now.

Brad Goodman wrote:

SwamyG wrote:Gagan and A.G. thanks. I do not know if you watched the video, can you explain why she stressed so much on the word 'Vartha' and tried to differentiate it with others? I am not looking at the Hindi (or Sanskrit) meaning of it; but importance of that word. Thank you.

She said that in her opening statement to really make the context very clear to every one so that they can understand and appreciate the line of thinking that Government was taking. To my understanding what she was trying to convey was

1. Varta = Composite dialogue and this is something that means u discuss all issues likes water, commerce, Kashmir, sircreek, LOC, IB etc

2. Talks = Limited to only one topic and which according to Ufa release was limited to terrorism

She said reason we do not want Aziz to bring in Kashmir is because this is a talk not composite or resumed dialogue and the mandate to discuss Kashmir is not with NSA but with MEA

jrjrao wrote:Packees are very clever and very smart. How they are able to see and imagine strange things is maayaa onlee:

India accepts Hurriyat as third party in ‘bilateral’ talks

Saudi Arab formally informs Pakistan that Modi was there for conspiracy, and Saudi King assures that he will never allow Modi conspiracy against Pakistan to succeed

Amber G. wrote:I saw the headline too, and my first thought was "where is jrjrao?"
(Interesting that my hunch was correct, that post brought Jrjraw to come out from the cold and post this here..)

jrjrao wrote:Packees are very clever and very smart. How they are able to see and imagine strange things is maayaa onlee:

India accepts Hurriyat as third party in ‘bilateral’ talks

Similar smartness which only a paki can show is also shown in this:
Saudi Arab formally informs Pakistan that Modi was there for conspiracy, and Saudi King assures that he will never allow Modi conspiracy against Pakistan to succeed

Amber G. wrote:BTW, time to make the youtube with nice music and release it.. Anyone with singing voice..??
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 2#p1776942

Abhay_S wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBwfNqN7FD4

Bay Laag - Aug 23.

posting this here instead of the TSP-Multimedia thread as i found some analyses mixed in with the usual Bravado , Self Pity and Propaganda. I will try to Give a Short Summary of what Moeed Yusuf said.

1 Modi has moved away from MMS' Policies and changed the Terms of Agreement
2 Stratergy is to isolate Pakistan and improve relations with all other countries except Pakistan(cite enclave issue with Bangladesh)
3 Ufa has set a new bench mark Just like Shimla and India will only Talk about its core issues and Exclude Kashmir from now
4 India has no compulsion to talk and will only talk in its terms or play this on and off game
5 Modi can do this as Economic differential has become big and Pakistan's Image is Bad
6 If this trend continues in 10yrs India will not even talk for the 4 mins it does now and Treat it like Bhutan.
7 India interests the world and pakistan worries the world.

SSridhar wrote:Actually, by not turning up for the meeting which was agreed upon at Ufa between the two Prime Ministers, Pakistan has the onus of initiating the talks once again and the venue will have to be New Delhi. Moreover, the Indian redlines have been conveyed in no uncertain terms twice now (FS & NSA). There is therefore no question of Pakistan trying to do the same thing all over again and hoping the results would be different.

They agreed that India and Pakistan have a collective responsibility to ensure peace and promote development. To do so, they are prepared to discuss all outstanding issues.

Both leaders condemned terrorism in all its forms and agreed to cooperate with each other to eliminate this menace from South Asia.

They also agreed on the following steps to be taken by the two sides:

1. A meeting in New Delhi between the two NSAs to discuss all issues connected to terrorism.

2. Early meetings of DG BSF and DG Pakistan Rangers followed by that of DGMOs.

3. Decision for release of fishermen in each other’s custody, along with their boats, within a period of 15 days.

4. Mechanism for facilitating religious tourism.

5. Both sides agreed to discuss ways and means to expedite the Mumbai case trial, including additional information like providing voice samples.

The NSA talks between India and Pakistan may have been pre-destined for failure given the “Hurriyat hurdle.”

Stung by criticism in Pakistan over the exclusion of Kashmir from the Ufa statement, the Nawaz Sharif government felt it couldn’t send Sartaj Aziz to Delhi without meeting Kashmiri separatists, and the Modi government, that took a big risk with the initiative to restart talks, couldn’t have been seen giving in on the Hurriyat issue. But how important were the NSA talks themselves to the process and what will calling them off mean?

“These talks were critical to the India-Pakistan process as we need a starting point to discuss our existential problems” says former Ambassador Jayant Prasad, adding, “For India those are fighting terrorism and ensuring peace and tranquillity at the border.”

On the Pakistani side, the view is the opposite. “The NSA talks were an opening to resume the full dialogue,” former High Commissioner to India Aziz Ahmed Khan told The Hindu over telephone from Islamabad, “Now there’s little hope they can be restarted. Without a discussion on Kashmir resolution, the Pakistan government is in an impossible situation.” Former Ambassador and now Senator Sherry Rehman says the NSA talks were a non-starter given the “narrow agenda” both sides had agreed to. “There is no way core issues can be kept off the table,” she told The Hindu .

Predictable divisions

Former NSA Leela Ponappa too feels that the talks between the two NSAs were based on “unrealistic expectations”. “I think even after Ufa it was dubious what could of come of this kind of engagement. In any case it has never been possible to restrict agendas in this way, as Pakistan does not have normal or predictable responses.”

There are also predictable divisions over whether any future dialogue will be derailed over the question of Pakistani diplomats meeting the Hurriyat.

“India will have to allow some contact with the Hurriyat,” says Mr. Aziz Khan {Why?} , adding that one way to take the pressure off such meetings would be for the Jammu and Kashmir government to itself begin a dialogue with the Hurriyat that could be seen “as a way of giving them a voice in the process.”

However Ms. Ponappa feels the Hurriyat can never be included in such dialogues in any way. “The government has drawn a welcome redline. For any Pakistani to think they can meet separatists in India is as absurd, as Indian leaders meeting Baloch fighters in Pakistan,” she says. Ambassador Prasad agrees, suggesting that in the near future, the Indian red line will mean all leaders only meet on the sidelines of multilateral fora like the UNGA session in September. “Anywhere away from the media glare would help,” he adds.

‘Temporary lull’

When it comes to how this process can be picked up if at all, diplomats on both sides are unanimous that the calling off of NSA talks is only a temporary lull. “Even after the 1971 war, talks were restarted after just six months,” says Ms. Ponappa, adding that DGMO talks and the meeting fixed between border ranger DGs will take place anyway.” Eventually, says Sherry Rehman, the two sides will have to stop being “cold war dinosaurs”, and plan a joint agenda that includes each others core concerns including Kashmir and terrorism.” Mr. Khan even says a short period of “reflection” may benefit the process as well. “It maybe better not to try and engage for some months, until other issues like the LoC tensions are sorted out.”

SSridhar wrote:There is therefore no question of Pakistan trying to do the same thing all over again and hoping the results would be different.

Former NSA Leela Ponappa too feels that the talks between the two NSAs were based on “unrealistic expectations”. “I think even after Ufa it was dubious what could of come of this kind of engagement. In any case it has never been possible to restrict agendas in this way, as Pakistan does not have normal or predictable responses.”

Kashi wrote:

SSridhar wrote:There is therefore no question of Pakistan trying to do the same thing all over again and hoping the results would be different.

If that were true, Pakis would have not persisted with their shenanigans- LoC/IB firing, stoking terror, raising Cashmere internationally etc. They have seen the outcome and it has not been favourable to them most of the time, yet they persist in doing so.

Why?

Pakistan’s overtures to Russia signal a new chapter is brewing in Pakistan’s foreign relations with the US, with the historically fluctuating dynamic set to cool off. Since 2001, the US has been in a reluctant, combustible but, from its viewpoint, necessary close alliance with Pakistan in the US-led War on Terror. The lack of trust on both sides that characterized this alliance of convenience has come to the fore as the US no longer needs to keep a close handle on South and Central Asian affairs given its impending retreat from both Afghanistan and Iraq. Unencumbered by the need to have a close ally in the region, the US will put this volatile relationship on the back burner. The primary cause for this perpetual state of mistrust has been Pakistan’s view of the Taliban and assorted militant organizations as an asset to its foreign policy ambitions, given the role the Pakistani state had in the latter’s creation. This duality in its War on Terror policy was always only barely tolerated and now in line with the pressure from its Congress, the US administration can afford to threaten withholding a considerable amount of money it owes to Pakistan as part of the compensatory Coalition Support Fund, for not being fully sincere in combating all groups of militants. The writing on the wall is clear for Pakistan — the joyride is over and new alliances are needed for Pakistan to pursue its interests.

Russia and China are both wise to the tectonic shift underway due to the US’s retreat from the region. The region has been left in a veritable mess. The Afghan war, far from being finished, has left the country in a more precarious position than before, and the Gulf suffers from instability. Not only is it in the interests of these two great powers to have stability and development in their southern region, the significant clout a geographically connected Eurasian nexus of countries with large landmass and larger populations will have is not lost on anyone. Hence the wooing of both Pakistan and India by Russia and China, both wary of the US’s attempts to contain their influence. Pakistan for its part needs a constant supply of foreign assistance. The Russian commitment to build a lengthy gas pipeline and the China Pakistan Economic Corridor both reveal the benefits it can get out of this triangular arrangement. The military establishment is also happy with this arrangement since this guarantees a constant stream of new weapons technology. While it cannot be truthfully claimed that Pakistan-US relations will ever completely collapse, given their history, it makes sense for Pakistan to forge new alliances and learn to live with the new global permutations. *

Tuvaluan wrote: ...

Suhasini Haider seems to be unable to get basic facts right - Ms.Leela Ponnappa was never NSA, only deputy NSA in 2007 in the MMS regime.

So, according to this ex-official, basically Pakistan is to be accept as unpredictable and India has to compensate for it by allowing the pakis to set the agenda? How did such people even anywhere near positions like deputy NSA. These IFS types are complete disasters in NSA-type positions -- they seem to crawl when asked to bend. Talk about punching below one's weight!

One look at the paki RAPEs like Mehr Tarar, Ejaz Haider, Nadeem Paracha, Omar Qureishi and their ilk makes it pretty clear that pakis will continue to exhibit paki behavior...and the more this govt. tries to build bridges with the pakis, the more pakis of Indian origin like all the INC scum will have a field day pretending to be uber nationalist patriots, like they are doing right now.

SSridhar wrote: ...
Governments were different, including Vajpayee's.

KLNMurthy wrote:Pakis will fight back, and not just with terrorism and dossiers.

An expected play for pakistan is to undermine GOI and Modi personally, as much as possible. So as to either get rid of Modi altogether or to at least keep him occupied.

I would expect more paki involvement with Teesta Setalvad, Kejriwal, Owaisi brothers etc., along with mobilizing ARoy, PMisra, Angana C, Vinay Lal, and various "religious freedom " outfits and NGOs. We will see a return to the 2003-2012 period in the War On Modi, with full pakistani engagement. They will also try very hard to expand and exploit real or imaginary fissures in BJP and parivar.

After the cancellation of NSA-level talks, proposed meetings between top military officials of India and Pakistan are now unlikely, a media report said today.

Pakistan cancelled the talks on Saturday after India clearly said that it would not allow a meeting with Kashmiri separatist leaders and talks will only focus on terrorism.

The Express Tribune said that with the NSA talks called off due to differences over the agenda as well as Pakistan's invitation to Kashmiri Hurriyat leaders, the meetings between Director General Military Operations (DGMOs) as well as heads of Pakistan Rangers and Border Security Force are uncertain.

The paper quoted an official as saying that the Ufa agreement has now become "controversial" and "irrelevant" as a result of cancellation of the NSA-level talks.

Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi in their meeting in the Russian city of Ufa last month had agreed on meetings between DGMOs and heads of Pakistan Rangers and BSF.

India wanted the two meetings before the NSA-level talks but Islamabad proposed September 6 for the meeting between the heads of Rangers and BSF, which would be followed by the DGMOs' meeting.{Clearly, Pakistan had a game plan. It is obvious that it did not want the NSA-level meeting to take place. It was planning for its failure from the beginning and that was why the Rangers-BSF & DGMO meetings were pushed by it to beyond Aug, 23}

Holding that as a nuclear-armed country, Pakistan knew how to defend itself, Sartaj Aziz, the prime minister's advisor on foreign affairs and national security, has accused India of acting like a regional superpower, a media report said on Monday.

"(Prime Minister Narendra) Modi's India acts as if they are a regional superpower; we are a nuclear-armed country and we know how to defend ourselves," Dawn on Monday quoted Aziz saying a day earlier.

"We also have evidence of Indian agency RAW's involvement in fuelling terrorism in Pakistan," Aziz said, adding that while Pakistan has evidence of Indian involvement in terrorism, India on the other hand only has propaganda against Pakistan.

"Propaganda against Pakistan is more important for the Indians, rather than giving us evidence," the adviser stated.

Aziz also said that India wants normalisation on its own terms; it would like to talk about trade and connectivity but not much else.

"If Kashmir is not an issue for India, why have stationed 700,000 troops in Kashmir," he asked

Aziz also stated that India should hold a referendum in Kashmir, and the people would decide their own fate.

"India should realise after the current episode that their tactics are not working, and they need to be sincere about dialogue with Pakistan," added Aziz.

SSridhar wrote:Nuclear power Pakistan knows to defend itself: Sartaj Aziz

That should have come from the military via Sartaj Aziz.

Holding that as a nuclear-armed country, Pakistan knew how to defend itself, Sartaj Aziz, the prime minister's advisor on foreign affairs and national security, has accused India of acting like a regional superpower, a media report said on Monday.

"(Prime Minister Narendra) Modi's India acts as if they are a regional superpower; we are a nuclear-armed country and we know how to defend ourselves," Dawn on Monday quoted Aziz saying a day earlier.

"We also have evidence of Indian agency RAW's involvement in fuelling terrorism in Pakistan," Aziz said, adding that while Pakistan has evidence of Indian involvement in terrorism, India on the other hand only has propaganda against Pakistan.

"Propaganda against Pakistan is more important for the Indians, rather than giving us evidence," the adviser stated.

Aziz also said that India wants normalisation on its own terms; it would like to talk about trade and connectivity but not much else.

"If Kashmir is not an issue for India, why have stationed 700,000 troops in Kashmir," he asked

Aziz also stated that India should hold a referendum in Kashmir, and the people would decide their own fate.

"India should realise after the current episode that their tactics are not working, and they need to be sincere about dialogue with Pakistan," added Aziz.