Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Jan. 29, 2010

[abhishek_sharma]

Barkha Dutt, K. C. Singh, Abhishek Singhvi and Siddharth Vardharajan on NDTV

http://www.ndtv.com/news/videos/video_p ... id=1204764

Siddharth Vardharajan is defending the Pakis. Nothing new.

[arun]

Article X Posted.

Mirror image of the Islamic Jihadi’s located in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan who seek to sow death in India, cases of citizens of the Islamic Republic who look to reap life in India.

Two articles, both datelined Feb 23 of cases of the citizens of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan using medical facilities in India:

Pakistani girl gets gift of heart

Pak businessman successfully undergoes surgery

[abhishek_sharma]

India, Pakistan take step forward, but potholes remain

SIDDHARTH VARADARAJAN

http://beta.thehindu.com/news/national/ ... 113762.ece

While agreeing to remain in touch at the foreign secretary level - it is more or less clear Ms. Rao will travel to Islamabad in the next few weeks - India demurred at Pakistan’s suggestion that the two sides work towards the timeline of a “substantial” prime ministerial meeting during the Saarc summit in Bhutan in April. And the Pakistanis did not accept India’s offer that joint secretary level meetings on a range of issues like trade be revived immediately. “That would have thrown us back to the pre-1997 days, before the composite dialogue format was created”, a Pakistani official told The Hindu.

By late evening, a section of Indian officialdom decided the Pakistani foreign secretary had crossed the line in his answers to questions put to him by reporters at a nationally televised press conference. If pressed, reporters present might have used the adjective ‘rambling’ to describe his lengthy responses but some Indian officials insisted on characterising Mr. Bashir’s briefing as “acrimonious” and full of “point scoring”. The one phrase they chose to take umbrage to was his statement that Pakistan did not need to be “lectured” to on terrorism. Mr. Bashir’s somewhat casual description of an earlier Indian dossier on Lashkar chief Hafiz Saeed as consisting of “literature” rather than evidence – a phrase he later withdrew when a follow-up question was asked – also irritated some officials enough to make them remind the media that the Pakistani foreign secretary had received his brief from “men in khaki” rather than from a democratically elected government.

One can only assume the Government of India at the highest levels was fully aware of this fact when it decided to invite Mr. Bashir to Delhi in the first place. Indeed, that it had already factored in the implications of the military being the most decisive element of the Pakistani establishment. When TV channels started reporting the churlish comments of unnamed sources, other senior officials, arguably closer to the Prime Minister than the first set, were quick to set the record straight and clarify that there was nothing unexpected or surprising in what Mr. Bashir had said and that New Delhi certainly did not intend to get into a slanging match.

A senior official told The Hindu the decision to talk to Pakistan was taken in full knowledge of the fact that there are many across the border who do not want the process of engagement to succeed. Judging from his remarks at a small dinner in his honour by the Pakistani high commissioner, Shahid Malik, late Thursday night – a dinner attended by Ms. Rao and other senior Indian officials – Mr. Bashir is clearly not one of them. In the weeks and months ahead, the challenge for Prime Minister Manmohan Singh will be to push a process of engagement that restores trust and confidence on both sides, that advances India’s core concerns on terror and opens the door to meaningful dialogue on the disputes that have bedevilled bilateral ties. And of course, part of that challenge will also involve ensuring there is no public manifestation of dissonance from within his own team.

[abhishek_sharma]

Suhasini Haider chats on Indo-Pak talks

http://features.ibnlive.in.com/chat/view/350.html

Khalid Mahmood Khalid:While the actual meeting had been smooth, Why Bashir's mood in Press Conf was looking aggressive ?
Suhasini Haidar: Not sure he was...put it down to diplomatic posture really.

akshay:What do you think about this new emphasis on the water issue by Pakistan? Isnt there already an existing framework for this (Indus Water Treaty)? Why bring this into the talks process? Is it because the previous arbitration decision on the Baglihar dam issue was not to Pakistan's liking.
Suhasini Haidar: Yes the int'l arbitration did rule in Indias favour. India hasnt violated any part of the treaty- but we must recognise that pakistan is suffering from a severe water shortage- we could look for ways of jtly developing projects upstream- but I agree the existing framework has worked well so far

ishani datta ray:Pak Foreign secretary has sharply conveyed his message, quite bluntly at times while Nirupama rao was very polite in conveying her points. Is India taken aback by such bitter reax from Pak side? what do you make out of that? At the same time its understood that the Pak FS has to be stern, keeping in ming his constituence, still...
Suhasini Haidar: I think much of this is diplomatic posturing- and the Pakistani foreign secretary was simply stating his government's position. Just as India has stuck to its stand of not letting the talks be about anything besides terror, Pakistan has tried to show it hasnt been outdone too.

Srini:Should India give Pakistan an ultimatum? It's now or never?
Suhasini Haidar: Now or never for what- is there ever going to be a time Pakistan wont be our neighbour?

Siddharth Joshi:What possible framework can we develop to make these talks uniterruptible?
Suhasini Haidar: That's a good question- many have spoken about the 'Majestic Hotel" model that ended the war in Vietnam, where the sides met week after week, regardless of whether they made progress. Needs much more political commitment on both sides to make this work though

Rajiv Shrivastv:Suahasini, Pakistan leadership has been supporting terrorsits to strike in Indiafor two decades and responsible for deaths of so many in India. America didn't have talks with afghan or Pak after 9/11. If oe of your clolse family member dies in Pak sponsered terror attacks, will you still support yielding to Pak unless you are a Pak agent?
Suhasini Haidar: Do you consider talking as yielding? And re: your point on the US, America didnt cut ties with pakistan even after 26-11. And today is actually advocating talks with the Taliban!

[Atri]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 617314.cms

India asks Pakistan to hand over 2 army officers

NEW DELHI: India and Pakistan resumed official level dialogue after 14 months, but what started out as a promising engagement in the morning descended into acrimony after Pakistan foreign secretary Salman Bashir rebuffed India's demand for action against Lashkar leader Hafiz Saeed.

Bashir dismissed what sources called here a strong Indian dossier on Hafiz Saeed as "literature, not evidence", seriously endangering the future of the engagement.

India on Thursday asked for 33 terrorists -- Pakistani nationals as well as Indian fugitives, including two serving Pakistan army officers, Major Iqbal and Major Samir Ali -- to be handed over, giving three dossiers to Bashir. Pakistan foreign secretary, however, seemed to make light of India's insistence on action against 26/11 masterminds, saying that Pakistan did not want to be sermoned on terrorism.

[SSridhar]

Suhasini Haider chats on Indo-Pak talks

http://features.ibnlive.in.com/chat/view/350.html

Suhasini Haidar: Yes the int'l arbitration did rule in Indias favour. India hasnt violated any part of the treaty- but we must recognise that pakistan is suffering from a severe water shortage- we could look for ways of jtly developing projects upstream - but I agree the existing framework has worked well so far

What is this jointly developing projects upstream ? Why should Pakistan insert itself into Indian projects that do not violate IWT ? How will it benefit them or us ? Under IWT, the designs of all upstream projects by India have to be given to Pakistan in advance and they have a right to object to that, even drag us to arbitration if needed.

but I agree the existing framework has worked well so far

It is flattering that Ms. Haider has accepted that India has scrupulously followed the treaty.

[abhishek_sharma]

What is this jointly developing projects upstream ? Why should Pakistan insert itself into Indian projects that do not violate IWT ? How will it benefit them or us ?

These guys (i.e. Suhasini Haider and Siddharth Varadarajan) should be sent to Pakistan. I don't understand why she cares for water shortage in Pakistan when we had one of the worst monsoon last year.

[Anujan]

http://thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=225694

The new Pakistani ambassador to Syria, appointed by President Zardari, has summarily sacked the entire staff and faculty of the Pakistan International School in Damascus and appointed almost all his immediate family members for a collective monthly salary of $38,000

[shiv]

What is this jointly developing projects upstream ? Why should Pakistan insert itself into Indian projects that do not violate IWT ? How will it benefit them or us ?

These guys (i.e. Suhasini Haider and Siddharth Varadarajan) should be sent to Pakistan. I don't understand why she cares for water shortage in Pakistan when we had one of the worst monsoon last year.

The funniest news item I saw was a headline on TV yesterday that was an official Indian statement dismissive of Pakistan "Pakistan's water problems are because of internal disagreements in Pakistan"

[Dilbu]

India names two Pakistani army officers in 26/11

[SSridhar]

The funniest news item I saw was a headline on TV yesterday that was an official Indian statement dismissive of Pakistan "Pakistan's water problems are because of internal disagreements in Pakistan"

The water problem in the Sind and Balochistan are because their water is stolen and the Inter Provincial Water Accord of 1991 is implemented grossly in the breach and in favour of West Punjab. The water problems in South Punjab are because North Punjab denies them water. The problem in North Punjab is that 60% of the water is wasted through seepage, contamination, excessive usage etc.

The following is a historical perspective of the Inter Provincial Water Accord.

The reports of neither Akhtar Hussain Committee of 1968 or the Fazle Akbar Committee of 1971 were acted upon by the federal government of Pakistan, with the result that water continued to be released/shared on an ad-hoc basis from the dams and barrages. On the basis of a series of meetings among provinces in March 1991, an agreement, Water Agreement Accord (WAA), was reached on the sharing of the river waters. It stipulated the following allocations

Water Allocation among Pakistani Provinces, 1991 (in MAF)

Code: Select all

Province	    Kharif	Rabi	Total
Punjab	      37.07	18.87	55.94
Sindh *	     33.94   14.82	48.76
NWFP **	      3.48	 2.30	 5.78
Civil Canals	 1.80	 1.20	 3.00
Balochistan	  2.85	 1.02	 3.87

* - Including requirements of Karachi
** - Ungauged Civil Canals above the rim stations where measurements can be made

As part of the above agreement, Sindh demanded 10 MAF of water for letting into the Arabian Sea below the Kotri Barrage to check sea intrusion. It was also decided to set up in 1992, an “Indus River System Authority” (IRSA) headquartered at Lahore, as per provisions of the 1991 Accord, with representation from all four provinces. The agreement also allowed the provinces full authority on the system-wise and period-wise usage of the waters within their allocations. However, the four-tier water management structure consisting of the Federal Ministry, WAPDA (Water & Power Development Authority) which has overall responsibility for development of all water resources, the IRSA to execute the 1991 Inter-Provincial accord, and the PIDs (Provincial Irrigation Departments) had never worked cohesively. For example, the IRSA was disbanded in 1998 after the Kalabagh Dam (KBD) was announced but was again revived in 1999. Actual water allocations have been made on the basis of “historic use” rather than on the 1991 settlement leading to more resentment in Sind. There is also a constitutional body, the Council of Common Interests, to resolve inter-provincial disputes on such things as natural resources (like water) but it has not been constituted.

[Prem]

x-post

'Not part of Pakistan'

Quote:
Sacrifices such as these give meaning to Pakistan's hard stance on the Kashmir issue. Sacrifices such as these give us pause for thought when our rhetoric on Kashmir begins to ring a bit hollow. Our stated position on and dedication to the Kashmir cause failed to pass muster recently when Pakistan refused the request made by the government of Azad Jammu and Kashmir for the allocation of some 614 cusecs of water for irrigation purposes.The water situation in the country is fast forming into a proper political debate. Many have been foretelling water as the pre-eminent political issue of the future. Their auguries are coming to pass. The "El Nino" weather effect is causing water shortages and draught in the entire region. The issue of water, despite the reluctance of India, is on the agenda in the upcoming foreign secretaries-level talks. Punjab and Sindh have been at each other's throats over water supply in the Chashma-Jhelum Link Canal. (Either way, thousands will be affected and there will be corresponding crop failures.)

The Indus River System Authority (IRSA) has been unable to resolve the inter-provincial bickering and, only last week, the prime minister summoned the chief ministers of all the provinces along with leading officials of the Water and Power Development Authority and the Pakistan Indus Water Commissioner to Islamabad to find out what was going on. And, to top it all, there are almost daily items in our press where experts are lashing out at India for "stealing" our water. In some instances, senior journalists have been reported to have suggested that Pakistan take out India's dams with its nuclear arsenal.The growing political consciousness on the water issue notwithstanding, IRSA declined the request made by the government of Azad Kashmir. The refusal was based on the grounds that, since Azad Jammu and Kashmir was not part of Pakistan, IRSA could not determine its water rights. This decision has turned relations between the governments of Pakistan and Azad Kashmir cold. Recently, before Kashmir Day (celebrated as an official holiday in our Islamic Republic) on account of the IRSA refusal, the prime minister of Azad Jammu and Kashmir informed the protocol office of the president of Pakistan that, should the president come visiting Mirpur, he would not be greeted in person.

http://thenews.jang.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=226224

[Carl_T]

Its like the dipolmatic mission of Prince Ullukh (Shakuni's son) on behalf of the Kauravas to the Pandavas before the Mahabharata. Inconsequential but satisfying the Kaurava ego.

In that case, it is reasonable to expect some action now towards the desired end?

Unless of course TSP turns over the two officers named.

[SSridhar]

India names two Pakistani army officers in 26/11

In this post and later in this post too, it was felt that the PA was under some stress regarding the talks. Apparently, they knew what was coming. Indian investigators have been able to zero-in on the exact Army officers who helped the 26/11 carnage. They wanted to corner the Pakistanis as soon as they had complete and incontrovertible proof and hence possibly the urgency.

[abhishek_sharma]

Back-channel engagement set to start

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/chill ... te/584709/

Breaking the 26/11 ice, as Foreign Secretaries of India and Pakistan resumed a long-halted conversation here today, decks were also cleared for the start of quiet back-channel engagement between former Pak Foreign Secretary Riaz Mohammed Khan and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s Special Envoy Satinder Lambah.

Lambah and Khan are said to have had a meeting and both have been “fully involved” in steps leading to the resumption of FS-level talks today.

Sources said Islamabad’s choice of Khan was communicated to New Delhi before today’s talks. India moved cautiously but is now believed to have given the go-ahead given how productive this process was during the Musharraf regime.

During that time, Lambah and then Pakistan NSA Tariq Aziz held several meetings in other countries — away from the public glare — on contentious issues, including Kashmir, Siachen and Sir Creek.

More importantly, Khan is also quite familiar with NSA Shivshankar Menon who was then his counterpart. All this, sources said, will help ensure that the conversation need not begin from scratch.

Despite some strong remarks made by Pakistan Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir after his meeting with Indian counterpart Nirupama Rao, sources said, what was important is that polemics was absent during the meeting itself. While differences persist, New Delhi is of the view that “re-engagement” is important and that it happens in the “right atmosphere.”

As for Bashir’s remarks, sources added that it could be attributed to “domestic compulsions”.

[sanjaykumar]

Possibly but nothing will come out of th etwo majors, nothing came of the Kabul embassy bombing. They will never be extradited, India does not have that leverage short of getting down and dirty in Karachi.

[shravan]

X-Post

Nine die as blasts hit Kabul, guest house for Indians targeted

Kabul, Feb 26 (DPA) Nine people were killed Friday when a series of explosions hit a hotel in Afghanistan's capital, Kabul, officials said. The attack also targeted a guest house for Indians next to a shopping complex, a media report said.

Farid Rahid, a spokesman for the ministry of public health, said nine people had been killed, among them foreign nationals, and 18 injured people had been brought to hospitals.

A policeman at the scene said he saw four bodies being taken away from the guest house, but could not say whether the victims had been Indians or Afghans.

[Malayappan]

Advantage of surprise by CRM in IE

Delhi surely knows that Foreign Secretary Bashir is not in a position to give credible commitments that Pakistan will end its support to groups on the warpath against India. Let alone controlling the Lashkar-e-Toiba, the Pakistan army’s main instrument for violence against India, Islamabad has loosened the restrictions on its public activity in recent weeks

A measure of controlled tension with India is the key to Kayani’s ambitions at home, in Afghanistan and Washington. A predictable India would make it easier for Kayani by persisting with its old framework of talking to Pakistan one day and refusing to engage the next.
Delhi, however, must find ways to surprise the Pakistan army by being unpredictable. This would necessarily involve strategic patience and tactical flexibility.

[Malayappan]

Ayaz Amir reflects -
The misery on our faces No this is not a towel, but in his own way another introspection. Among other things he says -

Hinduism stood in danger at the hands of Islam. Islam in the sub-continent was never threatened by Hinduism.

we discovered to our cost in 1970-71 that religion alone was not enough of a force to keep the country together. Just as we are discovering today that religion alone is irrelevant to the grievances of Balochistan.

Hypocrisy as a national characteristic, an all-pervading phenomenon, is not a good thing. It makes a people sick and stunted. It makes them less free.

[abhishek_sharma]

Military muscle

http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=226209

...

Najeeb Khan agrees with Farah Khan that the expenditure on the military should be cut down and more funds should be diverted towards education, health and poverty alleviation. He has also suggested that the administrative expenditure should be reduced too. As for the cut in the military expenditure, I do not agree with both the writers. While discussing the military budget one should not overlook the ground realities. Our traditional rival is India which is militarily very strong . We can't afford to endanger our independence by ignoring the military.

Under the prevalent circumstances the Pakistan army needs at least two more corps to avert the Indian threat.
...

We can improve health and education sectors and alleviate poverty by reducing the battalion of ministers and doing away with the Pajero culture.

...

No doubt Pakistan is a nuclear state, but so is India. If, God forbid, war breaks out, it will most definitely be conventional, not nuclear. Therefore, we need to remain heavily equipped militarily.

Lt-Col (r) Mukhtar Ahmed Butt

Karachi

[CRamS]

India names two Pakistani army officers in 26/11

What about Kiyani and Paasha the ultimate and real masterminds?

[CRamS]

India names two Pakistani army officers in 26/11

In this post and later in this post too, it was felt that the PA was under some stress regarding the talks. Apparently, they knew what was coming. Indian investigators have been able to zero-in on the exact Army officers who helped the 26/11 carnage. They wanted to corner the Pakistanis as soon as they had complete and incontrovertible proof and hence possibly the urgency.

Urgency for what? They could have supplied the same names even in the absence of this cricus. For e.g., they could have summoned the TSP ambassador in Dilli and given him the same evidence.

[harbans]

I don't know why folks missed this most important statement from Haider..

Srini:Should India give Pakistan an ultimatum? It's now or never?
Suhasini Haidar: Now or never for what- is there ever going to be a time Pakistan wont be our neighbour?

I have repeatedly mentioned the urgency for GOI to internalize the fact the entity called Pakistan is not necessary a permanent fixture. Our GOI seems to have internalized that Pakistan will stay. The cliche of 'Stable Pakistan..' is too internalized amongst our decision makers. This is the single most important reason why the GOI can never come up with a solution to Pakistan and we all will be seen and dismissed as a bunch of right wing war mongers with little credibility.

[Hari Seldon]

TSP appears despo to break off talks and later, appropriately use the India bogey to calibrate its GWOT collaboration.

To that end, it has grandstranded, acted obnoxiously, allowed LeT and other mujradeen types free rein in the media and so on.

After taking so many public jhapads, it cannot be that even the PM is unaware now that genuine peace etc with TSP is not going to happen. All the pre-partition memories of lawhore etc won't help much, although.

So the fact that we're persisting in '(s)talking' implies GoI is upto something else here. Maynot be chankian or even halfway intelligent but lez hope thats the case rather than WKKism run amok in the PMO.

[VikramS]

harbans:

The issue is that even if the current political structure of TSP changes (e.g. a breakup), it does not solve the fundamental challenge of Islamism. I doubt if any smart Indian is truly interested in an Akhand Bharat with 170 million brainwashed Jehadis as their fellow countrymen. So TSP or its successor is going to be India's neighbour for many generations to come.

[Avinash R]

Top Taliban commander droned in North Waziristan
...
According to sources, Zafar, a former member of the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, headed a group called Badar Mansoor. Most members of this group are believed to be from Punjab.

Zafar, who had a five million bounty on his head, had joined the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) in North Waziristan just before the Pakistani army launched an operation in South Waziristan against the banned extremists outfit.
...

[harbans]

The issue is that even if the current political structure of TSP changes (e.g. a breakup), it does not solve the fundamental challenge of Islamism. I doubt if any smart Indian is truly interested in an Akhand Bharat with 170 million brainwashed Jehadis as their fellow countrymen. So TSP or its successor is going to be India's neighbour for many generations to come.

That's debatable that fundamentalism will not decline if Pakistan breaks up. But whats not debatable and fact is fundamentalism will continue to rise in Pakistan as it is now with a full focus on India to keep united ethnic differences within their country. A breakup would certainly make Sindh, Punjab dependent on India for sorting their own differences. Their focus would not be a Ghazwa and a green flag on the Red fort as it is now.

As long as we keep internalizing that Pakistan will always exist as out neighbour, we will have no solution except giving into their demands for keeping peace. Pakistan will always be a revisionist state, India a status quoist one. In this conflict it's always the revisionist who makes gains.

[svinayak]

That's debatable that fundamentalism will not decline if Pakistan breaks up. But whats not debatable and fact is fundamentalism will continue to rise in Pakistan as it is now with a full focus on India to keep united ethnic differences within their country.

Fundamentalism with a large army is the problem.
With smaller TSPA army these fundoos are nobody.

[Aditya_V]

ALso the smaller TSP states will want India to Broker the fights inbetween them and will focus more on each other.

[shiv]

Indians killed in Afghanistan today

Paquistaan has spoken: "You dhotis can talk. We will continue killing"

[shravan]

^ 8 Indians dead. Some of them Doctors & Private Contractors.

[SSridhar]

Urgency for what? They could have supplied the same names even in the absence of this cricus. For e.g., they could have summoned the TSP ambassador in Dilli and given him the same evidence.

Of course, they could have. But, when India asks serving PA officers to be handed over along with what I guess could have been only very incriminating evidence (with PA knowing that the US is also aware of this evidence or possibly even supplied by the US), it had better be served personally. I also hope that some message was conveyed by the Indian FS to her counterpart. These could not have had the same effect when done through the Pakistani High Commissioner. The strong reaction of Salman Bashir at the press meet is the result of pent up anger.

[SSridhar]

Indians killed in Afghanistan today

I would link it up with the content presented in the talks yesterday.

[kenop]

Hillory's appeal on taxes

WASHINGTON: US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has urged wealthy Pakistanis to pay a larger share of taxes to reduce their country’s dependence on foreign aid.

In a testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the top US diplomat reminded rich Pakistanis that they had a duty to enable their government to fund schools and hospitals and to spend more on other social projects by paying taxes.

“The very well-off” in Pakistan “do not pay their fair share for the services that are needed, in health and education primarily,” she observed.

Secretary Clinton said the US, along with the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, was looking for ways to pressure nations that received loans and grants to broaden their tax base.

[SSridhar]

This is typical Basmasuran case.

The Federal Shariat Court threatens to slap Blasphemy Case against the Government of Pakistan itself !!

Dr Muhammad Aslam Khaki, adviser to the Federal Shariat Court on Islamic Jurisprudence, on Thursday demanded the government immediately delete a paragraph from its review petition against the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) verdict, in which it has compared the NRO with the Charter of Madina.

“Otherwise a case under the blasphemy law will need to be registered against the government officials responsible,” he said, adding that the NRO had resulted in reconciliation between a dictator and a political party accused of corruption, “with the aim to hide each other’s crimes”. “Whereas, the Madina Charter was an accord between Muslims and non-Muslims of Madina for mutual patience and tolerance under the leadership of a great personality, Prophet Muhammad (PBUH),” he said.

[brihaspati]

Are not dictators "great" personalities too! I don't see much fault with the gov's characterization of the accord - the Sharia court gives the comparison beautifully! In fact right after that so-called accord, violent actions began to happen on the Jews in that tiny community of Medina, and the first casualties were "poets" - one was a woman who was assassinated while suckling a child at the deadof night after the "great leader" had lamented in the "mosque" about whether there was no one who could "sort this" troublesome voice who lampooned the greatness of the leader. The assassin was praised in the morning by the great leader.

[SSridhar]

Headley arrest may have forced Pakistan to crack down on Taliban - Lisa Curtis

Revelations by Pakistani-American David Headley, an LeT operative charged with conspiring in the Mumbai attacks, may have prompted Islamabad to finally go after the Afghan-Taliban, a noted US scholar on South Asia has said. {I think some significant revelation by Headley also prompted the FS-level talks}

[RamaY]

Headley arrest may have forced Pakistan to crack down on Taliban - Lisa Curtis

Revelations by Pakistani-American David Headley, an LeT operative charged with conspiring in the Mumbai attacks, may have prompted Islamabad to finally go after the Afghan-Taliban, a noted US scholar on South Asia has said. {I think some significant revelation by Headley also prompted the FS-level talks}

Could it be that a faction of Taliban came much closer to the unmentionable item?

[SSridhar]

Could it be that a faction of Taliban came much closer to the unmentionable item?

I don't believe so. It was perhaps some damning revelation of the nexus between ISI and the Taliban.

[A_Gupta]

Just how Paki the Pakistanis are:

Dawn asked its readers to comment on whether India and Pakistan are like Tom and Jerry (the cat and mouse cartoon characters) (Kya India aur Pakistan Tom and Jerry hain?)

I wrote a couple of replies, addressing some of the comments there. They are still awaiting moderation. In the meantime the number of comments has more than doubled - and they have timestamps after mine, so the moderators have been active. Here are my two comments, both of which begin with

"Your comment is awaiting moderation." They are visible only from the computer where I posted the comments. I think I have been very mild, and yet it is unacceptable to the Dawn moderators.

India is the legal successor to British India, Pakistan is the new creation. Thus e.g., India is among the founding members of the United Nations; Pakistan’s membership dates to September 30, 1947. These are the facts, easily google-able.

Even while conceding Pakistan, Mahatma Gandhi told Jinnah – let us (India, Pakistan) separate as two brothers who do not want to stay in the same house (i.e., we remain brothers, though we separate). Jinnah did not agree, he said Muslims and Hindus are separate nations – the so-called “Two Nation Theory”. To see now Pakistanis apparently repudiate Jinnah saying that we have so much in common (or Indians repudiating Mahatma Gandhi, denying any commonality) is ironic in the extreme.

From the Indian point of view, I think they’d be satisfied with a cold peace with Pakistan. The main reason Pakistan impinges on Indian consciousness is because of the actions of Lashkar-e-Taiba and the like, which Indians believe are backed by the Pakistani army and the ISI. These actions are actual bomb blasts and attacks in India, as well as radicalization of Indian Muslim youth by these organizations.

Further, it is a common Indian impression that making any treaty with a Pakistani civilian government is pointless because it will be repudiated whenever the Pakistani military eventually overthrows this government. Until there is some continuity in civilian government in Pakistan and it shows it has firm control of defence and foreign policy, so the army becomes an instrument of the state instead of determining state policy, this mistrust will continue. Indians also believe that any Indian covert action in Pakistan ceased with Prime Minister I.K. Gujral (1997) whose Gujral Doctrine is supposedly still being followed.

Can there be peace? Yes, but this will require great patience. From the Indians’ side the distrust factors mentioned above will have to dissipate. And of course, Pakistanis have their own reasons to distrust India, they will have to decide when that can cease.

and

It is true though India is legally a continuation of the state that existed before 1947, India is new in many ways.

- For the first time in its very long history, India is not a land revenue state. In all previous regimes a good part of the government’s revenue was obtained by taxation of agricultural land.

- For the first time in its history, the legal equality of all citizens is enshrined in the law.

- For the first time in its history, the government is based on universal adult franchise.

Figuring out how my statements affect Pakistani H&D might be an interesting exercise in piskology. But even this much (such as "Indians believe that LeT...." instead of the bald "LeT is well-known to be...") is not acceptable it seems. Isn't this whole "talk to Pakistan" a farce?