Open Letter to Indian Political Leaders about Pakistan

[RajeshA]

If the worst-case scenario is so probable, and one can actually buy it, considering that the nukes in Pak are indeed, something of a loose canon, then we Indians should have been seeing enormous investments in nuclear bunkers, nuclear attack drills, radiation suits, etc. But since we do not see any of that, obviously Indian leadership does not believe in the "worst-case scenario"! So how dare they use the excuse to fool Indians!

[A_Gupta]

The worst case scenario is a low-probability event and people often use it to scare others and further their own political goals.

Nicholas Taleb in "The Black Swan: the impact of the Highly Improbable" would recommend being scared until we think about it and have steps to handle the situation.

[A_Gupta]

If the worst-case scenario is so probable, and one can actually buy it, considering that the nukes in Pak are indeed, something of a loose canon, then we Indians should have been seeing enormous investments in nuclear bunkers, nuclear attack drills, radiation suits, etc. But since we do not see any of that, obviously Indian leadership does not believe in the "worst-case scenario"! So how dare they use the excuse to fool Indians!

Nuclear bunkers, attack drills, etc., are all "make yourself feel good you are doing something" measures, I think that is one learning from the Cold War.

[abhishek_sharma]

Nicholas Taleb in "The Black Swan: the impact of the Highly Improbable" would recommend being scared until we think about it and have steps to handle the situation.

We should prepare for it. It does not imply that we should believe that the worst case scenario can happen any day. Expecting an unlikely event regularly is irrational.

People make sure that their homes and offices would be safe in the case of a fire or earthquake. As far as I know, they don't stop leading their normal lives expecting that an earthquake/fire would kill them any moment. Observing the behaviour patterns of a typical person would tell you what they expect from an average (not exceptional) day.

Similarly, although we should be prepared for all kinds of war, we should not assume that any military confrontation with Pakistan will turn nuclear.

[RajeshA]

If the worst-case scenario is so probable, and one can actually buy it, considering that the nukes in Pak are indeed, something of a loose canon, then we Indians should have been seeing enormous investments in nuclear bunkers, nuclear attack drills, radiation suits, etc. But since we do not see any of that, obviously Indian leadership does not believe in the "worst-case scenario"! So how dare they use the excuse to fool Indians!

Nuclear bunkers, attack drills, etc., are all "make yourself feel good you are doing something" measures, I think that is one learning from the Cold War.

That may or may not be true. But it still remains the benchmark for the leadership to consider the worst-case scenario as probable.

[Samudragupta]

The only messege i get from the actions of the leaders and forgive me Shiv for this post....India as a nation is not prepared to put the society in the state of war...we are still in the nation building stage....a disastrous war at this stage will be death knell for the civilizational revival....

[shiv]

For argument's sake, what is your response to - "the consequences of a totally failed, hostile and nuclear-armed state next door are unpredictable, and the worst-case scenarios are both horrendous and not improbable; in the worst case, even a daily 26/11 will seem like minor stuff. The only option open to us is to try to stave off this total collapse, and the only way to start that process is to talk - even if the talk seems absurd to the majority of educated Indians, and the parties we talk to have little in their control".

I have my own thoughts on the answer to this argument, want to see yours.

Dear Indian leader,

Thank you for your response.

I believe that Pakistan is already in a state of failure and remains nuclear armed. I am no more keen than you (dear neta) in entering into a cycle of events that might lead to nuclear war. I accept your argument that we must talk. The problem is who we should be talking to.

In my view talking to the civilian government is pointless. It has got us to where we are, with little progress on trade or terror. They have little say on matters relating to war or terrorism. You, dear leaders have never been able to entice the Pakistani army to talk to you except when the army has taken control in a coup. Have you invited the Pakistan army for talks?

Remember the last war in 1999? The Pakistani army claimed that it was waged by Mujahiddeen. The events of 26/11 in Mumbai were claimed by Pakistan to have been perpetrated by non state actors, with no involvement from the Pakistan army or civilian government. The Pakistani army has denied beheading an Indian soldier. I assume that if we must take the Pakistani word on this we will also have to talk to non state actors, for neither the Pakistan army nor the civilian government is able to control them, but both groups are quick to blame non state actors when violence against India occurs. Have you invited any non state actors for talks?

It is all very well to want to talk. A laudable and well intentioned aim. But we must talk to all power brokers in Pakistan. That should include the army and terrorist groups such as the LeT. Why do you restrict yourself to talking to the group with least power, the civilian leadership, and pretend that this will have an effect on the army and the non state actors' behavior?

If you do not want to talk to the Pakistan army and the non state actors, why simply talk to the impotent civilians? You are pretending that nuclear war might not occur without doing all you can to prevent it, and without talking to all the groups with whom we can try and negotiate to stop the horrendous consequences that you speak of.

You, dear neta, do not seem to know what to do. That is a dangerous situation and we can easily be pulled into war by the weak and directionless half measures you are taking. You really do not have a plan and it shows in the anxiety you express about what may happen and the failure of all the half-measures you have taken so far.

Would you be able to say why the idea of not talking to anyone in Pakistan would be more likely to cause war than the current aimless non strategy being followed by the Indian government?

shiv

[ramana]

Neville Chamberlain also led the Great Britain into World War II with his peace at any cost with Hitler's Germany drivel.
That appeasement did not prevent WWII and in fact emboldened Nazi Germany.

Same way MMS appaeasement of TSP will not bring peace and will lead eventually to war.

[RamaY]

For argument's sake, what is your response to - "the consequences of a totally failed, hostile and nuclear-armed state next door are unpredictable, and the worst-case scenarios are both horrendous and not improbable; in the worst case, even a daily 26/11 will seem like minor stuff. The only option open to us is to try to stave off this total collapse, and the only way to start that process is to talk - even if the talk seems absurd to the majority of educated Indians, and the parties we talk to have little in their control".

I have my own thoughts on the answer to this argument, want to see yours.

I wrote this blog post in 2010. I think it is still valid.

Is Talibanization of Pakistan in Indian Interests?

And in 2012

Pakistan after Taliban takeover - A prediction

[ramana]

Shiv, Looks like UPA is talking to LeT Hafiz Suar using Hurrirats as the interlocutors:

And these scum bags even had their Visas fast tracked by the government of India - what the hell!!!

The separatist Hurriyat Conference refused to divulge any details about its meeting with Lashkar-e-Tayyeba chief Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, saying people should not make noises about their Islamabad meetings.

"Whoever we meet, we speak our mind right into his heart, why should people make noises for just nothing," said professor Abdul Gani Bhat, senior Hurriyat leader.

Prof. Bhat was part of the seven-member delegation that visited Pakistan from December 15-28, 2012, and met the LeT chief, alleged mastermind of 26/11 Mumbai terror attack, among others.

The other members of the delegation were Hurriyat Conference chairman Dr Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, Bilal Gani Lone, Moulana Abbas Ansari, Aga Syed Al-Hasan, Musadiq Adil and Mukhtar Ahmad Waza.

Lashkar-e-Tayyeba chief Hafiz Mohammad Saeed

"How does it matter whom we meet? Whom we meet is not important, what you talk there is important," said Bhat, refusing to divulge what transpired during the meeting.

The Hurriyat describes its meeting with Saeed as unscheduled and says it took place without any government role in the matter.

He said Hurriyat seeks settlement of Kashmir dispute.

"We are not criminals. We are in politics, we represent sentiments. Why should people make it an issue," he insisted.

Mirwaiz was not available for comment.

During their stay in Pakistan, the Hurriyat leaders also met Pakistani president Asif Ali Zardari, prime minister Raja Pervez Ashraf, foreign minister Hina Rabbani Khar and other officials.

They met Opposition leaders Imran Khan and Mian Nawaz Sharief.

The Hurriyat delegation also met Pakistan Army chief Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani.

Since his return from Islamabad, Mirwaiz has linked resolution of Afghan problem with Kashmir and said India and Pakistan cannot have consensus on Afghanistan unless Kashmir was resolved.

Mirwaiz also calls for dismantling of Line of Control.

CM Omar Abdullah had hailed Mirwaiz for his Pakistan visit and described it as a positive development.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/in ... ds-newsxml

Also now we know why GOI says HS was in POK exhorting the SSG beheaders. He need to give a pep talk for he realised APHC was telling him that the cause is lost and LeT can go home.

Note the time period of the Hurrirat visit.

[pentaiah]

We are just a notional state.
The leadership, the citizery still think
If an Assamese is killed its not Indian killed for (rest of us)
If kanndiga is killed its a just Kanndiga
If a mallu fisherman is killed its just a keralite who died


There is no feeling of our citizen who was behaeded serving the whole of country, it was just choice of bad job and that too he is not a VIP anyway.


Also what is there to talk?
Give up an entire state to another country?
What is this unique privileges bestowed on state which no other state enjoys or claims?
Who is begging for talks and for what?

Our scum is in our front yard Hurri rats need some pesticide to get rid of pestillence and the CM of the state agrees?

[RamaY]

^ So HS is not listening to APHC and is pushing for larger LeT agenda as part of TSPA.

Will APHC realize this and become indian?

[Prem Kumar]

Is the "breakthrough" that MMS is looking for look like this:

1) Pakistan gives up the Kashmir cause
2) India gives up the Afghan cause (like we had any). LeT will be redirected by Pakistan towards Afghanistan for strategic depth
3) Demilitarization of Siachen
4) Minimize troops on LoC
5) Withdraw AFSPA in Kashmir
6) India will not interfere in Balochistan (like we ever did)

[Philip]

Rajesh,I appreciate the nuance.You know,this reminds me of that old tale about the stupid villagers weeping and wailing because the moon had fallen into a pool! But,seriously speaking,one hears the phrase "my bad time" ever so often,when adversity hits someone,accepting defeat in stead of trying to reverse the situation.

I ask the Q,whether some of our top leadership have compromised themselves and their loyalty to the nation by consistently toeing the Yanqui line,that of establishing "peace with Pak" at any cost.The tremendous unwillingness to do anything to Pak despite a decade of perfidy against India is simply incomprehensible.

I do not know even if a million letters like Shiv bombard the PM's office or 10 Janpath,the ordinary people of India are held in such contempt -as we saw during the protests against the gang rape of India's brave-heart ,by the political elite headed by the widow with the stone-heart.

[ramana]

^ So HS is not listening to APHC and is pushing for larger LeT agenda as part of TSPA.

Will APHC realize this and become indian?

No. APHC is a US creation. It was created by R Raphael in 1993. Their golmal is to create a third option of an independent Cashmere where US will be the protector.

Sort of two monkeys with the roti and the wise cat story in Panchatantra.

[ramana]

Is the "breakthrough" that MMS is looking for look like this:

1) Pakistan gives up the Kashmir cause
2) India gives up the Afghan cause (like we had any). LeT will be redirected by Pakistan towards Afghanistan for strategic depth
3) Demilitarization of Siachen
4) Minimize troops on LoC
5) Withdraw AFSPA in Kashmir
6) India will not interfere in Balochistan (like we ever did)

1) Will make the raison-de-etre(commonly known as raisins) for TSP to exist invalid.

2)If LeT goes to Afghania they will become the new bakra/goat for the Pashtuns.


But muddled thinking (with ample lifafa from US) might produce this agenda from India.

[kish]

This is an attempted political satire, not to mock anybody's feelings. Mentioned below would be the typical response from Netas, cheered from the sidelines by wkks,RNIs & jollawallas to divert the attention away from terrorist attacks, paki aggression. And to prevent Bharat from achieving anything in meaningful in science & Technology or military.

Dear concerned Indian,

Before giving you a point by poing rebuttal, Let me give you some basic facts about India. After reading these facts, you will understand how in a communally charged environment (yes, you guessed it "saffron terrorism") we(Netas) gave a befitting reply to pakistani provocations like kargil, Parliament attack, 26/11 attacks.

Facts of India (as per RNIs,WKKs,Netas):
1) 98% of Indians live on less than $2 a day
2) 53% of Indians live on less than $1 a day
3) India tops Global Hunger Index, 100% Indians are hungry before they eat
4) 84% of Indians have stunted growth, Yes Ishant sharma would have grown taller if not for malnutrition.
5) India has worst Gender equality, worse than peaceful placess like Baakistan, saoudi babaria, Cheena.
6) Lack of Toilets. 99% Indians use Indian toilets, not the western ones and hence considered open defecation.
7) India has communicable disease. 24 million people died last month of deadly disease. 23 million of those watched Indo-pak cricket series.
8.) Internal migrant labourers(Bangladeshis) live on less than Rs.20 rupees a day.
9) Majority community discriminates minorities. They study well and take up all the jobs, leaving no jobs for minority.
10) And 22 million troops in kashmeer.

If you don't believe netas, read any UN report or ask Arundirty Roy or any other jollawallas.

Inspite of all these, we gave pakis a befitting reply. During the kargil war, We found out Indian army needed artilary and weapons locating radars. We humiliated pakistan by letting IA fight without these weapons and won the war.

Aftermath of Parliament attack, we realized its a direct attack on us. So, we increased our security 10 fold. You can be rest assured that henceforth no netas will ever die of terrorist attack.

Our best response came after 26/11. We kept sending dozens of dossiers, till they complained about eye pain after reading the huge volume of literature.

As far as peace with bakistan is concerned, that is only option left for comman man like you. To beg pakis not to attack you. See, we are doing our duty religiously despite our business interests(like 2G scam,commonwealth games, Land mine scams, weapons deals scam,etc). We are going the extra mile to give peace a chance and signing whatever papers the pakis give us like Sharm-el-shaik joint declaration. And we are also giving Paani, Bijli, train engines,etc to protect comman man like you from future terrorist attacks. Thats it for now, see you during the elections.

yours faithfully,
Netas
Caption(The man who sees you every 5 years)

[Prem]

^ So HS is not listening to APHC and is pushing for larger LeT agenda as part of TSPA.

Will APHC realize this and become indian?

Sappa de putt mitt na hunde, chahe daily Dhudh pilayye Ji
Kaanwa de putt Hans na bande, chahe sau munn Sabun layye ji
Kutte di poonch tedi Rehnde ,chahhe Saala siddhi krayy ji
RNI kadhi Bharti Na bannde, chahe hazar saal Namak Khwayye Ji.

Its just the beginning of the realization in the Motherland that leaders have sold their soul and our soil for secular studpidity. They are killing Bhumiputra to feed the lowly Varahakaturas. Nothing can save India unless the shift in current political paradigm. Guillotine Neerre ke God will fix the pagal hogs!

[shiv]

Dear concerned Indian,

Before giving you a point by poing rebuttal, Let me give you some basic facts about India. After reading these facts, you will understand how in a communally charged environment (yes, you guessed it "saffron terrorism") we(Netas) gave a befitting reply to pakistani provocations like kargil, Parliament attack, 26/11 attacks.

Facts of India (as per RNIs,WKKs,Netas):
1) 98% of Indians live on less than $2 a day
2) 53% of Indians live on less than $1 a day
3) India tops Global Hunger Index, 100% Indians are hungry before they eat
4) 84% of Indians have stunted growth, Yes Ishant sharma would have grown taller if not for malnutrition.
5) India has worst Gender equality, worse than peaceful placess like Baakistan, saoudi babaria, Cheena.
6) Lack of Toilets. 99% Indians use Indian toilets, not the western ones and hence considered open defecation.
7) India has communicable disease. 24 million people died last month of deadly disease. 23 million of those watched Indo-pak cricket series.
8.) Internal migrant labourers(Bangladeshis) live on less than Rs.20 rupees a day.
9) Majority community discriminates minorities. They study well and take up all the jobs, leaving no jobs for minority.
10) And 22 million troops in kashmeer.

If you don't believe netas, read any UN report or ask Arundirty Roy or any other jollawallas.



yours faithfully,
Netas
Caption(The man who sees you every 5 years)

Dear Netas

Thank you for repeating what is well known about India. Your list can be found in any western media publication about India and I am delighted to see that you too read them.

But respected neta, I cannot see how any of the points you have made will be improved by talking to some Pakistani or playing cricket with Pakistanis? For example, if we allow more Pakistanis in, we have greater chances of re introducing polio in India. I agree that stopping Pakistanis from coming will not stop infiltration attempts and polio may come in via that route, but why are we inviting them and calling Pakistanis into India and increasing the risk?

What has been achieved by talking to Pakistanis?

1. Has infiltration stopped?
2. Have border incidents stopped?
3. Has Kashmir become safer?
4. Have Khalistan hijackers been handed over for the 1980s hijackings?
5. Has Dawood Ibrahim been handed over for the 1993 Mumbai blasts
6. Has Hafiz Saeed been punished for his role in 26/11/2008
7. Has India's economy improved or the number of toilets in India increased because you are talking to Pakistan?
8. If Pakistanis words are so important to us why don't we listen to the and do what they want and hope they help us. Why not Advaniji and Modiji give themselves up as criminals because the Pakistanis call them criminals?
9. What is the exact reason for telling the Indian public that we must talk to Pakistan? Do you believe that we want to hear what the Pakistanis have to say and that we cannot hear it from the media unless you talk?

Sorry if I am asking too many questions.

shiv

[shiv]

Cross post

The Vice President speaketh - The Hindu

“The definition of diplomacy is to continue negotiating at all times under all conditions. So there is work for diplomats to do. Neighbours can’t be wished away; they are a fact of life. So we have to continue talking … and talking from a position of dignity and rectitude,” he said in answer to a question on whether there was a need to review the country’s relationship with Pakistan in light of the killing and mutilation of two Indian soldiers last week.

Mr. Vice President, talk as much as you can, but also act once in a while especially when an Indian soldier is beheaded and his head taken away as a trophy and another is mutilated or when an urbam guerrilla warfare happens for three days in mega city like Mumbai killing nealy 200 innocents, or when repeated multi-city serial bomb blasts take place killing a few hundred, or when commuter trains in Mumbai are regularly targetted killing a few hundred.

What have your talks achieved so far ? The ruling political class has to understand the depth of anger in this country. There is a time for talking and there is a time exclusively for action alone. Many a time before we were needed to act firmly but we didn't and we continue to pay a heavy price because we only talked like a chatterbox. On the other hand, whenever we acted, in those few and extremely rare cases when we had been pushed too far and we had no more space left to be pushed any further, the results were telling.

The India-Pakistan relationship is moving certainly towards such a denouement. We can talk provided that is a ruse to lull Pakistan into a complacency that the dhimmi India was once again exhibiting its characteristic behaviour, and we hit them very hard most unexpectedly. Till that time, Mr. Vice President, I will hold my earlier judgement of the GoI, which is that it is almost exclusively composed of cowardly men and women who belong to a long bygone era.

[Pratyush]

^ So HS is not listening to APHC and is pushing for larger LeT agenda as part of TSPA.

Will APHC realize this and become indian?

The AHPC had nearly 25 years to realise that the TSP was not interested in J&K for j&Ks sake. But only to further its interests. If they have not understood TSP. Then expecting the an exchange with HS will make them understand is a futile hope.

[Pratyush]

Dear Netas

Thank you for repeating what is well known about India. Your list can be found in any western media publication about India and I am delighted to see that you too read them.

But respected neta, I cannot see how any of the points you have made will be improved by talking to some Pakistani or playing cricket with Pakistanis? For example, if we allow more Pakistanis in, we have greater chances of re introducing polio in India. I agree that stopping Pakistanis from coming will not stop infiltration attempts and polio may come in via that route, but why are we inviting them and calling Pakistanis into India and increasing the risk?

What has been achieved by talking to Pakistanis?

1. Has infiltration stopped?
2. Have border incidents stopped?
3. Has Kashmir become safer?
4. Have Khalistan hijackers been handed over for the 1980s hijackings?
5. Has Dawood Ibrahim been handed over for the 1993 Mumbai blasts
6. Has Hafiz Saeed been punished for his role in 26/11/2008
7. Has India's economy improved or the number of toilets in India increased because you are talking to Pakistan?
8. If Pakistanis words are so important to us why don't we listen to the and do what they want and hope they help us. Why not Advaniji and Modiji give themselves up as criminals because the Pakistanis call them criminals?
9. What is the exact reason for telling the Indian public that we must talk to Pakistan? Do you believe that we want to hear what the Pakistanis have to say and that we cannot hear it from the media unless you talk?

Sorry if I am asking too many questions.

shiv

Dear Concerned Indian,

WTF, do you think you are, we are the supreme rulers of this land. Our will the word of god. If you plan to question us. Then we would advice you to leave the country. Gaand me bahut khujli ho rahie hai, tujhe. Bloody Upper cast hindu. Think about the SC/STs you oppressed. The noble state of Pakistan with its glorious army / holy warriors is the gods vengeance on you. You will do well to accept it and repent. Better yet convert.

You benevolent neta.

[A_Gupta]

Shiv, thanks for your answer.

My answer is that by displaying softness or weakness, one's greatest fears become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Even without drawing weapons or starting a fight, one has to stand firm that certain behavior is unacceptable and there will be no dialog until that behavior stops. This has to be a firm principle.

[shiv]

Shiv, thanks for your answer.

My answer is that by displaying softness or weakness, one's greatest fears become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Even without drawing weapons or starting a fight, one has to stand firm that certain behavior is unacceptable and there will be no dialog until that behavior stops. This has to be a firm principle.

I agree.

The Indian political set up and their bureaucrat advisors do not seem to have grasped that Pakistan is not a normal nation state and cannot be treated like one.

It is a failing state and it is pointless holding talks, issuing visas and claiming that progress is being made. The government does not know and does not want to learn from many of us who have spent time studying Pakistan and its history. Thy really need to open their eyes and see how stupid they look every time Pakistan bites them on their asses. Only - Indians get killed when that happens - so its not funny.

Pakistan is not a normal country. How the fu(k does the government of India try to maintain "normal" relations with such a country? Our leaders are sounding more and more and more stupid as time passes. It's a real shame.

[ramana]

You need to take into account that its the appeasing the US that is the unseen hand going on.


Lets look at some facts
- TSPA is the enabler of AlQaeda, Taliban and LeT
- The 9/11 attack was directly conducted by AlQaeda hosted by Taliban and enabled by TSPA
- The US invaded Afghanistan, rooted out Al Qaeda and Taliban from there and sent them to TSP
- Killing of a number of AlQ#3s and finally AlQ #1 in TSP shows that the safe haven is TSP.
--ALQ#2 is still roaming in TSP under TSPA protection.
- Meantime US beggared itself in Iraq and the banking industry crisis(2006-2008) and has no money to see the problem through
- US needs to get out of Afghanistan without the Saigon moment.
- US needs TSPA to rein in its irregualrs to prevent that Saigon moment.
-- US has made deals to rehabilitate the TSPA back into the drivers seat after tryst with 10% and his facade of civlian rule.
- Funds have been restored to TSPA
- Miliatry arms are in pipeline
- Jihadi pasand Kerry is the SD
- US also has leaned on India to prevent pressure on TSPA. The farcial piss process, Visas on arrival, banning cotton exports, reducing basmati rice export quotas, inviting TSP leaders (Rehman Malik etc) who abuse their hosts in India, the non-response to the beheading are all there for us to see.
But nothing above prevents GOI from taking steps to protect their own people and land.
Its in the GOI/DIE DNA to crawl when asked to be lenient!

[ramana]

Shiv, Newsinsight.net has an op-ed by NV Subramanian on the very same subject of TSP and need for 1971 redux. Fortunately at that time we had KS garu to articulate and make the case in public and in govt circles. Misfortunately now we have pale shadows running the govt. (MMS and SSM).

1971 Redux?

1971 redux?
Pakistan must be assisted out of its misery by breaking it up.
By N.V. Subramanian (11 January 2013)

New Delhi: Pakistan is a military-jihadi state. Such a state needs an enemy to sustain and justify its military-jihadi structure and institutions. If such an enemy is not available, the state invents the enemy. India is Pakistan’s invented enemy. The enemy must be warred against (1947-48, 1965, 1971 and 1999), attacked through terrorist proxies (the most audacious being the sea strike on Bombay in November 2008), and bled (this week’s Mendhar barbarity). The cliche is true that the Pakistan state exists for the military and jihadis. Elections are grudgingly allowed so that Pakistanis have the false comfort of having elected rulers. In reality, nothing changes. The military enriches its own, gets all the fighting toys it needs and more at the cost of the people, grabs the deterrent and makes it a phony national symbol, and then defiantly and insolently applies the nuclear squeeze on allies and invented enemies alike. Pakistan’s ever-growing size of deterrent limits India’s military options. And the fear that some of Pakistan’s hundred or more nuclear weapons and large fissile stocks would fall into terrorist hands or be leaked to jihadis drives the United States and the rest of the West into insane placations of the military with more aid and weapons, strengthening the vicious cycle. This hasn’t stopped Pakistan’s state failure. Its economy is in ruins. Infrastructure has collapsed. Power and water shortages are endemic. And terrorists of various descriptions are slowly but surely taking over the country. Their ultimate aim appears to be to seize control of the nuclear weapons and make a confederate caliphate of Pakistan and Afghanistan.

What must India do about Pakistan?

Other than working towards the dismantling of Pakistan and denuclearizing it, there is no other solution. In the wake of the Mendhar atrocity, there have been cogent voices seeking targeted assassinations of terrorist leaders like Hafiz Mohammed Sayeed, who was reported in the area days before the Mendhar tragedy. As a short-term measure, this is unavoidable. But its overall success may not equal that obtained from the killing of Osama Bin Laden, even if one assumes that India is prepared for and can adequately handle the repercussions. Bin Laden was the Al-Qaeda. He represented the state the Al-Qaeda did not have or was dispossessed of when the Americans ran it out of Afghanistan. When Bin Laden was knocked off, this writer was alone to analyze that Al-Qaeda was finished, as it is. That is not the case with Pakistani terrorists like Hafiz Sayeed. The Pakistani military-jihadi state created Hafiz Sayeed and others to prosecute the state policy of terrorism against India. Among the others was Masood Azhar of the Jaish-e-Mohammed who fell afoul of the Pakistan military and is rarely heard today. If Hafiz Sayeed goes, he will be replaced. Hafiz Sayeed is a deniable instrument. If India succeeds in or two targeted assassinations, successive terrorist leaders would come under military protection. If they have to be snatched like Bin Laden from a garrison town like Abbottabad, it is possible but potentially escalatory in military terms, which, because it can tip in the nuclear direction, is loaded with imponderables and thus self-limiting. The United States is thousands of miles away from Pakistan which cannot and won’t dare to attack its mainland for the reprisal would be quick and monstrously disproportionate. India is a neighbour which has still to reconcile to the presence of a rogue state on the west. In the short-term, targeted assassinations will be effective, but it is not the silver bullet to contain a barbarous Pakistan.

The only solution is to take Pakistan’s state failure to its logical conclusion. No country in the world save perhaps Israel would assist India in this process, but India has enough capabilities not to want any assistance from anyone. Pakistan has forfeited the right to exist as a state. It must be broken along its faultlines of Punjab, Sind, Baluchistan and the aptly renamed Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. India has the capacity to do so, which was exhibited in 1971 in another sector in more difficult circumstances. Assisting India is the internal collapse of Pakistan and the spread of terrorism throughout the military-jihadi state as a karmic blowback. With Pakistan broken, its most likely successor state, Punjab, would be unable to keep nuclear weapons, and that would commence the welcome denuclearization of the territory west of India. Four rump states is a tolerable proposition for India than a united, nuclear terror state. It will be a project that will require the best minds, treasure, executive audacity, and implicit national political consensus.

India needs to cleanse the sub-continent of Pakistan, and it must begin now.

[Prem]

1971 Redux?

1971 redux?
Pakistan must be assisted out of its misery by breaking it up.
By N.V. Subramanian (11 January 2013) What must India do about Pakistan?
India needs to cleanse the sub-continent of Pakistan, and it must begin now.

Welcome Brother In Thought , May Bhagwan Remove Vanity And Bring Sanity To Our Ruling Liddhers !!

Liddh+Phose=Fresh Bovine Dung Pile

[shiv]

Shiv, Newsinsight.net has an op-ed by NV Subramanian on the very same subject of TSP and need for 1971 redux. Fortunately at that time we had KS garu to articulate and make the case in public and in govt circles. Misfortunately now we have pale shadows running the govt. (MMS and SSM).

1971 Redux?

Brilliant article - says it like it is. Thanks

Are or leaders just ignorant? Or are they at a loss for ideas.

I suspect that they may be ignorant because if they knew, they would at least say things about Pakistani state failure that should be said out in the open.

Our netas treat Pakistan just like they treat France and Britain.

[shiv]

Dear Neta,

Pakistan had a 20% population of Hindus and Sikhs in 1947. That percentage has fallen to less than 2% in 2013. In India, the population of Muslims has grown from about 45 million in 1947 to about 160 million in 2013. If Pakistan is a normal country, why is it unsafe for Hindus and Sikhs? If India is hostile to Muslims why has the population of Muslims increased?

If Hindus are unsafe in Pakistan, why do we need "normal" trade and diplomatic relations with Pakistan? Do you believe in the Asaram Bapu philosophy that a girl who is about to be raped should call her rapist a brother and expect not to get raped? Do you believe that Indians should treat Pakistanis as brothers and expect that all will be well? Why crticize Asaram Bapu when the Indian government follows a policy similar to that suggested by Asaram Bapu?

Dear neta, did you know that Muslims come in different varieties like Shia, Sunni and Ahmedi? You do not allow your census people to count Shias and Sunnis separately the way you count forward castes and backward castes among Hindus. Hindu are better split up and Muslims are better as a bloc, so maybe you don't know that there may be 30 million Shias in India? Do you know that in Pakistan Ahmedis have to declare that they are not Muslims if they want a passport? Did you know that Ahmedis are being targeted and killed in Pakistan? Did you know that 125 Shia Muslims were kiled in Pakistan in a massacre in the first week of 2013?

Do you believe that Sunnis have a more special place in Islam that Shias and Ahmedis? If you disagree, why do you insist on better relations with a Pakistan in which Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Shia and Ahmedi Muslims are unsafe? Do you really believe that Pakistan is a "normal country"? Do you believe that in the course of normal trade and travel India's 1 billion Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Shias and Ahemdis will be happy and safe as they travel as private citizens to Pakistan because you did not warn them of the dangers faced by religious minorities in Pakistan?

Dear leaders of India. Show me one statement made by an Indian Prime Minister or Foreign minister telling Indians that minorities like Hindus, Sikhs, Christians. Ahmedis and Shias are unsafe in Pakistan? I might be wrong, but all that I have heard from you dear leaders is that we must maintain friendly relations with Pakistan? Respected leader. Are you merely blind. Or are you callous? How can there be people to people relationship between a dangerous country like Pakistan and India? You are shirking your responsibility to Indians by lying to them about Pakistan. But I am willing to say that maybe you are just ignorant. Maybe you can still learn and understand. I pray for that to happen because there is little else I can do. You have the power. You have the media. You have the voice.

I apologize for sounding angry and upset. But I am heading to be a senior citizen and I think I have seen and understood much more about Pakistan than many of the younger generation of Indian politicians and diplomats. They may understand the truth f someone points them towards it.

shiv

[Prem]

Right now we have Deer Neta/s caught in light.

[shiv]

The hostility industry: Mani Shankar Aiyar

Respected Mani Sahankar Aiyer ji,

I read your book "Pakistan Papers" and enjoyed it because I thought you knew. But I now realize that you belong to an upper class of Indan elite who finds that he has more in common with the elite of Pakistan than the ordinary citizen of India, Forgive me for saying this sir, but you seem to be out of touch with Indian citizens, busy as you are in the hallowed corridors of Delhi.

You say that there is a hostility industry supported by the following types of people: "retired generals, superannuated ambassadors, and — the most dangerous of the breed — demobbed short service officers turned diplomats,". Sir. You seem to know no Indian beyond this elite group whom you dislike. My own peer group and I do not belong to your list but we agree with the sentiment that we should not be dealing with Pakistan the way you advise. You are wrong sir. Let me make a few points to show how wrong you are and how misleading your words can get as your rhetoric extends far beyond reality.

For example you have stated:"First, whereas the horrors of 1947 were the direct outcome of three decades of stoking the highest levels of communal animosity in our 5,000-year-old history of unity in diversity". Sir you are substituting words for knowledge. Our 5000 year history had no Islam for Hindu-Muslim communalism to occur for the first 4000 years. There are records of earlier massacres that you do not want to mention as you set about giving a verbal thrashing to your favorite whipping boys. Come down a notch from your high horse sir. Poyi solruthu thevai illai. History neenge mattum padichirukkingen nenekaadinguh.

You say: "There is a huge mindset change occurring in Pakistan". Sir - only the elite Pakistanis who are your friends are now beginning to see the problem in their country. The average Pakistani, one of 180 million Pakistanis who contribute to the Jamaat ud Dawa have not had any change of mindset. Sir you are a man in power. Have you asked an Indian polling company to poll opinions of Pakistanis in Pakistan about India? If not, have you read what Pakistanis feel about India in polls done by western agencies? Sir in the absence of a poll you are merely talking of Pakistan based on your personal impression and you have the power to make your personal impressions into national policy.

You are wrong sir.

[merlin]

Can this open letter be posted on Facebook etc? To reach more people than those who come here. With or without proper attribution as shiv pleases?

[Sushupti]

[SSridhar]

Shiv has written in Tamil (in italics above) two sentences. For the non-Tamil speaking audience, he says: There is no need to lie. Don't think that only you have read history.

[disha]

As Kao once said (with change in verbiage mine) "Let the bakis stew in their own juice"

[Philip]

NVS is only echoing what the great majority of us on BR having been saying ever since Kargil.After 26/11 we have been crying as loud as ever,but the political and babu castrati in Delhi have their own vested interests in pursuing their "Piss in our time" policy of appeasement with Pak.The time for dhoti shudder will be when the armed froces unitedly tell the chief of the castrati that if another outrage takes place they will be hard put to keep their soldiers guns quiet and that it would be better that the guns were aimed at the Pakis than the castrati of Delhi!

[PratikDas]

Thank you, Shiv ji.

Unfortunately, I find it difficult to offer the Netas the benefit of the doubt when they keep advocating Aman ki Asha, and I find it difficult to be as respectful as you are. Nevertheless, I take my proverbial pagdi off to you, Sir.

[PratikDas]

Moderator(s), please consider making this thread a Sticky. Not doing so would deprive many of an education.

[ShauryaT]

Shiv ji: Let me post a viewpoint, which comes remarkably close to my view of the situation - minus the histrionics that many display (for or against current GoI policy for TSP) - not pointing to you.

The reality principle

The misfortune of our public discourse is that often demagoguery masquerades as realism. It represents restraint as an act of cowardice or naivety. In some quarters, there may be a romantic naivety, but our policy has been a hard-headed realist one. Manmohan Singh has a lot to answer for. He has brought governance and economy to the brink, creating a deep sense of vacuum. But his Pakistan policy cannot be blamed for being naive or woolly headed. On the contrary, it is informed by a profound realism.

Some defenders of engagement with Pakistan sometimes make the large assumption that Pakistani public opinion has changed decisively. The honest answer is that we do not know. Certainly, there is a great desire in Pakistan to emancipate itself from its current troubles. Confrontation with India does not help. And individual to individual relations are always charming love festivals. But it is too soon to say whether this is a decisive structural shift. The receptivity to conspiracy theories about what India might be doing in Afghanistan is still remarkably high; and public sentiment is often a very contextual thing. So while there is reason to be cautiously optimistic, this cannot be the basis of our dealings with Pakistan. In any case, in Pakistan, the disjuncture between the state security apparatus and public sentiment is deep. The state structure operates almost sui generis, with a logic of its own, and it would be foolish to assume that improving the sentiment among the people will automatically translate into greater security for us. It does not even translate into greater security for Pakistanis. But no sensible peacenik has made this assumption.

In a curious way, the assumptions behind the prime minister’s policy have always been the opposite. The fact of the matter is that Pakistan is a society in which all its internal domestic contradictions are now playing out with full force: Shia-Sunni tensions, the relations between Islamabad and the provinces, particularly Balochistan, the basic allocation of powers between civilian and military rule, and the role of the clergy, make for a volatile mix. As Farzana Shaikh has powerfully argued, the easiest way to paper over these contradictions is to invoke the threat of the external enemy, India. Some have argued that anti-Americanism now runs deeper in Pakistani politics than anti-Indianism. This may be true. But anti-Americanism has a different political valence, not the least because it is as much a weapon the military uses to extract rents as anything else. Anyone with a deep sense of history knows that an enduring peace with Pakistan can come only if there is a stable resolution of its own identity crisis. We have to prepare ourselves that this resolution may be volatile and we have to deal with the consequences. The best thing we can do is let Pakistan wallow in its own internal contradictions, and not short circuit the process. The surest way of making the military establishment stronger is war talk.

We also need to reflect on the sheer limitations of the instruments we have to deal with a state like Pakistan. American policy, with its billions of dollars and penchant for militarisation, has had relatively little success in two of its core objectives: counter-terrorism and non-proliferation. All that policy did was redirect the violence, not contain it. America will once again have to continue to cosy up to the Pakistani military establishment. Heightened tension between India and Pakistan will paradoxically legitimise this cosying up even more. Our own experience is also worth reflecting on. A big war triumph in 1971 did not lead us to winning peace. On the contrary, we still are coming to terms with the fact that a wounded and sulking power is an even more dangerous, mercurial and elusive beast. The consequences of Operation Parakram are still hotly debated; whether it sent a strong signal or undermined the credibility of our threats is still an open question. But the way it unfolded violated the cardinal rule of showing force in international relations: you had better be sure that what you do will yield results, not send a signal that you are about empty threats. Third, given how cheap machismo is, it always bears repeating that both India and Pakistan are nuclear powers. We also know that the possession of nuclear weapons limits conventional options. It is to the credit of Indian leaders, from Vajpayee to Manmohan Singh, that while recognising the necessity of these weapons, they have never flinched from understanding their enormity. It is often said that our risk averseness has become a millstone around our neck. It allows Pakistan to inflict damage without fear of retaliation. This argument is more complicated, but on the whole, we are safer with risk averseness than escalations whose logic we do not understand.

This is particularly true because no matter how much outrage and helplessness we feel, our actual appetite for war is very limited, and in their hearts, most political leaders know this. Indian democracy’s finest hour was not to succumb to any hysterical temptation in the face of 26/11. As much as it tried, the BJP could not politically capitalise on it. It is in this context that Sushma Swaraj’s loose talk, besides being irresponsible, is politically stupid. It makes her appear less trustworthy as a custodian of power, not more. You could argue that we have made a virtue of necessity: simply renamed weakness as restraint. But once in a while our cautious prudence deserves more credit. It is a source of strength that has, all things considered, served us much better than illusions of force peddled by self-styled realists.

Give the prime minister’s realism a little more credit. He has talked to Pakistan. Exaggerated rumours notwithstanding, he has not given away anything. This realism, following Vajpayee, has changed the international discourse on Kashmir. We have a long way to go. But it has given us the best chance we have had in decades of restoring some normalcy to Kashmir. It is such realism that has increased the asymmetry between Pakistan’s and India’s standing globally. Of course, we need options to deal with a situation like this. And our governance problems are gnawing away at defence capabilities. But it is not clear that stopping talks, trade or civil society relations gives us any more options. This engagement will give you more options in the future not less, which is why the Pakistan establishment abhors it. As that realist Bismarck knew, realism is about playing a long-term game of chess, not about the self-destructive Charge of the Light Brigade.

[PratikDas]

It is sad that the torrent of criticism substantiated with facts is dismissed as histrionics, that the open letter this thread is about is not even addressed. and the one article that calls the government's inaction chanakyan because MMS has "talked to Pakistan" is held above fact and precedence.