120 Whither Kashmir? (Part II) - Islamabad Policy Research Institute

More documents

Recommendations

Info

30 IPRI Factfile within 5-6 years from the present level of only $2 billion a year. As a further sign of goodwill, Pakistan, responding to a long-standing request by India, agreed to provide its rail and road facilities for trade with Afghanistan. A memorandum of understanding (MoU) to that effect was signed by Pakistan’s Commerce Minister Makhdoom Amin Fahim on September 30, 2009. Despite these encouraging developments, however, the issue of the resumption of the Composite Dialogue remained unresolved. On the contrary, the relations between the two countries seemed to be sliding back to the pre-2004 phase of rising tensions and mounting hostility. There were skirmishes across the Line of Control (LoC) and clashes across the international border in Punjab; each side accusing the other of ‘unprovoked firing’. The repeated incidents of firing across the LoC were particularly worrying, because these incidents threatened to end the six year old ceasefire along the boundary in Kashmir, which was hailed as the most successful Confidence Building Measure (CBM) between Pakistan and India. The Indian Army Chief’s statement on his country’s strategic doctrine to develop the capability of fighting simultaneously on the Chinese and Pakistani fronts and the reaction from the Pakistani military leadership, added fuel to the fire in an already explosive situation. Resort to coercive diplomacy by India to get Pakistani compliance on the Mumbai terrorist attacks had already alienated Pakistani public opinion; the threatening statements from the Indian military and political leadership, and the treatment meted out to Pakistani cricketers in IPL selection led to the renewal of the old blame game between Islamabad and New Delhi. The elements in both countries who had never reconciled to peace and normalisation between Pakistan and India were quick to exploit the prevailing situation with their agenda of undermining any chance for peace between the two countries. Prime Minister Gilani was right when, early in September 2009, he said in a statement in Karachi that continued suspension of the Composite Dialogue between Pakistan and India could be exploited by the terrorists. The decision by Pakistan and India to hold a meeting at foreign secretaries’ level is fundamentally motivated by a desire by the two countries to prevent a further downslide in their bilateral relations. The decision also shows, once again, that Indian coercive diplomacy against Pakistan cannot succeed. The constant pressure from the international community, which nervously saw Pakistan-India relations relapsing into acrimony and hostility, is also an important factor in pushing these South
Whither Kashmir? Asian neighbours to the negotiating table once again. The fast changing geo-political scenario in the region, particularly expected developments after the London Conference on Afghanistan, has also impelled Pakistan and India to revisit their positions vis-à-vis terrorism and peace talks. Dr Rashid Ahmad Khan, Daily Times (Lahore), February 11, 2010. INDIA DOESN’T WANT TO TALK ON KASHMIR While composite dialogue is the only way forward for the resolution of all outstanding issues and India has offered Pakistan talks, New Delhi “does not want to talk on Kashmir”, Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani said on Thursday. “They have agreed to talk to Pakistan, but they don’t want to talk on Kashmir,” the AFP news agency quoted Gilani as saying on Thursday. The news agency reported that India’s offer for limited dialogue on terrorism has dismayed Islamabad. Way forward: Addressing reporters in Islamabad, the prime minister said dialogue was the only way to resolve problems between civilised nations. Asked if India did not want to talk on the Kashmir dispute, Gilani said “we should wait for India’s suggestions” on the resumption of the composite dialogue process. He said the Foreign Office and the foreign secretary were in contact with India, and “we should not jump to conclusions” over the outcome of the dialogue. Replying to another question, Gilani said judges would be appointed to superior courts in line with the law. The prime minister said while the country was facing multidimensional challenges, the Pakistan People’s Party-led government was planning to steer the country out of the crises. He said the government was “fully aware of its election manifesto” and working to address the grievances of the masses. AFP quoted an Indian government source as saying that while Pakistan had taken a “few small steps” needed for talks to resume, it had not gone far enough to merit a return to full dialogue. 31 Daily Times (Lahore), February 12, 2010.
Page 1 and 2: Whither Kashmir? WHITHER KASHMIR? (
Page 3 and 4: Whither Kashmir? 32. Conflicting Pe
Page 5: Whither Kashmir? The IPRI Factfile
Page 8 and 9: 2 IPRI Factfile share of assets to
Page 10 and 11: 4 IPRI Factfile almost uninterrupte
Page 12 and 13: 6 IPRI Factfile The media is perhap
Page 14 and 15: 8 IPRI Factfile This was not the on
Page 16 and 17: 10 IPRI Factfile I urge both India
Page 18 and 19: 12 IPRI Factfile of-the-box solutio
Page 20 and 21: 14 IPRI Factfile Kashmir. As of Jan
Page 22 and 23: 16 IPRI Factfile terror by neglecti
Page 24 and 25: 18 IPRI Factfile In the past, ‘co
Page 26 and 27: 20 IPRI Factfile non for a lasting
Page 28 and 29: 22 IPRI Factfile expressed wishes -
Page 30 and 31: 24 IPRI Factfile issue and Pakistan
Page 32 and 33: 26 IPRI Factfile insecurity and und
Page 34 and 35: 28 IPRI Factfile Gilani while talki
Page 38 and 39: 32 IPRI Factfile WHY RUSH TO DIALOG
Page 40 and 41: 34 IPRI Factfile take the wind out
Page 42 and 43: 36 IPRI Factfile women in Shopian h
Page 44 and 45: 38 IPRI Factfile rendered numerous
Page 46 and 47: 40 IPRI Factfile State) to Kashmir
Page 48 and 49: 42 IPRI Factfile Princely states, o
Page 50 and 51: 44 IPRI Factfile hospitality. Fruga
Page 52 and 53: 46 IPRI Factfile otherwise. War, th
Page 54 and 55: 48 IPRI Factfile KASHMIR LEADERS ME
Page 56 and 57: 50 IPRI Factfile the Chashma-Jhelum
Page 58 and 59: 52 IPRI Factfile his Pakistani coun
Page 60 and 61: 54 IPRI Factfile towards India whil
Page 62 and 63: 56 IPRI Factfile expenditures to th
Page 64 and 65: 58 IPRI Factfile Ok. But again let
Page 66 and 67: 60 IPRI Factfile all the stakeholde
Page 68 and 69: 62 IPRI Factfile never do under any
Page 70 and 71: 64 IPRI Factfile interests — whic
Page 72 and 73: 66 IPRI Factfile On March 20, the I
Page 74 and 75: 68 IPRI Factfile “There were 3240
Page 76 and 77: 70 IPRI Factfile like ‘will to fi
Page 78 and 79: 72 IPRI Factfile force.’ Sajjad S
Page 80 and 81: 74 IPRI Factfile Activists have all
Page 82 and 83: 76 IPRI Factfile called upon the pa
Page 84 and 85: 78 IPRI Factfile Article 21 of the
Page 86 and 87:
80 IPRI Factfile the adjudicative p
Page 88 and 89:
82 IPRI Factfile • June 3, 1947:
Page 90 and 91:
84 IPRI Factfile be decided through
Page 92 and 93:
86 IPRI Factfile Rise of Peaceful P
Page 94 and 95:
88 IPRI Factfile Kashmir by Indians
Page 96 and 97:
90 IPRI Factfile • August 2, 1996
Page 98 and 99:
92 IPRI Factfile being arrested, to
Page 100 and 101:
94 IPRI Factfile • September 23,
Page 102 and 103:
96 IPRI Factfile • September 24,
Page 104 and 105:
98 IPRI Factfile • May 26, 2009:
Page 106 and 107:
100 IPRI Factfile India. The meetin
Page 108 and 109:
102 IPRI Factfile • January 6 201
show all

120 Whither Kashmir? (Part II) - Islamabad Policy Research Institute

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?