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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

60 IPRI Factfile all the stakeholders including the various political parties and the military leadership, as well as the representatives of AJK and Gilgit-Baltistan governments, consulted? Were friends like China and other states in the Middle East and Central Asia, who are stakeholders in the future of this region, taken into confidence? Unfortunately, nothing is clear except that even Parliament was not consulted. Above all, the statements made by our Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir before his departure, painting a rosy picture as a result of the expected dialogue, was really surprising. He ought to have known - exactly - the nature of the hot soup awaiting at the Hyderabad House luncheon. Then on his return, Mr Bashir’s stated: “India must change its perception about Pakistan,” adding that, “Islamabad was not desperate for pursuing meaningless and cosmetic dialogue. We have made it clear to India that terrorism is an international challenge and it should not be portrayed as only Pakistan’s problem.” I wish our foreign secretary would have made such sentiments crystal clear to New Delhi before proceeding on a thoughtless joy ride to Delhi. It seems that Pakistan has learnt no lessons from past negotiations with India. But it is never too late. Ikramullah, The Nation (Islamabad), March 7, 2010. http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-englishonline/Opinions/Columns/07-Mar-2010/Conflicting-perceptions INDIAN TACTICS ARE UNCHANGED Foreign Minister Shah Mehmud Qureshi’s remark at his Press conference in Multan recently that Pakistan wants ‘result oriented and purposeful dialogue’ with India to resolve the outstanding issues, but ‘it’s not in hurry and can wait for meaningful dialogue’ seemingly represents Pakistan’s understanding of the Indian tactics on the issue of dialogue process between the two countries. He said that Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir, who visited India last month on Indian invitation, presented Pakistan’s point of view on all issues including Kashmir and water, besides highlighting its position on the dialogue process. The issue of terrorism was also discussed, he added. A cursory look at the history of Pak-India ties reveals the bitter truth that the Indian government has ridiculed Pakistani leadership again and again over its anxiety for resumption of the ‘composite dialogue’ between the two countries. It has persisted with the ‘blow hot blow cold’
Whither Kashmir? policy with Pakistan right from the beginning. It has now attached the condition that Pakistan should ‘control’ the non-state actors allegedly involved in the acts of terrorism on the Indian soil for resumption of the dialogue. In his latest remarks on the issue in the Indian Parliament, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh conceded that ‘dialogue is the only way forward for civilized countries to resolve their problems’, yet he adamantly said: ‘for any meaningful dialogue to proceed, the terror machine has to be controlled by Pakistan even if non state actors are at work’. And he said so despite the fact that the successive Indian governments have miserably failed over the decades to ‘control’ insurgencies in several Indian states, where freedom fighters are pursuing their struggle for liberation from the Indian yoke. The people of these states are waging wars for freedom. And incidentally occupied Kashmir is one of those states where the Kashmiri people are also fighting for emancipation from Indian domination. Kashmir, in fact, has a unique status since India has committed itself at the UN Security Council to allow the Kashmiri people their inalienable right to self determination to decide their own destiny. On the contrary, India is brutalizing the Kashmiris with the help of its military might to suppress their spirit for freedom. It can, however, dominate them militarily, but cannot crush their fortitude for freedom. It has failed to do so over the past six decades and shall not succeed in future as well since the people willing to render supreme sacrifices for freedom are bound to triumph ultimately. The attack on the Indian Parliament and the Mumbai incident are a manifestation of the Kashmiris’ determination to liberate themselves from the Indian control. India should better accept this truth howsoever bitter and sour. India’s demand that Pakistan should ‘control’ the Kashmiris involved in the terror activities on the Indian soil is unjust and untenable. If India has not succeeded in crushing the insurgencies over the decades, how can Pakistan be expected to do so especially when the Kashmiris are engaged in their just struggle for freedom. If it wants to see them controlled, it should better redeem its pledges made to them at the world forum as well as by the first Indian Prime Minister Pandi Nehru directly about restitution of their right to self determination. It’s pertinent that India should ponder over its own conduct first before unjustifiably resorting to blame game against Pakistan. India is rather adopting coercive tactics to blackmail Pakistan so as to make her toe its line and submit to its unethical demand to abandon the Kashmiris, which it shall 61
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 36 and 37: 30 IPRI Factfile within 5-6 years f
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 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?