PM Singh and direct accusations against Pakistan.

PM. Singhs current approach, one among many previous approaches to the Pakistani problem, is to blame them directly, and specifically certain state organs of the Pakistani state. From a technical perspective he is correct. ALL acts of so called "Islamic terrorism" is carried out through state security institutions, whether as false flag operations in their own countries, for example 9/11 (to increase security legislation; to allow the security to be more proactive in a given society; to gain more resources and money for security; to concentrate power within a limited elite group who subsequently define who is a good person and bad person......and so on), or operations in other countries.

All terrorism is state terrorism in one sense, especially in the Mumbai sense. Simply because of the logistics involved; the material; manpower; training; timing and transport.
Academically PM Singh is totally correct, that what happened in Mumbai was not the work of 10 amateur youths, largely illiterate, not particularly bright by the looks of it, desperate ("If you give me food and a bed, I will work for you" {India} Kasab told the police) from the bottom of Pakistani society, coming all the way from Pakistan to carry this out----they had to have backing for a larger more effective organization.

So from the analytical point of view this is progress, and our politicians are rationalizing the scenarios, rather than making off the cuff threats to Pakistan which were:
(i) Hand over the following from our wish list. (ii) You have 30 days to act, or else. (iii) Clean up terrorism or else, possibly war. Small problem with this new angle is that the FBI have cleared the ISI of involvement, so which other government agencies could be responsible from Pakistan? The army? To embarrass the politicians of Pakistan? The ISI is largely drawn from the army anyway, so.

Or is PM Singh merely posturing in light of elections very soon, and he doesn't believe a word he is uttering?
Is this progress? Not really.

1) The Pakistan state is controlled by the Americans, and specifically the army and intelligence. The Americans reinforced their control of Pakistan in 1977, when they removed Bhutto who was slightly independent in terms of his foreign policy agendas. The American's have reinforced their power over Pakistan even further recently by bringing in Zardari, who is to all intents and purpose a very corrupt gangster out to look after number one, himself, and the Americans use that character weakness to both control him and through him Pakistan. He visits the American embassy in Islamabad every other day. Remember "Busharaf" was not even good enough for the Americans, and had to be toppled using elements within the army loyal to the USA, Kiyani and Pasha. In that realistic scenario accusations by India against Pakistan about Mumbai terrorism misses the point of the real relationship between Pakistan and America. The accusations by India will come to nought of a brick wall, as Pakistan will stone wall, and America will provide cover. Zardari and his other American puppets will NEVER act in good faith to resolve the problem of Mumbai because it is not in their nature, or simply even if they wanted to they can't because they are America's puppets. General Suja Pasha honestly offered to visit India to deal with the Mumbai incident in late November, and then suddenly retracted that offer-----so who caused that change of decison?

(ii) Of course all the above point is on the basis that Pakistan actually carried out the Mumbai terrorist incident. There is considerable doubt about this thesis, at least by me. That 10 amateurs youths can hold off 800+ of India's finest for 3 days, backed by 40,000 Mumbai police force, without sleep, simply does not make sense, in 13 different locations in groups of 2,3 and 4 all at the same time, or similar times? And their very first act is to kill 3 of the top anti-terror encounter experts....who were going together in the wrong direction and destination away from the action.

(iii) The performance of PM Singh and others make India look impotent and ineffective. Maybe even amateurish. If Pakistan is an American controlled puppet state, and India in fact is facing American mischief through failed state Pakistan, then the best outcome for India and South Asia would be to institute mechanisms between India and Pakistan which deal maturely with similar scenarios in the future much more quickly and comprehensively then to engage in media based airwave spats of accusations and counter accusations------The only thing India will get from this is a brick wall of denials and counter denials; It has no meaningful outcomes for India and of course not Pakistan.

It may feel good, in a self important way for the politicians but achieves very little.

(iv) If India is looking for accusations against Pakistan followed by war, there are good reasons why India should not attack Pakistan at this juncture, and I have given plenty of reasons why India should not attack Pakistan in previous posts. In all events Pakistan is a country which is not in control of itself. War with Pakistan will be open ended, and who knows what the outcomes will be for India if a war is initiated against failed state American controlled Pakistan.

(v) That there should be certain outcomes from this episode which are constructive and beneficial for India and Pakistan. Pakistani officials from the key institutions of the armed forces, intelligence, police, bureaucracy need to be engaged in face to face regular meetings in the future with their Indian counterparts, where grievances from both sides can be aired privately in the face to face meetings rather than through the Indian, Pakistani and international media. Which is the case now. I have elaborated on this idea before---hotline calls for a few minutes are not enough; this was instituted long ago, and we need further better communications systems between the two neighbors,NOW.

Of course one can argue that if the Pakistani top echeleon are mere puppets of America, what is the point of meeting them in the first place? I believe in all such meetings some small good can be gauged and clarifications made about key substantive neighborly relations.

No, India did not choose Pakistan as its neighbor, but it is the responsibility of the leadership of mighty India to make sure that all mature avenues are pursued to make the existence between the two neighbors as bearable as possible in the present circumstances, and merely complaining and accusing over the airwaves, is thus not providing mature leadership in the real present scenario for India and for South Asia, which is what India touts itself to be, and can be.