.
.
.
You can be right about Pakistan until hell freezes over, but that still won't get you any where....
FACTS: Pakistan is a failed state created by the departing Raj to harass India, which Pakistan has done dutifully by initiating four wars against India in 1948, 1965, 1971 and 1999.
FACTS: The most powerful element in Pakistani society is the military which has consistently had an anti-India bias. The ISI is an integral part of that. Hating and envying India's achievement as a nation state seems to be a significant and probably the sole driving force behind the Pakistan military.
FACTS: Pakistan as a failed state, and through the military have become the "Gunga Din" client state of the USA. A development that has taken over 50 years from 1954. The ISI is funded and directed by the USA presently. If subsequently any significant covert action is taken by the ISI against India as is presumed with 26/11 per Headley's statement, given the fundamental nature of the two states relationship paradigm, then one must logically conclude that such action must have been approved and coordinated by sections of American security.(DAVID HEADLEY........liaison officer, rather than the case that the American agent was acting on his own). Then the problem is not "Pakistan based terrorism" per se, but American behind the scenes direction and acquiescence by elements of American security allied to Israel.
FACTS: Since the 1970's especially, Pakistan has trained Deobandi/Wahabi orientated insurgents in the order of 500,000 men and some women to fight holy wars against 1) Shia, Sufi and Ahmedis within Pakistan. 2) In and against Afghanistan with the Mujaheddin and Taliban. 3) Against Iran using Jundullah. 4) Against India, especially since 1989 and the near war in 1990........and that all such action has been approved and funded by the USA, with Israel to keep the pot boiling in the region. Operation Cyclone and Operation Greenbelt.
FACT: India itself is not all goodness and light in this matter of STATE FUNDED TERRORISM, and since the early 1970's under Indira Gandhi especially state terrorism using the services of RAW was seen as a significant tool through which state policy has been conducted........by passed parliament and enhanced the power of the PM, in such places as Bangladesh, Pakistan and of course most overtly Sri Lanka. In relation to 26/11 as with 9/11 there is considerable doubt as to the real culprits in these episodes as narrated by the respective governments................and there is strong suspicion which I happen to share that such acts were internal false flag ops carried out by elements of domestic security allied with foreign security elements linked to Israel, and its narrow agenda's in the Greater Middle East.(Pakistan included)
In that sense, pointing fingers at the notorious ISI misses the bigger picture, and the wider critical timeline of history and events since 1954, when Pakistan allied itself with the USA strategically.
Quite naturally India should want to find the offending Party to 26/11, and extract meaningful concessions from Pakistan; that in itself is fine.
But playing to the gallery as Pillai amateurishly did recently, and winning brownie points against Pakistan still won't get you any where.............vis a vi Pakistan because it is backed by the USA as a client state, and its leaders get various pep talks on a one to one basis at the American embassy. One must presume that this is what Hilary precisely did recently when offering her latest bag of goodies and presents to Pakistan.
For India to get meaningful concessions/cooperation from Pakistan, and thus chart a pragmatic course of co-existence with a problematic neighbor India must:
1. Engage Pakistan constantly, and try and separate the civilian politicians from the military and bolster their position.
2. At some point India must consider financial aid to Pakistan in the billions of $. The USA is the most powerful influencing nation in Pakistan because quite simply it gives the most aid to the country...........various American dominated intuitions from the WB, IMF, Pentagon and the USA government are pouring about $25 billion worth of aid into Pakistan since 2009........that amount will obviously buy influence for the USA in Pakistan.................AND like elections in India if India wants to win in Pakistan it will ultimately have to spend money in Pakistan.
3. India through careful long term negotiations needs to tie Pakistan into a South Asian based security block, which marginalizes the role of the USA in Pakistan ultimately................that's going to take a lot of time, skilled negotiation, patience and money.
Having multiple organisations negotiating with Pakistan with diverse strategies won't get you anywhere. The lead organisation should be the MEA dealing with the foreign ministry of Pakistan and thats it.
That is not saying that other governmental organisations and non-governmental organisations shouldn't interact with Pakistan now, they should by all means, but obviously it all shouldn't be around the issue of 26/11 which makes failed state Pakistan feel under siege.
__________________________________
26/11 remark: Krishna does a Qureshi on Pillai
Times of India.
Times of India.
In a move certain to find support in Pakistan, external affairs minister S M Krishna on Wednesday criticized the timing of home secretary G K Pillai's remarks on the revelations by Lashkar terrorist David Headley, which Pakistan used to sabotage the foreign ministers' meeting last week.
In an interview, Krishna said, "Mr Pillai could have waited till I came back to issue the statement. Perhaps it would have been wiser if that statement had not been made on the eve of my visit." In fact, he said, "Everyone who was privy to whatever was happening in government ought to have known that the right kind of atmosphere from India's side should have been created for the talks to go on in a very normal manner, but unfortunately this episode happened." He added that had taken up the matter with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.
Krishna's remarks will give Pakistan a reason to justify its behaviour, and help its effort to mask the fact that Pakistan's refusal to take action against the 26/11 masterminds and its insistence to put Kashmir on the negotiating table were the reasons why the talks in Islamabad collapsed.
In a separate interview to a news agency, Krishna moderated his stand by saying that on facts, Pillai was "very much in order" in speaking about the disclosures made by American-Pakistani terrorist Headley to FBI and the Indian interrogators.
The remarks puzzled many in the government, with many finding it amiss and wondering whether Krishna was being egged on by the ministry mandarins who may be viewing the home ministry's candour on Pakistan's support for terrorism as a foray into a territory MEA thinks it alone can deal with.
The foreign minister's remarks showed up the barely concealed fissures within the government, exposing a strong division of opinion and perception within the regime on the issue of Pakistan and how to deal with it. Krishna's criticism of home secretary Pillai came a day after national security adviser Shiv Shankar Menon, in a deliberate move, endorsed the home secretary's remarks focusing on the terrorist-official nexus as one of the most difficult parts of dealing with Pakistan-sponsored terrorism.
Sources said a section of the top level of policymakers did not feel that Pakistan deserved to be treated with kid gloves at a time when they were clearly not ready to give India any satisfaction on terrorism. Second, the home secretary's remarks were no revelation -- the information had been given to Pakistan in the form of a dossier by home minister P Chidambaram only a couple of weeks ago.
The criticism can recoil on the MEA. There is a strong feeling among the top echelons in the government that it did not try to hold enough consultations outside the South Block before Krishna took off for Islamabad. However, it had not so far been articulated. But with the foreign minister launching a public criticism of the home secretary, others may also like casting off their gloves.
There is a general consensus that engagement with Pakistan needs to go on, but there appear to be differences on how far India should push Pakistan on terrorism.
Former national security adviser Brajesh Mishra, in a speech on Tuesday night, said, "This talk has also failed. And it would continue to fail, as in the past, as we have not yet grasped the reality that Pakistan army will never allow peaceful relations with India."
Remembering his experiences, Mishra said, "Pakistan army's hostility towards India is not because of Bangladesh, Kashmir or Siachen. Their very existence depends upon hostility towards India. Unless we grasp that, we will never be able to deal with Pakistan."
(Rather a pessimistic view of Pakistan which may well be justified, BUT INDIA HAS TO EXIST WITH PAKISTAN ULTIMATELY AND MUST THUS MANAGE PAKISTAN SOONER OR LATER, going to the proverbial corner and complaining about the country won't help matters..........I myself am rather more optimistic. The Pakistanis save the Pashtun's and Baluchis are Indic people, so we are not talking about people from the other side of Mars. The Punjabis dominate the military, and the likes of Zia-ul Haq, Musharaf, and Kiyani are most likely descended Harijjan converts to Islam. How impossible can it be to get these types of people into the line so that they can see India's point of view eventually? You had ULTRA HARDBALL general Hamid Gul (ISI) saying perfectly rational beautiful things about India/Pakistan relations in his own way........now if the likes of him can say such things......India using the right strategy can manage the Pakistan military eventually, but this will require a lot of cross border engagement, effort and greater cooperation between the various institutions of the two states.
Has the head of RAW met with the head of the ISI..........or at other levels?
Has the head of the Indian army met with Kiyani, or at other junior levels?
So on, and so on, and so on.......)
