RupeeNews

Much of this so called “Cold Start Strategy” is based on the Israeli strategy which it tried to implement in Lebanon. Israel was unable to implement its objectives in Lebanon and had to withdraw even from the Litani River. Israel failed to achieve its goals in Lebanon. In Lebanon, Israel was unable to stop the barrage of missiles from Lebanon even on the last day. Many consider this Israel’s defeat.India’s Cold start war strategy and the Pakistani Nuclear response.

Gen Kapoor’s provocative doctrine: Pakistani countermeasures

• The essence of the Cold Start doctrine is reorganising the army’s offensive power that resides in the three strike corps into eight smaller division-sized integrated battle groups (IBGs) consisting of armour and mechanised infantry and artillery, closely supported by helicopter gunships, air force and airborne troops (parachute and heliborne).
• The IBGs are to be positioned close to the border so that three to five are launched into Pakistan along different axes within 72 to 96 hours from the time mobilisation is ordered.
• Cold Start thus envisages rapid thrusts even when the defensive corps’ deployment is yet to be completed, and high-speed operations conducted day and night until the designated objectives are achieved
• The probable objective areas for Cold Start could be (1) Ravi-Chenab corridor from two directions, an IBG along Jammu-Sialkot-Daska axis and another across the Ravi to link up with the first IBG, and (2) in the south against Reti-Rahim Yar Khan-Kashmore complex.
• To counter Cold Start, the Pakistan Army will have to create more armour-dominated brigade-sized reserves from the existing resources if possible, and a more flexible military system and structure.
• For Pakistan the dimensions of time and space assume paramount importance as it lacks territorial depth, is opposed by a larger adversary and lacks the resources to fight a protracted war.
• The strategy of pre-emption is thus imposed on Pakistan in the same way it was imposed on Israel prior to the 1967 war.
• The fact that the Pakistani Army can occupy their wartime locations earlier than the Indian army confers on it the ability to pre-empt Cold Start;
• failure to do so could lead to firing of low-yield tactical warheads at IBGs as they cross the start line or even earlier
• Pakistani countermeasures to Cold Start Strategy–battle-ready nuclear weapons
• India said on Monday it is monitoring the situation following media reports suggesting Pakistan is allegedly digging tunnels in Sargodha district
• “We are attempting to establish the purpose of digging up such large tunnels,” an intelligence official was quoted as saying in the reports. “These clearly cannot be meant for transport as is obvious from the images available; they don’t lead on to roads,” he added.
• Delhi’s Cold Start Strategy Frozen DOA (Dead on Arrival)

India knows that it can never win a conventional warfare because of the Nuclear Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). However it still harbors notions of winning a sort of a mini war. India may think it has a Cold Start Strategy, but it may end as a hot nuclear war. Indian Defense planners cannot guarantee that a limited strike will not escalte into a full fledged war. A full fledged war witha nuclear armed labor may destroy both countries. Responding to the “Surgical Strikes”: Neutralizing Delhi’s Cold Start strategy:

While engaging the Kashmir question must be the priority, a much more serious problem is that in less than a decade India has twice threatened us with all-out war in less than a decade, in December 2002 and 2008, using terrorist action by non-state actors as a pretext both times. As the name suggests, the Indian “COLD START” strategy envisages moving Indian forces without any warning or mobilisation into unpredictable locations at high speeds against Pakistan (on the Israeli pattern of 1956 and 1967) seeking to defeat Pakistan by achieving total surprise at both the strategic and the operational levels (remember Pearl Harbour), striving for a decision before the US or China could intervene on Pakistan’s behalf. An unspoken assumption seems to be that “rapid operations would prevent India’s civilian leadership from halting military operations in progress, lest it have second thoughts or possess insufficient resolve”. Does this particular Indian military psyche conform to the so-called civilian control of the Indian military? Facing a foe having 3:1 superiority, and with such a history and such an offensive strategy, we may be forgiven for our “India fixation”.

The military challenges for Pakistan posed by COLD START derails any resolve for sustained peace with India, re-constituting Pakistan’s strategy to take on all five of India’s “Strike Corps” with all our three “Army Reserve” formations presently occupied in FATA, Dir and Swat. Please forgive also our suspicions as to what the many Indian consulates in Afghanistan are doing on our western borders! Ikram Sehgal. The News

On Dec 13, 2001, five gunmen attacked the Indian parliament building. An hour later, 12 people including the gunmen were dead. In the days that followed, India blamed the militant groups based in Pakistan for the attack.

On Dec 18, 2001, the Indian government ordered the commencement of Operation Parakaram (Operation Victory), the largest mobilisation of Indian forces since 1971. It appeared that war was inevitable. Yet, after a 10-month standoff, Operation Parakaram was terminated. India had lost face.

The main reason why this happened was the time taken by the three strike corps to reach their wartime locations from central India. It took them three weeks during which time Pakistan was not only able to deploy its forces but also to internationalise the crisis.

Until 2004 the Indian army’s strategic thought envisaged the deployment of seven corps in defensive role and three corps in offensive role each built around an armoured division supported by mechanised infantry and artillery. After the defensive corps had blunted Pakistani attacks, the strike corps would undertake counter-offensive operations aimed at the destruction of the Pakistan Army’s two strategic reserves also built around an armoured division.

After Operation Parakaram the Indian army concluded that this doctrine was inflexible because of the huge size of the strike corps — they have long deployment times, are difficult to manoeuvre, while their concentration in the forward areas gives away the general strategic direction they would adopt. And above all, the doctrine inhibited a quick response to challenges posed by acts like the attack on the Indian parliament (and seven years later in Mumbai).

As a consequence, in 2004 the Indian army announced the development of a new limited war doctrine called Cold Start to respond to what it calls proxy wars by Pakistan. It would seek to inflict significant damage on the Pakistan Army before the international community could intervene on Pakistan’s behalf, while at the same time ensuring that the conflict did not escalate to a level where Pakistan was tempted to use nuclear weapons.

The essence of the Cold Start doctrine is reorganising the army’s offensive power that resides in the three strike corps into eight smaller division-sized integrated battle groups (IBGs) consisting of armour and mechanised infantry and artillery, closely supported by helicopter gunships, air force and airborne troops (parachute and heliborne). The IBGs are to be positioned close to the border so that three to five are launched into Pakistan along different axes within 72 to 96 hours from the time mobilisation is ordered.

Cold Start thus envisages rapid thrusts even when the defensive corps’ deployment is yet to be completed, and high-speed operations conducted day and night until the designated objectives are achieved.

In a war limited by time, mobility is the single-most important factor which if used to its full potential will help attain the political aim in the desired time and space framework. But this requires a perfect matching of the physical means of mobility with the mobility of the mind, as the value of a highly mobile force can be reduced to zero by commanders whose minds are characterised by lack of imagination, initiative and flexibility. “Adherence to dogmas has destroyed more armies and lost more battles and lives than any other cause in war. No man of fixed opinions can make a good general.” (J.F.C. Fuller)

In the 1965 war the Indian 1 Corps, spearheaded by the 1st Armoured Division, had penetrated seven miles only into Pakistani territory in Sialkot sector in 21 days, while in the 1971 war, the same corps having about eight tank units did marginally better by penetrating eight miles in 14 days, that too when opposed by light covering troops. In both wars the Indian army was schematic in its operations. Changes in dispositions such as forming a new defensive line, reassigning of objectives, switching forces not in accordance with their original plan, took time. Above all, their commanders at all levels lacked enterprise, imagination and initiative.

Given this, while Cold Start is a sound concept, though not original, the Indian war directors need to question the ability of their commanders at all levels to execute it efficiently and sustain the advantage gained from striking first. The “law of the initial advantage of the aggressor” assumes critical importance, as it is the aggressor who generally sets the pattern which operations will take. The Germans in the Second World War and the Israelis in the 1956 and 1967 wars had translated the concept of blitzkrieg, characterised by surprise, speed and concentration, with devastating results against numerically superior forces because they had a flair for conducting high-speed operations with flexibility, rapidity and less military routine.

The probable objective areas for Cold Start could be (1) Ravi-Chenab corridor from two directions, an IBG along Jammu-Sialkot-Daska axis and another across the Ravi to link up with the first IBG, and (2) in the south against Reti-Rahim Yar Khan-Kashmore complex. To counter Cold Start, the Pakistan Army will have to create more armour-dominated brigade-sized reserves from the existing resources if possible, and a more flexible military system and structure.

For Pakistan the dimensions of time and space assume paramount importance as it lacks territorial depth, is opposed by a larger adversary and lacks the resources to fight a protracted war. The strategy of pre-emption is thus imposed on Pakistan in the same way it was imposed on Israel prior to the 1967 war. The fact that the Pakistani Army can occupy their wartime locations earlier than the Indian army confers on it the ability to pre-empt Cold Start; failure to do so could lead to firing of low-yield tactical warheads at IBGs as they cross the start line or even earlier.

Cold Start would be a portent of escalation, and inevitably a disaster for both. It is a doctrine that challenges both countries. The writer is a retired brigadier of the Pakistan Army. javedhussainpa@yahoo.com

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during her campaign for the presidency of the United States mentioned “Pakistan’s paranoia” about India’s intentions about Pakistan. Pardon us Ms. Clinton but Bharat has threatened Pakistan will all out war, not once but twice in the past few years. Additionally, it was the Pakhtuns that liberated Azad Kashmir and it is Delhi that occupied Kashmir, Junagarh, Manvadar, Sir Creek and Siachin–not the Pakhtuns (aka Taliban).

Terrorism across the borders works for Bharat–in China, Sikkim Bhutan, Nepal, Lanka, and Pakistan. RAW is good at hiring and sending mercenaries to murder innocent civilians–as witnessed in Karachi last week.

• “No one should ever underestimate our capability and determination to foil any nefarious designs against the security of Pakistan,
• “None can dare rob us of nuclear arsenal”: General Hameed Gul
• After dramatic failure of “Cold Start Strategy” India comes up with cockamamy “96 hour Rapid Thrust” scheme
• India is behind Karachi blast: Imran Khan
• Proxy war in Afghanistan: Strategic depth vs Strategic clout.
• “This new doctrine along with the earlier restructuring of the Indian Command structure, particularly the operationalisation of South West Army Command (2005) has increased manifold threats to Pakistan. It has also enhanced Indian capacity for faster action, Prof. Khurshid Ahmad Jamat e Islami.
• Is Delhi preventing the 4th Battle of Panipat or instigating it?

An Indian newspaper ‘The Hindustan Times’ indicates a former Maharashtra electrician, now suspected of being the Indian handler to 26/11, was a former informant for domestic police and intelligence agencies. The presence in Pakistan of Syed Zabiuddin Ansari (29) also represents domestic-intelligence gaps as India prepares to reopen talks with Pakistan after the killing of 180 people in Mumbai on November 26, 2008. The only son of six children of an insurance agent from the dusty, central Maharashtra town of Gevrai, Ansari is one of a handful of missing, radicalised Indians capable of being used by Pakistani terrorists or their state handlers in a future attack, which intelligence and police officials across India now nervously anticipate.

As a double agent, Ansari lead the Intelligence Bureau and the Maharashtra Police to the biggest arms haul outside Jammu and Kashmir in the last 10 years, security sources told HT, requesting anonymity because of the sensitivity of the case. Ansari led police to at least 43 kg of RDX (Research and Development Explosive), 16 AK-47 rifles and 4,000 rounds of ammunition concealed in computer cabinets on the outskirts of the Maharashtra city of Aurangabad on May 10, 2006. Ansari, now believed to be holed up in Karachi, fled in a blue, Tata Indica immediately after and was never seen again. “If he [Zabiuddin Ansari] had helped further, we could have unearthed the entire link,” said Sunil Deshmukh, a police inspector who was part of the raiding party. “We believe he escaped to Pakistan via Bangladesh.

He has risen in the LeT (Lashkar-e-Tayyebba) hierarchy since then.” Last week, Home Minister P. Chidambaram for the first time acknowledged one of the 26/11 handlers was Indian, though he said it wasn’t clear who “Abu Jindal” was because Pakistan refused to provide a voice print. India has no recording of Ansari’s voice, Maharashtra police chief A.N. Roy confirmed to Hindustan Times. The giveaways, says intelligence agencies, were the Hindi words “Abu” used with the Urdu-speaking terrorists who ravaged in Mumbai on 26/11. Two examples: He used “sarkar” instead of “hukumat”; referred to 26/11 being “the trailer”, an English term — subsumed into Bambaiyya Hindi — that baffled the terrorists. Indian suspected of 26/11 role once worked for India’s Intelligence Bureau: Indian intelligence officials believe Ansari is likely to be “Abu”, but because of the sensitive nature of the information, they would not reveal what led them to this conclusion.

Ansari’s story was pieced together by HT from various police and intelligence sources.
With terror groups itching to replicate 26/11, connecting these dots is increasingly important: Like Ansari, key radicalised Indians spread across Pakistan, the Middle East (and, increasingly, East Asia), can be used to aid attacks on India.
After Ansari escaped in 2006, his recruiter, Mohammed Amir Shakeel Ahmed (33), was arrested. He told interrogators that their Nepal-based Lashkar handler, had also suspected Ansari of being a double agent.
A police source said Ansari, while helping police, also recruited the first jihadi from Maharashtra, Mirza Baig, to be killed by forces in J&K;in late 2005.

Specific information is hard to come by, but Ansari likely went over to the dark side after a series of religious riots in Maharashtra led men like him to believe terror was their only hope against what they saw as injustice against Muslims.
The other men on the run, mostly from Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh and Kerala, also slipped out through Bangladesh, followed similar paths to radicalisation.
Most are educated, and some were professionals before they turned to jihad. In the 1990s, groups of radicalised

Muslim youth went to Pakistan for training. That phenomenon appears to have ebbed, but some officials are not sure.
“We haven’t come across people going to Pakistan in large numbers of late, but nothing can be inferred from that — that it is not going on,” said Roy. (Hindustan Times)

Massive demonstrations have been held in Indian-administered Kashmir for the third consecutive day over the killing of a second teenage boy in one week.

On Sunday, hundreds of people took to the streets in Kashmir’s summer capital Srinagar despite a protest ban in the region.

The demonstrators also threw stones at a motorcade of a senior minister of the Jammu and Kashmir state government who had gone to meet the bereaved family, AFP reported.

Witnesses say 16-year-old Zahid Farooq was killed on Friday when police opened fire on a group of youth without provocation.

The government has banned the assembly of more than four people in Srinagar and some other major towns in Kashmir.

Residents of downtown Srinagar have complained that medicines and food stocks are being depleted since they have been under a strict curfew for several days.

Separatist leaders say the international community should hold the Indian security forces accountable for human rights violations in Kashmir.

Despite the risks, it seems the Kashmiris are determined to continue their “people power” movement.

Political analysts say the frequent street protests of the past two years are giving new life to the Kashmir liberation struggle.

Over the past two decades, the conflict in Kashmir has left over 47,000 people dead by the official count, although other sources say the death toll could be as high as 90,000.

PKKH

BAQIR SAJJAD SYED

ISLAMABAD: Renewed international pressure and growing realisation in New Delhi that the rapidly changing situation in Afghanistan could deprive it of its strategic leverage in the region has forced the sudden change of heart in India regarding ties with Pakistan, according to diplomats and analysts.

“It was being increasingly felt by strategists in New Delhi that after recent conferences on Afghanistan that endorsed President Hamid Karzai’s plan for reintegrating Taliban, India was being left out and Pakistan might take the centre stage,” a diplomat told Dawn when asked about the Indian proposal for resumption of bilateral talks.

It all started with Indian Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao’s call to her Pakistani counterpart Salman Bashir, almost a week ago, inviting him to Delhi in February for talks on wide-ranging issues that have been constraining the bilateral ties, particularly in the aftermath of the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks.

She expressed Indian government’s willingness to discuss issues besides terrorism which would remain the focus of the parleys.

Ms Rao went to the extent of offering negotiations on contentious issues like the water dispute, but stayed short of suggesting resumption of the Composite Dialogue.

India’s eagerness for resuming talks was evident from Home Minister P. Chidambaram’s belated admission that there was also a local Indian link to Mumbai attacks for which New Delhi had earlier been blaming Pakistan-based terror groups only.

Things afterwards started moving at a rapid pace towards detente. Pakistan sought clarifications and on Friday High Commissioner Shahid Malik met Ms Rao in New Delhi to discuss the agenda and possible dates for the meeting.

Although Pakistan is insisting on accepting nothing short of Composite Dialogue, there is realisation in the Foreign Office that sticking to revival of peace talks may jeopardise the opportunity for normalisation of strained ties.

The thinking is that the offer of initial contacts should be availed and subsequently taken forward to full resumption of Composite Dialogue.

“The attempt is to keep talking about the issues which are of concern to us,” Mr Malik said.

Although analysts and diplomats believe there are a number of factors that triggered the rethinking in India, the primary reason remains the changing scenario in Afghanistan coupled with the impending reintegration of Taliban in Afghan society.

Afraid of losing all the strategic gains made by India in Afghanistan by investing over $2 billion, it was thought that Indian interests could be best served by re-engaging with Pakistan.

The Istanbul and London conferences and acknowledgment by Nato commanders that Indian role in Afghanistan needed to be clipped to address Pakistan’s concerns showed the proverbial writing on the wall to the Congress government.

The global endorsement of President Karzai’s plans for reintegrating Taliban in Afghan society, motivated by the West’s eagerness to get out of Afghanistan as quickly as possible, was seen in New Delhi as strengthening of Pakistan’s position because of the role Islamabad was expected to play in wooing the Taliban. Equally worrisome for India was Pakistan’s offer of training the Afghan police and army personnel.

Sustained international pressure on New Delhi to mend fences with Islamabad also played a role.

The pressure from the UK and US increased in recent months, as the coalition forces in Afghanistan got ready for the final push in the war-torn country before pulling out.

Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani, speaking at a Kashmir day event, also attributed India’s change in stance as a manifestation of the increasing international pressure on New Delhi.

Progress in the prosecution of alleged mastermind of Mumbai attacks in Rawalpindi courts where the accused have been indicted after lengthy delays and the first witnesses deposed last week provided the right ‘face saver’ to India to restart talks with Pakistan.

Indian Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna, in his interaction with media personnel, described these developments as constructive signs.

“Any step forward in the direction of Pakistan also investigating the Mumbai attacks will certainly make it easier for India to carry out normalisation of business with Pakistan,” Mr Krishna had noted.

Additionally, detractors of the Indian government began to characterise Indian stance of not engaging with Pakistan as futile. The upcoming Saarc events – the interior ministers’ meeting in Islamabad and the summit in Thimphu, Bhutan -– hastened the Indian decision, because it no longer wanted to be seen as stalling the peace process.

With all set for the two countries to resume bilateral talks, there are worrying signs as well. Jamaatud Dawa, accused of being a front organisation for banned Lashkar-e-Taiba, the group blamed for Mumbai attacks, is seen as gaining strength after holding a series of meetings in Muzaffarabad, Peshawar and Lahore.

The first high-profile activities by the group since the Mumbai attacks have almost coincided with a thaw in Pakistan-India relations.

This in itself may throw a spanner in the works and the much-awaited restoration of peace process may elude the people of the two countries.

RupeeNews

February 5th is being observed as Kashmir Solidarity Day, which is a yearly practice since 1990 as a day of protest against the unjust occupation of Kashmir. The day is marked with renewed firm resolve to continue the struggle for the achievement of the birthright of Kashmiris to self-determination through getting the valley liberated from the Indian yoke of tyranny. Kashmiris observe the solidarity day every year not only to renew their deep-rooted love and affection with Pakistan, but also to reiterate their commitment and dedication to their liberty from the Indian occupation. Kashmiris have been struggling since 1947 to secure their freedom, which was assured by the UN Resolutions; however, subsequent Indian governments have not only remained oblivious to the UN Resolutions, but also continued to subject the Kashmiris to their reign of terror. Pakistan’s endeavours to resolve the issue through dialogue have also been spurned by India.

The Palestinians too continue to suffer atrocities inflicted upon them by Israel, which was created unjustly after evicting the Palestinians from their territory in 1948. Since then the Palestinians have struggled to regain their homeland but have failed despite extreme sacrifice and war against Israel by its Arab neighbours to liberate Palestine.

Two other Muslim countries, Afghanistan and Iraq, which were occupied by the US/NATO forces during the 21st century, are close to being liberated from the tyranny of their invaders. Afghanistan was conquered by USA and its allies, following the 9/11 debacle. The US declared Osama bin Laden and his Al-Qaeda group responsible for the attacks on the Twin Towers and Pentagon and demanded the then Taliban regime in Afghanistan to hand over purported culprits for trial. Mullah Omar, the Taliban leader demanded proof of Osama’s complicity to the 9/11 attack. The Taliban query was interpreted as refusal and Afghanistan was subjected to one of the most ferocious attacks in history and occupied by US and its allies.

Iraq was attacked in 2003 by a US-led coalition force under the plea that Saddam Hussain’s regime possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD), which would pose a threat to the rest of the world. That is another aspect that the WMDs were never found during the seven years of occupation.

A number of conspiracy theories were floated to the rationale behind occupying Afghanistan and Iraq. In the case of Iraq, control of its oil reserves is the apparent reason for subjugating Iraq and installing a pliable and malleable regime there. The case of Afghanistan is slightly different. Michael Klare, author of the book Resource Wars, which has a major focus on the Caspian region, and Ahmad Rashid, Pakistani journalist and author of Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia, opine that in the 10 years, since the collapse of the Soviet Union, there has been a new great game between Russia, the United States, China, Iran, the European companies, for control of the new oil and gas resources that have been discovered in the Caspian Sea and in the Caucuses and Central Asia. They deduce that “because Central Asia is totally landlocked, distances are huge, and the US strategy has been essentially to keep, new oil pipelines not to be built through Russia or through Iran or China.”

They quote US government Energy Information fact sheet on Afghanistan dated December 2000, which reveals: “Afghanistan’s significance from an energy standpoint stems from its geographic position as a potential transit route for oil and natural gas exports from Central Asia to the Arabian Sea. This potential includes proposed multi-billion dollar oil and gas export pipelines through Afghanistan” which is the shortest route to the Pakistani coastline on the Indian Ocean. To achieve this Afghanistan had to be conquered and a pliant regime installed there.

After tremendous bloodshed and financial losses, the US administration is now considering ways and means of exiting both Iraq and Afghanistan. President Obama, in his maiden State of the Union Address on January 27, presented strategies for reviving the sick economy of USA. What he failed to mention, but has been disclosed by the Information Clearing House Newsletter of January 31, 2010 that a number of Iraqis slaughtered since the US invaded Iraq so far is “1,366,350”, while the number of US military personnel sacrificed (officially acknowledged) In America’s War on Iraq is: 4,692. On the other hand, the number of International Occupation Force Troops sacrificed in Afghanistan is 1,611, while the civilian casualties in Afghanistan since 9/11 range between 11,760 and 31,357. To top it all, the cost of war in Iraq and Afghanistan is a whopping $955,465,013,902. No wonder plans for the egress of the US and other international forces from Afghanistan and Iraq are underway.

General Viktor Yermakov, the Commander of Soviet forces in Afghanistan in the 1980s, while talking to CNN after the proposed troop surge in Afghanistan, commented that the “US is repeating the Soviet blunder of adding more troops in Afghanistan.” He stated that at the height of the Soviet-Afghan War, there were 300,000 Soviet troops deployed in Afghanistan, out of which 15,000 Soviets were killed, 469,685 got wounded while 500 are still missing. What he did not say was that the invasion contributed to the demise of USSR.

It is ironical that during the London Conference, General Stanley McChrystal’s despite being a fighting general, pronouncement that “there’s been enough fighting,” and Robert Gates, the US secretary of defence, proclamation: “The Taliban…are part of the political fabric of Afghanistan,” are being used to bolster Hamid Karzai’s plea that negotiations must be opened with the Taliban. The London Conference went a step ahead and approved a multi-million integration fund to lure the Taliban fighters to join the political mainstream.

We hope and pray that peace returns to Iraq and Afghanistan, but what a pity that Kashmir and Palestine continue to bleed since they neither have oil nor are situated on the oil-gas trade route. May their predicament be over and the simmering trauma gets resolved at an early date. Kashmir, Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan.

PKKH

By: RupeeNews

Every few weeks Srinagar blows up. These are the fruits of a brutal occupation of Kashmir by the 800,000 strong Bharati (aka Indian) occupation forces.

Every few weeks there are demonstration against the occupation and the yearning for freedom. The Kashmir’s living in Bharati Occupied Kashmir want freedom, freedom from Bharat, and freedom to join their brothers and sisters in Pakistan.

The world is ignoring them—there is a cost to this. The world ignored Afghanistan–and there was a cost to pay for that.

SRINAGAR: Indian police in Kashmir fired shots in the air and released tear gas for a third straight day on Wednesday to quell violent protests sparked by the death of a Muslim boy.

Police said 15 security personnel and 15 protesters were injured in the Kashmiri summer capital, Srinagar, and the towns of Baramulla, Pulwama and Shopian.

Wamiq Farooq died on Sunday after being struck by a tear gas shell fired by police to quell an anti-India demonstration in Srinagar.

Scores of protesters shouting “Blood for blood!” and “God is great!” hurled rocks and bricks at riot police at several points in Srinagar and other towns on Wednesday, prompting police to fire warning shots and release tear gas.

Rock-throwing protesters also attacked an army convoy with stones on the outskirts of Srinagar, injuring four soldiers, according to police and witnesses.

Wamiq’s killing has sparked violent clashes across the mainly Muslim Kashmir Valley. So far, more than 100 protesters and policemen have been injured.

Witnesses said Wamiq had gone out to play cricket and was not among the protesters who clashed with police on Sunday.

Kashmiri separatists have held regular rallies, which often turn violent, since 2008. More than 60 protesters have died in the rallies since then, most of them during firing by the police.

The region is in the grip of a 20-year insurgency against Indian rule.

According to an official count the unrest has left more than 47,000 people dead.

RupeeNews

SRINAGAR: A Muslim youth was killed and eight others injured when police fired tear gas and used batons to disperse scores of anti-India protesters in Kashmir on Sunday, police and witnesses said.

The violence broke out when protesters pelted police positions with stones and bricks in downtown Srinagar, the summer capital of Indian Kashmir and urban hub of anti-India separatists.

The youth was critically injured when a tear gas shell hit his head, a police officer said, insisting on anonymity.

“He later died in hospital,” the officer said, adding that police were still trying to establish the dead person’s identity.

The death sparked more protests in Srinagar, with demonstrators burning tyres and blocking roads, residents said.

Kashmir is in the grip of a 20-year insurgency against Indian rule that has left more than 100,000 people dead according to official figures.

Anti-India feeling runs deep in the Muslim-majority Kashmir Valley, the centre of the insurgency.

Kashmir had been relatively stable in recent months but militant violence has increased in the past few weeks.

Earlier in January, Indian commandos stormed a hotel in Srinagar and killed two militants who had been holed up in the guesthouse for nearly 24 hours. A civilian and a policeman also died in the siege and attacks and clashes have continued since.

Thursday, January 28, 2010
Muneer Akram

During US Defence Secretary Gates’ recent visit, we have again heard the refrain of our Western friends that terrorism and the Taliban, not India, pose an ‘existential’ threat to Pakistan.

But India’s own actions and pronouncements belie these Western assertions. For the past year, India has refused to resume “composite dialogue” and has regularly threatened military action against Pakistan in the event of another Mumbai-like incident. And, while protesting loudly about pro-Kashmiri militant groups like the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba, India has been busy fomenting dissension and insurgency in Balochistan, FATA and other parts of Pakistan.

It was hardly helpful that Secretary Gates virtually endorsed India’s belligerence when he told reporters in New Delhi that “it’s not unreasonable to assume India’s patience would be limited were there to be further (Mumbai-type) attacks.” It would have been better if India was told that it is its posture which risks an Indo-Pakistan conflict and that anti-Indian violence will end once New Delhi halts its suppression of the Kashmiri people.

Any lingering doubt about India’s hostile intentions and policies towards Pakistan should have been set to rest by the new military doctrine outlined recently by the Indian army chief. General Kapoor identified five thrust areas for the Indian military build-up: the ability to fight a two-front war against Pakistan and China; optimise capacity to counter asymmetric and sub-conventional threats; enhance capabilities for strategic reach and “out-of-area operations from the Persian Gulf to the Malacca Straits; acquire strategic (intercontinental) and space-based capabilities and ballistic missile defenses, and ensure a technical edge over adversaries (that is, Pakistan and China).

The new doctrine reflects India’s great power aspirations. But, the greatest danger for Pakistan emanates from the concept of the so-called ‘Cold Start’ strategy, propounded by General Kapoor, to mobilise and strike fast (within 96 hours) at Pakistan “under a WMD overhang”. At its meeting on January 13, 2010, Pakistan’s National Command Authority “took serious note of recent Indian statements about its capability to conduct conventional military strikes under a nuclear umbrella” describing this as “oblivious to the dangerous implications of adventurism in a nuclearised context.”This is, of course, not the first time India has contemplated a limited war or a conventional attack against Pakistan after South Asia was nuclearised. Indian leaders and military officers have often threatened ‘hot pursuit’ and ‘lightning strikes’ against training camps across the LoC in Kashmir. But they could not ignore Pakistan’s stance that no war between India and Pakistan could be conceived as a limited war. In 1987, and again in 2002, India contemplated a full-scale attack against Pakistan. On both occasions, India discovered that it did not have the capacity to overcome Pakistan’s conventional defences.

India no doubt hopes that with the western weapons faucets now open to it, it can, in the near future, acquire the capability to defeat Pakistan in a conventional conflict. All the new capabilities and weapons systems acquired by India, whatever the proffered rationale, can and will be deployed and used against Pakistan in the event of a future confrontation or conflict. Today, over 70 per cent of India’s military capabilities – land, air and naval – are deployed against Pakistan. There is no reason to believe that this proportion will change in the foreseeable future.

Pakistan cannot, of course, afford to match India’s military build up. Its response will have to be defensive, asymmetrical, innovative, and achieved at much lower cost. Pakistan’s forces may need to do some tactical rethinking. For example, an Indian tank force can be more effectively destroyed by drones and missiles rather than a matching tank force. A large surface navy can be seriously damaged by submarines and mobile missile-boats. The eight Indian “battle groups” may be more mobile; but they would also be vulnerable to encirclement and destruction. Rather than spread themselves thin to defend the entire Eastern border, Pakistani forces could adopt an offensive-defensive strategy, focusing a thrust into Kashmir to bottle up half a million Indian troops there.

Following the post-Mumbai situation and the emergence of India’s Cold Start strategy, Pakistan’s armed forces have undertaken extensive war games to counter this threat. If the Indians have watched these closely, they should be clear in their minds that the danger of conventional adventurism escalating to the nuclear level cannot be ruled out. This was the general conclusion in 2002 — confirmed among others by Pentagon war games. The Indo-Pakistan “composite dialogue” was restarted in 2003 on the basis of the mutual recognition that a military conflict between the two nuclear-armed countries was too dangerous to contemplate.

The critical question which arises, therefore, is what has given Indian military planners the confidence now that a conventional attack will not escalate to the mutually disastrous nuclear level? There could be three possible reasons for India’s “new” confidence:

First, India may believe that the new capabilities it is acquiring – Israeli AWACs, US-Israeli-Russian ballistic missile defence systems, advanced strike aircraft – can effectively neutralise Pakistan’s nuclear strike force of missiles and aircraft. This would be shallow strategic thinking since Pakistan could ensure penetration of Indian defences through multiplication of its missiles and warheads.

Second, Indian plans may envisage, together with a Cold Start conventional attack, a pre-emptive strike against Pakistan’s strategic delivery systems. This is likely to push Pakistan to maintain at least a part of its strategic capabilities in a state of readiness to respond to a pre-emptive counter-force strike.

The third, and most ominous, possibility is that India has come to believe that foreign powers will prevent Pakistan, by threats or military means, from escalating a conventional conflict to the nuclear level.

If India launches a Cold Start strike, the world community would first try to halt the conflict. India may count on making quick military gains and then accepting a ceasefire. But, the priority western goal would be to prevent Pakistan from resorting to its nuclear deterrent. If diplomatic demarches and threats do not work, even more drastic measures could be contemplated.

Numerous media stories have mentioned the existence of US plans to seize or neutralise Pakistan’s nuclear weapons in the event of their threatened take over by Islamic radicals. These plans, if they exist, could be executed also in the context of an Indo-Pakistan conflict.

An article which appeared in the Foreign Affairs Quarterly (November-December 2009), “The Nukes We Need”, is also worth noting. The two writers argue that “The United States will sooner or later find itself embroiled in conventional wars with nuclear-armed adversaries” and should have the “ability to launch precise, very low-casualty nuclear counter-force strikes.” This would enable the US “to deter nuclear attacks” as well as have “retaliatory options.” The writers point out that the US already has such low-yield nuclear weapons in its arsenal.

Despite the present counter-terrorism alliance with the US, Pakistan needs to factor in these scenarios into its deterrence posture and doctrine. As the Foreign Affairs article, cited above, asserts: “If not backed by the capability and credibility to execute threats, deterrence is merely a dangerous bluff.”

To preserve the credibility of their nuclear deterrent capabilities, the major nuclear powers adopt some or all of three options: first, keep at least part of their nuclear-strategic weapons systems in a state of “high alert”; second, deploy a sufficient number of nuclear-armed missiles in hardened silos, deep underground, at secret and dispersed locations; and third, possess nuclear powered submarines as a credible second-strike nuclear force.

These objectives deserve the highest priority in Pakistan’s response to India’s new military doctrine. Pakistan’s response should also be accompanied by robust diplomatic action. This should include:

* A dialogue with China to coordinate an effective response to India’s new doctrine and capabilities at the diplomatic, strategic and tactical level.

* Press India’s weapons’ suppliers to refrain from providing it with the capabilities to execute its “adventurist” strategy; and

* Activating efforts to promote a South Asia restraint regime that provides for nuclear restraint, conventional balance and resolution of conflicts, especially Kashmir.

A clear and visible response by Pakistan is essential to convince India, and the international community, that Pakistan is determined to defend its independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity and that “cold start” could end in a hot finish.

The writer is a former Pakistani ambassador to the United Nations.

Source: http://thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=221109

PKKH

WASHINGTON — The White House on Monday was noncommittal but did not rule out Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s plan to ask for Taliban names to be removed from a UN blacklist to spur reconciliation.

Karzai said before heading for a major international conference on Afghanistan in London this week that he would also seek Western support for a plan to offer money and jobs to cajole Taliban fighters into laying down arms.

“I will be making a statement at the conference in London to the effect of removing Taliban names from the UN sanctions list,” Karzai told reporters in Istanbul.

The idea had previously met resistance but “as we are talking today, there is more willingness that this can be reconsidered,” he said.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs noted that top US generals David Petraeus and Stanley McChrystal had drawn parallels between Afghanistan and reconciliation schemes that had worked with factions in Iraq.

Gibbs did not comment in detail on Karzai’s plan.

But he said Washington was open to “a similar path to what happened in Iraq… provided that whoever this is accepts the Afghan constitution, renounces violence, and publicly breaks with groups that advocate violence.”

“That’s, I think, what people expect under the notion of reconciliation.”

Karzai wants to bring low- and mid-level fighters into mainstream society to end the gruelling insurgency, but the leadership of Islamist insurgent groups active in the battered country is hostile to negotiations.

McChrystal, the NATO military commander in Afghanistan, has voiced support for negotiated peace.

“As a soldier, my personal feeling is that there’s been enough fighting,” US General Stanley McChrystal said in an interview with Britain’s Financial Times published Monday.

“I believe that a political solution to all conflicts is the inevitable outcome. And it’s the right outcome.”

The White House has several times brought up the tactics of then US-Iraq commander Petraeus, who worked with local Sunni leaders fed up with Al-Qaeda after the Iraq war troop surge.

Karzai was in Istanbul for talks with Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari on Monday, to be following by a meeting with leaders of his country’s neighbors on Tuesday.

Under a plan announced by US President Barack Obama in December, 30,000 extra US troops will be in Afghanistan this year — on top of more than 70,000 already there — before they begin withdrawing in July 2011.

Karzai will fly on to Berlin and then London, where the conference will focus on corruption, security, good governance and reconciliation with the Taliban. US does not rule out Karzai’s Taliban plan

Daily.Pk

The internet has become a vehicle to fan preposterous propaganda by the agencies in India, in order to promote ‘Hindutva’ sensibility to raise scare and trepidation among the Hindus that Pakistan in collusion with Bangladesh and Indian Muslim are now planning for a second partition of the subcontinent to carve our a much bigger chunk of territory out of India,

which they have named ‘Mughalistan’, which will comprise Pakistan, Bangladesh, including all of North and Eastern India. The so called Mughal Muslim state will merge Pakistan and Bangladesh through a large corridor of land running across the Indo Gangetic plain – the heartland of India. Jinnah’s Pakistan was envisaged to have the whole of Bengal and the Punjab – besides a corridor which could provide land link between the ‘West’ and the former “East Pakistan.” The moth-eaten Pakistan was accepted only ‘temporarily’ as Jinnah thought it expedient to accept what was made available, under the exigencies of the circumstances, but the idea of ‘greater Pakistan’ was shelved for an appropriate time, as a necessary outcome of the partition, which the Hindu India had to reconcile with.

For propaganda message to appear credible a source had to be identified. It was deemed expedient to select Bangladesh, where this idea of Mughalstan was conceived and covertly planned at Jahangir Nagar University, jointly supported by the ISI of Pakistan and DGFI (Director General Forces Intelligence of Bangladesh). In propaganda parlance, this is called Black Propaganda source, which is based on total distortion as the real originators are operating from somewhere else. It is for our intelligence agencies to find out as to from where such “hate propaganda” is being disseminated. They have also concocted an organization called Mughalstan Research Institute (MRI) at Jahangir Nagar University. The objectives of the propaganda are focused on the following themes so that Indian Hindus see the so called vicious game the Muslims are playing to further divide the Hindu India and that they are no content with the creation of Pakistan – an Islamic Republic and Bangladesh though apparently ‘Secular’ nourishes deep Islamic ethos:

The Punjabis pronounce Mughalstan, ie, what is against the usual Urdu pronunciation Mughalistan. This is to establish that ISI (Punjabi dominated organization of Pakistan) is the contributor of the name. Such little details are meant to establish the credibility. The Islamic jehadis in India are being funded and organized by the Muslim countries, like Saudi Arabia and others. Osama Bin Laden is behind the concept of greater Pakistan to liberate the Muslims of India from the domination of Hindus. The Bombay bombings of 1993 was led by Karachi based Dawood Ibrahim (a fugitive who is very much wanted by India for his crimes, he committed) besides Jamat-e-Islami, Lashkar-e-Tayyaba, Jaish-e-Mohammad and Hizbul Mujahideen all are involved in planning a greater Islamic country in the subcontinent. Indian Mujahideen are also involved and the students of Islamic Movement in India (SIMI) are partners in this mission.

Hindus are declared enemies by Lashkar-e-Tayyaba and Jaish-e-Mohammad, and besides liberating Kashmir, they have vowed to hoist the Islamic flag atop the historic Red Fort after capturing Delhi and the rest of India. Establishment of Islamic caliphate is the objective of SIMI (Students Islamic Movement of India) and as such they have launched jihad in the Indian States as secularism, democracy and nationalism – the key stone of Indian states-hood, are antithetical to Islam. The Indian Mujahideen have claimed responsibility for bombings in Lucknow, Vanarsi and Faizabad, Banglore, Jaipur, Ahmedabad and New Delhi in 2007 and 2008. Their role models are Mohammad Bin Qasim, Mohammad Ghouri and Mahmood Ghaznavi. They consider ‘Hindu blood’ as the cheapest of all mankind, and taunt Hindu history as full of subjugation and humiliation.

Muslims, wherever they are in majority in India, for example Kashmir, hundreds of Hindu temples were raised. Hindus were forced to flee and their women were raped. There has been mass genocide of Hindus or they were converted to Islam. Kashmiri Muslims despite having special status – through Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, are still complaining of discrimination, the idea being that they are ungrateful people. Muslims population is steadily rising in the UP state, as it has risen to 18% and in Bihar 17%. A vast number of Madrassas and mosques are disproportionately growing through excessive funding by Saudi Arabia, Iran, Kuwait, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

Muslim Banghbhoomi comprises various districts along the Indo-Nepal and Indo-Bangladesh borders. Bangladesh is craving for Taliban type militants and madrassas are teaching that the Muslims are the best in the world and that the non-Muslims are “to be converted, beaten, killed and their women are to be raped as maal-e-ghaneemat. Atrocities against Hindus in Bangladesh can be seen from the fact that there is no single woman between the ages of 7 to 70, who has not been raped. Bangladeshis have succeeded in infiltrating into Maripur, Mizoram, Meghalaya. Arunchal Pradesh and Tripura etc. In other words, they are responsible for fanning fissiparous trends in many of the states of India.

The message is loud and clear that Hindus must rise to stop this grandiose plan of the Muslims. Mughalstan is not a question of “If” or “but”, but “when”, unless we, “Hindus” stand up to unitedly counter the treacherous plan. Ii implicitly carries message of coercive policies against he Indian Muslims, Pakistan and Bangladesh. The ostensible purpose of the propaganda is to malign both Bangladesh and Pakistan for their hatred against the Hindus. The whole propaganda is motivated by a typical Kautalian sensibility to use deception, duplicity and deceit to fan hatred against the Muslims. It is also aimed at frustrating all the attempts to bring peace and cooperation among Pakistan and India through much dramatically publicized “Aman Ki Aasha”. One should interpret the outlandish proclamation by the Indian Army Chief General Kapoor that India was capable of defeating both Pakistan and China within 96 hours. Stereotyping Muslims justifies all actions to destabilize Pakistan and even to launch a war if necessary.

The hate against Muslims is a combined strategy of US, Israel and India. The so called ‘War on Terror’ has a covert design to suppress the Islamic resurgence and undermine its identity through a well orchestrated plan. Pakistan should not dismiss it as a ‘whimsical idea’. There is a method in madness. They have killed around 90,000 Muslims in Kashmir in alone notwithstanding regular communal riots like the one in Gujrat, where Muslims were cut into pieces like vegetables. Besides Muslims, Sikhs have been killed to the tune of 250,000 in the operation against Golden Temple. A significant number of Christians have been slaughtered only in Orissa. Dalits are being most brutally treated at the hands of Hindus and yet the propaganda is to whitewash the Hindu propensity for violence. Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah was indeed a man of great foresight. He saw through the game, the Hindus were playing that they were the true inheritors of the British Empire and every one else was to be left high and dry.

Unfortunately, the rest of the world is uncritically accepting the Indian propaganda that it is a vibrant democracy, quite oblivious of the reality that India is notoriously following its apartheid repressive policy against its religious minorities. They are covertly planning to destabilize through subversion in Balochistan, tribal areas and extending it to Punjab and Karachi. George Orwell said very rightly: “In time of universal deceit, telling to truth is a revolutionary act.” The truth must be heeded to and our countrymen must rise against Indian machinations.

DR S M RAHMAN

RupeeNews

There is only one sentence to describe Bharati (aka Indian) attendance in the London conference on Afghanistan–”Bharat was addded as an afterthought, and after much yelling and screaming by Delhi”.
Islamabad believes India is looking to Afghanistan for destabilising Pakistan

Delhi was reluctantly invited to the London conference, but it might as well have not been invited. All its objections have been overruled. Bharat did not want the Taliban to be included in the Kabul government.

It has been.

Pakistan has repeatedly brought the world’s attention to Bharati Consulates who have been sponsoring terror in Pakistan. Bharat faces a hostile crowd. Pakistan, Turkey, and Afghanistan have already decided on the agenda, and it has been blessed by the US, the UN, Japan, China and the UK. There are leaked copies of the final resolution already published on various internet sites, including the Iranian Press TV site.

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan has successfully mobilized the defunct six-plus-two talks formula to counter the US pressure regarding giving India a “greater role” in warn-torn Afghanistan’s rehabilitation.Pakistan acts to counter Indian influence in Afghanistan By Sajjad Malik

Afghanistan’s immediate neighbours – Pakistan, Iran, China, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, as well as the US, are meeting today (Tuesday) in Turkey to discuss the situation in Afghanistan and to take stock of measures for the restoration of peace in the country.

The original “six-plus-two” also included Russia, but in the new set up Moscow representation has been replaced by the United Kingdom.

The Chinese foreign minister and senior officials from Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Pakistan and Afghanistan will attend the conference, which will also be attended by British Foreign Secretary David Miliband and US Special Envoy Richard Holbrooke’s deputy, Paul Jones.

Diplomatic sources said Pakistan has been lobbying for the renewal of talks among Afghanistan’s neighbours in order to foil Indian designs of gaining a foothold on Afghan soil.

Pakistan believes India is not an immediate neighbour of Afghanistan and therefore should have limited role in the country.

Turkey has been asked to convene the meeting, as it enjoys the backing and trust of Pakistan and is accepted as a neutral party for promoting a common approach to the conflict. The conference will urge regional players to work together in order to stabilise Afghanistan and the region.

The revival of the talks group has come at a crucial juncture – on Thursday, around 50 nations will be meeting at the London Conference to discuss the Afghan issue and deliberate on measures to help the war-ravaged nation.

The organisers of the London Conference, like the US, are trying to convince Pakistan on accepting the greater Indian role in Afghanistan.

Destabilisation: “It is not possible for us to give India a role in Afghanistan as it is using Afghan soil to destabilise Pakistan. Also, India has been traditionally aligned with Russia and played a part in the destruction of Afghanistan,” sources said. They said the last meeting of the six-plus-two group was held before the 9/11 attacks and the Taliban had agreed to give 80 percent of representation in the Afghan government to the Northern Alliance. “Since then, fortunes have reversed and the Taliban have lost the government. Now the six-plus-two group will try to pave the way for the participation of the Taliban in the new government,” sources said.

The coalition forces badly need breathing space in Afghanistan following a deadly 2009, in which the force lost at least 504 soldiers, including 305 US and 108 British troops. Sources said US-led forces were giving a thought to Pakistan’s viewpoint on the Afghan conflict, an idea substantiated by US Defence Secretary Robert Gates’ statement during a recent visit to Pakistan that said that Washington was with Pakistan and supported its efforts for peace in Afghanistan.

The presence of both the UK and the US at the Turkish initiative speaks volumes about their interest in a regional solution.

Bharat will try to brag about the so called $1.3 Billion has has spent/wasted on Afghanistan. Most of the money Delhi spent was actually went into the pockets of Bharati contractors from Bharat.

India will not complicate the US’s diplomacy in Islamabad by seeking any role in the build-up of the Afghan armed forces or police… Nor is Delhi inclined to raise dust about US plans regarding the “reintegration and reconciliation” of the Taliban. The Indian position was dogmatic but nuances have crept in. This is partly tactical, as it is clear Indian opposition will not stall the process of integrating the Taliban into Afghan political life. Ambassador Bhadrakumar. Asia Times Online

Much to the chagrin of Delhi, the Americans are fully supportive of including the Pakistani brokered peace between the Taliban and the government of Mr. Hamid Karzai. The only silver lining that Bharat can hope to see is possible support from Iran (which also is apprehensive of Taliban government in Kabul)

PressTv

US Defense Secretary Robert Gates has warned that militants might provoke a war between nuclear armed Pakistan and India.

Gates said in New Delhi on Wednesday that India cannot be expected to show restraint, should it be attacked by a militant group with roots in Pakistan.

“I think it’s not unreasonable to assume India’s patience would be limited were there to be further attacks,” Gates said following the talks with senior Indian officials.

Tension between India and Pakistan escalated particularly after the November 2008 Mumbai attacks that left nearly 170 people dead.

India blames Pakistani-based anti-India groups for the attacks.

India and Pakistan have fought three wars since the two neighbors secured independence from Britain in 1947.

Gates, who is visiting the Indian capital of New Delhi, also discussed the prospect of stronger military ties between the US and India. He has pledged to help India gain access to high-tech military technology.

Gates also told Indian officials that Washington intends to be involved in the region for a very long time.

Daily.Pk

It is befuddling to see two faces of India; one face breathing fire and yearning to annihilate Pakistan, and the other singing melodious tunes of peace and friendship. One year before, Indian civil and military leaders were indulging in high pitch saber rattling. Their strike formations had moved up into battle locations and fighter jets had scrambled to strike targets in AJK and Muredke.

Indian media and public were up in arms beating war drums. Divorcing sanity and rationalism, Indian leadership accused Pakistan of its involvement in Mumbai attacks and charge-sheeted it without any shred of evidence. They had refused to listen to any explanation and spurned offer of joint investigation. Whatever one-sided evidence was provided to Pakistan was flimsy and fabricated. They got irritated when lies got exposed but USA and UK covered up their concoctions by fully backing them up and putting the entire blame on Pakistan. Their bellicosity has not died down to this date and they are still bent upon trying to coercively impose their will on Pakistan.

On 29 December, Indian army Chief Deepak Kapoor stoked embers of war for the second time in quick succession. No sooner this uncalled for jingoistic statement was made another equally puzzling move was made under the caption of Aman ki Asha (desire for peace). A seminar was organised in New Delhi jointly sponsored by India Times and Jang Group from 10-12 January to promote peace between two arch rivals. Notwithstanding the harmless and well-meaning title, timings of the same were rather odd since it does not fit into the vitiated atmosphere deliberately stoked by India. It is persistently inflating its defence budget and its armed forces are getting laced with latest art-of-weapons and its nuclear program is being radically expanded and upgraded. Added to it are its offensive designs and covert operations against Pakistan. It is in no mood to resolve disputes and ease tensions. From the time India signed peace treaty with Pakistan in January 2004 and promised to resolve all disputes through composite dialogue, India has not moved an inch towards resolution of any dispute. Major disputes are Kashmir, Siachen, Sir Creek, dams on rivers and water. Past master in foot dragging and making false promises, India kept buying time and under the garb of friendship deceived Pakistan by stabbing it in the back. Its intelligence agencies have been indulging in sabotage and subversion and supporting disruptive forces in Pakistan and making several regions turbulent. Even when RAW’s involvement in Balochistan, FATA and Swat came to light our leaders preferred to remain quiet so as not to antagonize India.

Taking our policy of appeasement as a sign of weakness, RAW and Mossad in consultation with CIA cooked up Mumbai drama. Indian political leaders and media upped the ante and held Pakistan squarely responsible for the carnage without a shred of evidence. Their mentors in USA and UK lent credence to their false claims. The incident planned in a shoddy manner backfired and prestige of shining India got badly bruised. Indian public termed it as an intelligence failure. Intelligence agencies, Indian Navy, Coast Guard, Mumbai security apparatus as well as Army were censured since a band of ten terrorists managed to breach the cordon and held the port city hostage for over 72 hours. Response of security forces was simply pathetic, resulting in lots of fatalities including foreigners and loss of face. When Pakistan did not get over awed and held its ground firmly on diplomatic and military planes coolly, maturely and boldly, it nonplussed plot makers in India. As the dust settled down and glaring loopholes in the wicked plan started to prop up, it further perplexed them. It irritated them to find Pakistan objecting to their fake pieces of evidence and got panicky when their lies got exposed. Not knowing what to do, they were left with no other option but to keep crying as victims of terrorism and stubbornly clinging on to their ridiculous stance that India would not renew dialogue unless Pakistan acted upon its silly demands of punishing the culprits and dismantling terrorist networks. While expecting a lot from Pakistan, India refuse to admit that it is involved in subversive activities, well knowing that Pakistan has collected heap of evidence.

Hosts of steps taken by Pakistan were disregarded and like USA, it also started to stupidly sing the mantra of ‘do more’. This piggish stance has become all the more necessary to hide their embarrassment since Ajmal Kasab, the lone witness on which the whole case was cleverly spun by Indian agencies has begun to unravel truths while recoding his statement in the law court. He has categorically denied having killed anyone on 26/11 and revealed that he was kidnapped and put in jail much before the incident and on the day of occurrence he was taken to the site, shot and injured. Involvement of local terrorists aided by elements within Indian army and RAW in Samjhota Express and Malegaon acts of terror has already been proven. In the backdrop of demonstrated Indian bellicosity, Aman ki Asha came as a surprise and left many in Pakistan gaping in wonder as to what to believe and what not to believe. Pro-Indian elements within Pakistan have however hailed the initiative. They have been ignoring Indian clandestine operations together with jingoism and have projected Indo-US theme that religious extremists and not India is the existential threat to security of Pakistan. They laugh and mock those who say that war on terror is US war and not our war. They also ignored Gen Kapoor’s offensive statements but jumped with excitement at the proposed seminar on Aman ki Asha and lauded the idea profusely. In their series of write ups they have projected it as a breakthrough and a step in the right direction towards Indo-Pak détente. None bothered to contemplate that no Indian leader has brought any change in his tone and hawkish style, or taken any confidence building measures (CBM) to ease up tension.

List of invitees was prepared from among them. Aman ki Asha is not meant to promote peace but to once again harm Pakistan through guile and deceit. It has been conceived and sponsored by RAW with devious motives. Real motive behind it is to sidestep real issues of conflict and once again indulge in nonsensical CBMs. It is an effort to hoodwink world comity and to again take Pakistan for a ride.

India has somehow come to the conclusion that as a result of Indo-US-Israel-UK eight-year collective efforts, Pakistan has been sufficiently weakened from within and is now in dire strait. They feel that time is ripe to dictate terms either through military coercion or through peace mantra and extract maximum concessions. They want peace to be imposed on Indian terms which they perceive will be readily accepted by Pakistan. Pro-Indian lobbies particularly among ultra liberals in Pakistan will actively pursue their agenda.

If India is really interested in peace, it will have to first undo some of the blatant wrongs it inflicted upon Pakistan. It must immediately put an end to its intrusive and meddlesome activities in Pakistan, it should abide by Indus Basin Treaty of 1960 and stop stealing water and building dams on rivers flowing into Pakistan, abide by Indo-Pak agreement on Siachen inked in 1989, resolve Sir Creek issue on which already lot of ground has been covered, stop its vile propaganda against Pakistan, develop relations on the basis of trust, friendship, respect and equality. Above all, longstanding Kashmir dispute which is the main bone of contention should be resolved in accordance with UN Resolutions and pledges of Nehru.

A H Raja

NEW DELHI: India on Monday told the United States that it had no agenda in Afghanistan except seeing it emerge as a stable and peaceful country.

To this end, India would continue to work in Afghanistan on development projects but with no geo-political ambitions, External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna told the visiting U.S. Special Envoy on Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, here.

Mr. Holbrooke was also told about India’s involvement in infrastructure building in Afghanistan.

The U.S. Special Envoy said he was looking forward to the international conference on Afghanistan, scheduled for January 28 in London, and expected a positive contribution from India.

He also informed Mr. Krishna of two preparatory meets scheduled in Turkey with India participating in one of them. Mr. Krishna is scheduled to attend the London meeting.

Mr. Holbrooke briefed the Minister on the steps taken by the U.S. in Afghanistan and the content of his talks in Islamabad and Kabul.

Sources in the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) said Mr. Krishna indicated India’s keenness to see the situation stabilise in Afghanistan but professed disinterestedness on other issues of tactical military importance.

Emerging from the talks, Mr. Holbrooke said India was a “tremendously important participant in the search for peace and stability not only in south Asia but throughout the vast region that stretches from the Mediterranean to the Pacific.”

He reiterated the U.S.’ expectation of “more action” from Pakistan in routing the Taliban from its bases on the Afghan-Pakistan border despite being encouraged by its battle with the militants in the Swat Valley.

The main subject of his talks with the Pakistani leadership during his ongoing three-nation visit was the spread of the Taliban in the North West Frontier Province. Mr. Holbrooke did not think Monday’s attack in Kabul was surprising “since they are desperate people.”

He said:

“They are ruthless and the people who are doing this will certainly not survive this attack nor will they succeed, but we can expect this sort of thing on a regular basis.

“That is what Taliban are. They are part of extremist groups operating in the border areas between Afghanistan and Pakistan and they do these desperate things all the time and India knows all this.”

Daily.Pk

INDIA IS LOSING THE BALANCE

Sino india India which has openly signed a number of mutual agreements with China, calling the latter a strategic partner, has been playing a double game with Beijing by acting upon a secret strategy.

Although Sino-Indian differences have always existed due to Indian presumption that peace-loving China is its adversary, yet the same has entered into the alarming situation when on December 29, 2009, Indian Army chief General Deepak Kapoor openly revealed that Indian Army “is now revising its five-year-old doctrine” and is preparing for a “possible two-front war with China and Pakistan.” While New Delhi is no is match to Beijing in conventional and nuclear weapons, but this statement clearly shows that Indian rulers are ready to go even to the extent of war especially against China. However, with the statement of Kapoor, Sino-Indian rift which has been in its embryonic stage has come on the surface.

Last year, Indian leaders and media seriously reacted to an article of a Chinese think-tank, Zhan Lue who suggested the disintegration of India. As a matter of fact, it was the only personal opinion of a Chinese think-tank, having no official backing, but Indian high officials took it as the state voice of Beijing. In this respect, on August 11, India Today cited Navy Chief Admiral Sureesh Mehta disclosing: “China is likely to be more assertive on its claims, especially on its immediate neighbours…matching division should be changed to technological advancement on the Indian military side. We should reduce the Chinese footprints on the Indian Ocean.”

While criticising the article, former officer of the Indian intelligence agency, RAW RSN Singh remarked, “This kind of a report never comes without state approval. But India is fully prepared, if the Chinese think of any misadventure, they will be in for a shock.”

In fact, under the pretext of Chinese threat to the Indian Union, New Delhi has itself been planning to destablise, and even to disintegrate China. In this regard, on March 10, 2008 when anti-government violent protests by Buddhist monks erupted in Tibet’s capital, Lhasa including nearby provinces, India, backed the same, though outwardly denied. Dalai Lama, the spiritual leader of Tibet who has lived in exile in India along with his 120,000 followers since a failed revolt against Chinese rule in 1959 has been tacitly encouraged by New Delhi—enabling him to mobilize armed groups and international support to create instability in the neighboring provinces of China. For this purpose, India has clandestinely established secret camps where Dalai Lama’s militants are being imparted armed training. In this respect, Indian RAW has sent a number of agents who have joined the ranks and files of the Tibetan insurgents of China, and they create unrest from time to time.

New Delhi shows that despite Sino-Indian border dispute, she does not favour an independenceBorder Disputes of Tibet and avoids any propaganda against Beijing. But Indian stand was indirectly expressed by its leaders and media. For example, the former foreign minister Yashwant Sinha had said, “We want good relations with China, but if we reach a point of conflict over Tibet, we should  be prepared for that eventuality.”

The state-run China Daily, on July 27, 2006, denounced the Lama as a “splittist” and pointed out that he has “collaborated with the Indian military and American CIA to organise Indian Tibetan special border troops to fight their way back into Tibet.”

It is notable that in order to conceal its covert activities, India has always blamed China for backing Maoist uprising. In this context, instead of addressing the root causes of the Maoist uprising, Indian government has recently intensified its blame game against China, alleging for supplying arms to these insurgents.

While everyone knows that in more than seven states, India itself faces separatist movements which are the result of acute poverty and social injustices. Particularly, Maoist movement has been raging in the form of peasant uprising in West Bengal. And its leader, Mupala Luxman Rao in 1969, protested against big Hindu landlords who left no stone unturned in molesting the poor people through their mal-treatment such as forced labour, minimum wages, unlawful torture and even killings. Now this movement which is indigenous has expanded to Indian other regions including Maharashtra. At present, it is a popular insurgency by the downtrodden who have massive support of people for their ideology.

In this regard, on October 31, 2009, The New York Times wrote, “India’s Maoist rebels are now present in 20 states and have killed more than 900 Indian security officers…India’s rapid economic growth has made it an emerging global power but also deepened stark inequalities in society.” However, by neglecting all these ground realties, and accusing Beijing, New Delhi has been advancing towards a self-destructive path. Taking cognizance of Kapoor’s threat against China and Pakistan, on January 2, Pakistan’s Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee (JCSC) Chairman Gen. Tariq Majid has rightly indicated, “The Indian Army Chief’s statement exhibits a lack of strategic acumen. He further said that such a path could “fix India on a self-destructive mechanism.”

India’s misperceptions about Beijing in connection with Maoist movement could also be judged from the fact that it has also been accusing the latter for supporting Maoist insurgency in Nepal. Recently, India has also blamed China for backing a Maoist study center so as to cause uprising in Nepal. While these Indian allegations were already proved untrue when in the recent past, Maoist political party won the overwhelming majority in country’s first genuine elections.

As regards Indian new military build up against China, on May 31 last year, after 43 years, New Delhi re-opened its Daulat Beg Oldi (DBO) airbase in northern Ladakh, which overlooks the strategic Karakoram Pass and is only 8 kilometers, south of the Chinese border-Aksai Chin area. India has also erected more than 10 new helipads and roads between the Sino-Indian border.

In this connection, Defence Ministry planners are working on building additional airfields and increasing troops—raising two new mountain divisions to be deployed along the 4,057-kilometer Line of Actual Control (LAC).

With the help of Israel and America, on 26 February 2008, India conducted its first test of a nuclear-capable missile from an under sea platform after completing its project in connection with air, land and sea ballistic systems.

In the recent past, Indian Navy Chief Admiral Sureesh Mehta revealed that New Delhi “will soon float tenders to acquire six submarines”. Mehta also accused Beijing and explained that the “Indian Navy would keep a close watch on the movements of Chinese submarines which are operating out of an underground base in the South China Sea” and “wish to enter the Indian Ocean”. However, under the pretension of China factor, New Delhi and Israel with the tactical support of the sole superpower are plotting to block the sea lanes of the Indian Ocean for their joint strategic goals.

It is of particular attention that in May 1998, when India detonated five nuclear tests, the then Defense Minister George Fernandes had declared publicly that “China is India’s potential threat No. 1.” India which successfully tested missile, Agni-111 in May 2007, has been extending its range to target all the big cities of China.

America which signed a nuclear deal with India in 2008, intends to make India a mini-super power of Asia by containing China and destablising Pakistan as well as Iran. Pakistan’s province, Balochistan where China has invested billion of dollars to develop Gwadar seaport irritates both Washington and New Delhi.

However, Beijing and Islamabad cannot neglect their common defence when their adversaries are following a covert strategy. In this connection, Pakistan’s President Asif Ali Zardari had decided to visit China after every three months to further cement ties between both the old friends. Both the countries have signed eleven agreements to enhance bilateral cooperation in diverse sectors. So Sino-India rift is also part of the greater cold war between the US and China. Besides, Indian reservations regarding China’s infrastructural projects in Azad Kashmir are unjustified and discriminative.

Indian game plan against Beijing could also be assessed from the fact that on the one hand, New Delhi is grabbing waters of neighboring countries by building dams, while India is challenging the Chinese plans to build a dam on the river Yarlung Tsangpo in the upper reaches of Tibetan plateau, reiterating that it would adversely affect navigation in the Brahmaputra River.

Returning to our earlier discussion India which has wide-ranging agreements with Beijing, apparently emphasises mutual cooperation, but has been acting upon anti-China secret diplomacy. Hence, Sino-Indian rift has widened in the recent times.

Sajjad Shaukat

Daily.pk

Western fascism does not let the Indian strategists to consider surrendering Kashmir sovereignty at any early date. While US led IST (international state terrorists), basically the Chrestians who hate Islam and Muslims, are let terror loose in Afghanistan and Pakistan with drones killing every Muslim they think have the right to live like Muslims, Indians also consider their prerogative kill Muslims in its vicinities.

Having been made an Indian military cantonment cum arms depot for decades now since 1947, Kashmir, a former valley, remains the epicenter of Indian state terrorism meant to silence Kashmiris demanding sovereignty back from a fanatically terror India, supported by many arms suppliers to that country, including Russia and Israel’ Kashmir has been converted into zone of a syndicate of Indo-Israeli hidden gangs operating in this to terrorize Kashmiri Muslims until they all become full Indians; Hindus by provocative techniques have made several Kashmiris to take up arms against the aggressors.

Hindus are basically extremely greedy and always sought to control the peoples in their neighbourhoods, but the arrival of British army in India altered the mindset of Hindus only to serve the resent masters and use them to create problem for Muslims. The British colonizers, quite deliberately supported Indian aspiration for a hegemonic position in the South Asia region. October 27, 1947, changed the destiny of Kashmiris and fate of Kashmiris as the Indian terror troops, on guidance and support from the UK, landed in Jammu Kashmir capital Srinagar to defend the Kashmiris against any “external threats” and forcefully started occupying the state without the concurrence of the people.

According to the India now the original “Article of Accession” for the state of Kashmir is lost–as if it ever existed. There are serious issues of timing. India is preparing for a possible ‘two-front war’ with China and Pakistan. However, India never discloses this openly and avoids earning the wrath of the Kashmiris who have lost their dear ones in the struggle for freedom the Indian Hindu terrorists. But Indian leaders keep stating JK is an integral par of Hindu India which has the privilege of killing any Muslim inside India and Kashmir as per their whims and fancies – and with American help the Pakistanis and Afghanis. India thinks if Americans just close their dirty eyes on what it does in Jammu Kashmir, New Delhi would also pretend ignorance of what US-led NATO terrorists are doing in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan  and would not make any reference to NATO genocides  in Islamic world. This mutual agreement has brought about a nasty Israeli-India terror coalition and both don’t criticise of each other’s terrorism in Palestine and Kashmir. That is the new democracy.

India gives out the probably its usual mischievous, impression, that India is negotiating with Kashmiris and Pakistanis for the settlement of Jammu Kashmir issue tormenting the region for a long time now. India makes the world, including the USA, that it is making strenuous efforts to make as many Kashmiris and Pakistanis pro-India probably for that purpose, Kashmiri freedom leaders knowing al hidden strategies of Hindus both in India and Jammu Kashmir, are not willing to buy any of the Indian gestures that hide the ugly side of Indian terror goals in JK and Pakistan.

Indian double speak can some times outmanoeuvre the Israeli and American ones. On 12 Jan India organized a seminar on Jammu Kashmir and arranged for some Hindu Kashmiri pundits enjoying life in New Delhi to disturb the meet and hurl nasty Hindu comments in unparliamentarily expressions on freedom leader of JK Liberation Front Yasen Malik. The Muslim leaders of Kashmir like National Conference and Congress party have made a Hindu, for the first time, deputy CM in the government and they pursue Hindu interests of Pundits. Obviously, the NC is also playing its dirty politics in attacking the freedom leaders of Kashmir to get applause from Hindu masters in New Delhi. That is characteristic of pro-India elements in JK.

II

Pro-Indian elements of Kashmiris now enjoy life to the fullest possible ways by being in both JK state and central regimes. By doing so, they also seem to mock at the freedom groups each one trying to outsmart the other on being the real “separatist” faction in JK. While the freedom factions do not find the need to unit and merge into one solid freedom movement with several leaders concentrating on each aspect, like one for foreign media management, etc, the pro-India outfits think they can tactfully obtain sovereignty back form an arrogant India with an innocent looking façade.

By promoting pro-India elements in Kashmir, Indian state arranged a show with IANS in the form of an interview on the sidelines of a function organised in New Delhi on 20 Oct evening to celebrate Abdullah’s 73rd birthday. A beaming political actor from Kashmir who is also responsible for the genocides and disappearances of Kashmiri Muslims said: ‘Kashmir will remain a part of India and Kashmiris will never leave this nation. You should not doubt us. India should stop thinking that Kashmiris will ever divide off from India ‘. The Kashmir issue, he said, ‘will be solved peacefully only if India and people at the helm in New Delhi stop thinking that Kashmiris will ever secede’.

Indian colonialists relish the genocides of Kashmiris and derive sadistic pleasure at the secret graveyards left intact by the occupying Hindu terrorists in JK. Hindus are enjoying their domestic politics by giving unsolicited advices to Kashmir Muslims. As Indian premier terrorist Manmohan keeps giving sermons on behaviour, Kashmir leader Abdullah, now a central minister, tries to become a nice guy in the eye of Hindus. National Conference NC claims to the true owners of Jammu Kashmir with their Pundit connections. As part of Indian democratic and secular traditions, both father and son Farooqs are now true representative of Kashmiris- son as CM of JK and father a minister in central government.

It appears the Kashmiris who are in central coalition UPA government, especially from non-Congress stream like National Conference NF to make pro-Indian statements mixed with emotional outbursts to fool the listeners and spectators. NC leader and father Omar Farook, the CM of JK, Farook Abdullah claims his party always fought for independence of Jammu Kashmir and as such freedom groups are less important than NC in Kashmir politics becomes a nice guy. Immediately after the JK polls, the NC leaders declared they knew where to put the Hyrriyat.

India should not doubt Kashmiris and stop thinking they will ever ‘leave this nation’, says former Jammu and Kashmir chief minister and union Minister for New and Renewable Energy Farooq Abdullah in a visibly renewed energetic mode. Farooq bhai pleads Hindus and their henchmen to listen to the heartbeats of the people of India. They want to live in peace and harmony. Don’t divide them,’ an emotional Abdullah told the gathering, which also included former ministers Vasant Sathe and M.M. Jacob as well as former Jammu and Kashmir governor and ex RAW (Research and Analysis Wing) chief G.C. Saxena who insulted the his Hindu “yatra politics” in Kashmir valley and created more problems for unsecured Kashmiri Muslims. Thousands of Muslims were slaughtered in Kashmir under his governorship alone.  Hindu India is keen to use the severely frustrated Kashmiri Muslims fight for Hindu cause as well. Abdullah is an important tool in New Delhi for this.

Avoiding any worthwhile commitment to the real issue of sovereignty, Manmohan on 28 Oct asked the youth of Kashmir to “change” and join in building a new Kashmir for peace in the region. He urged them to think constructively about how to build their futures. Manmohan asked Kashmiris not to harbour ambitions of joining Pakistan but be with Hindu terror India. The prime minister said under the government’s skill development and employment scheme, the tourism ministry will train 300 youth of the state to be deployed as escorts of Hindus masters during the Amarnath and Vaishno Devi pilgrimages. In simple words, Hindus ask Kashmiri youth to serve Hinduism and be nice guys like Farook and Co. Or, face the Indian state terrorism laws and rules” He also said will deploy around 8,000 youth in Jammu and Kashmir on a voluntary basis as part of a nation-wide program to engage in public service such as cleaning of the picturesque Dal Lake. Kashmiris should clean up Dal Lake only to get themselves by Hindu state terrorists on the sidelines.

III

Pakistan consistently displays interest in Kashmir issue seeking for its re-independence. There has been a hunch that Pakistan keeps changing its Kashmiri stand and promotes those Kashmiris who want JK to become a part of Pakistan. Both India and pro-India elements are trying to bribe the Kashmiris freedom fighters making them pro-Indian elements. There is no evidence to either prove or disprove this. One may recall that during his very first press conference after taking oath as President, Asif Zardari had pronounced that the nation would hear some good news about Kashmir within a month. This announcement had raised both expectations and suspicions — whether the President has some workable agenda and mechanism to address this problem or had he entered into any behind the scene understanding with Indians. Similarly, at a certain stage he also proposed that Pakistan and India should work on normalization of their relations and settlement of the Kashmir issue should be left to the future generations.

At a point Zardari was seen tryng to appeasse India leaders for nothing. In an interview to Wall Street Journal, Zardari had even also dubbed the freedom fighters as terrorists, triggering strong protests from Kashmiris and delighting the Indian Establishment. In this backdrop, one is pleased to note this positive turn in his thinking and hopefully this would not prove to be a mere PR exercise during his maiden visit to an area which is considered to be the base camp for the freedom struggle of the Kashmiri people. We also expect other concerned institutions and policy-making circles would also start giving the issue the attention it deserves. Unfortunately, in the past, Pakistan deviated from its principled position by offering so-called out-of-the-box solution and, therefore, the focus now should return back to solution of the problem strictly in accordance with the relevant UN resolutions.

When terror India has plenty of resources including stolen and earned through immoral and illegal means, the freedom groups are handicapped by lack of funds to purse their goals and some of them are funded by both Pakistan and India to keep the death toll of Kashmir   on the rise. The moderate faction of the separatist Hurriyat Conference has indicated its willingness to talk to New Delhi saying it was a ‘positive development’. Abdullah said New Delhi should learn lessons from past mistakes of giving ‘too much hype’ to the Kashmir peace process — which led to the brutal killing of a pro-Kashmir commander Hizbul Mujahideen, Abdul Majid Dar, who had agreed to hold talks with the central government after he declared a ceasefire in 2000. Dar was expelled from the outfit and was later shot dead by militants in March 2002.Abdullah said dialogue to encompass all shades of opinion was ‘inevitable and it seems New Delhi has recognised the fact’. ‘They are sincere,’ he reiterated, adding that some political prisoners had been released. Manmohan Singh is also holding a meeting to implement the recommendations of the five working groups set up to look into the problems in the state.

A day after Prime terrorist Manmohan Singh offered peace talks to pro-Kashmir and freedom leaders in Jammu and Kashmir, Union home terror minister P Chidambharam said the government was mulling withdrawal of paramilitary forces from the valley as well as the ‘vacation of occupied houses and land’ by the army. “We have identified a number of issues on which follow-up action is being taken by the central government and the government of Jammu and Kashmir,” Chidambaram told reporters here, including withdrawal of some paramilitary battalions and vacation of occupied houses and land by the army and paramilitary”.  Chidambaram said different opinions will be reconciled and the decision taken in appropriate cabinet committees. He said the central government was keen on “transferring more and more responsibility to the Jammu and Kashmir police and strengthening (its) training”.

The specialist in quiet diplomacy and central police Minister P. Chidambaram had announced in Kashmir last month that the central government was working ‘on quiet diplomacy to arrive at a unique, acceptable and honourable solution to the problems in Kashmir ‘, raising expectations that the stalled talks with separatist leaders would resume. His comments come after the prime terror minister Manmohan said in Srinagar that the responsibility of maintaining law and order “will increasingly fall on the Jammu and Kashmir police”. Chidambaram said the government “intends to follow up on the promise of ‘quiet talks, quiet diplomacy’ with all shades of political opinion in Jammu and Kashmir “, echoing what Manmohan Singh said during his two-day visit to the valley. “We need to end all the violence to begin a dialogue.’

Addressing an invited audience at the function organised by the Foundation for Amity and National Solidarity, former JK CM Farook Abdullah said India wanted peace with Pakistan. ‘We don’t hate Pakistan. We feel sad to see what is happening in Pakistan. “We want a friendship with you but please allow us to live happily,’ he said while expressing concern over rising terrorism in the neighbouring country. Abdullah urged politicians not to mix religion with politics. ‘Every election in India divides the nation because elections are being fought on religious sentiments. People are seeking votes in the name Ram and Allah. Abdullah now advocates cooperation and sharing the booty and not any religious radicalism.

NC patron Abdullah clearly shows his first priority as a Muslim by prioritising his alignment: ‘I am a Muslim. I am Kashmiri and I am a proud citizen of India, the country whose unity in diversity amazes me,’ Abdullah, who is also president of the ruling National Conference in the state, stated.  The former chief minister appreciated the central government’s move of ‘quiet diplomacy’ to solve the problems in the state that has been ravaged by a two-decade separatist war. New Delhi, according to him, is sincere this time and the other side separatist leaders is also serious,’ Abdullah said, adding ‘there should be no hype if the Kashmir issue is to be solved sincerely’. Perhaps, Farooq feels something is always better than nothing including a central ministerial cabinet. After all, he was a victim of Indian fanaticism and state terrorism as he was removed as CM when he made a trip to Marg while stressing for re-independence from Indian yoke.

President Asif Ali Zardari declared last week that fighting for liberation of Kashmir is duty of Pakistan and that there can be no peace in the region without resolution of this long-standing conflict. During his first ever visit to Muzaffarabad where he addressed the joint session of the AJK Legislative Assembly and Kashmir Council, the President also expressed the confidence that time is not far off when the world powers and regional countries (a veiled reference to India) will have to take serious decisions about Kashmir. This must be music to ears for Kashmiris living on both sides of the Line of Control (LoC), as it is a healthy departure from Zardari’s earlier stance on the Kashmir issue, freedom struggle and the approach to resolve the problem. It is an open secret that the Pak President had an evasive stance on this crucial issue, which is rightly believed to be a nuclear flash point between two South Asian neighbours. However, he should know rhetoric alone wil not bring peace to the region.

(More to follow)

A R Colachal

Srinagar, Occupied Kashmir: Hundreds of angry Kashmiri villagers paraded two Indian soldiers naked through the streets after they were caught trying to rape a 17 year old girl. Mohammad Usman, a witness, told that furious villagers had beaten up the soldiers, stripped them, shaved their heads smeard dirt on their faces and paraded them through the village market in the incident which took place in Kunan, a village north of Srinagar, the capital of Indian-occupied Kashmir.

by GHALIB SULTAN
First Published on: Sep 7, 2009

Figures from Indian sources all indicate that the violence is way down in Indian Held Kashmir. The number of civilian deaths in 2007 were 170, in 2008 147 and in 2009 58 up to July. These include people killed by Indian security forces. Indian security force personnel casualties were 122 in 2007, 85 in 2008 and 39 up to July 2009. The cease fire violations on the Line of Control were 21in 2007 and 77 in 2008 and overall incidents are down from 1504 in 2002 to 236 in 2009 so far. The trend is definitely towards a reduction of violence and the credit for this must go to Pakistan. India has neither acknowledged this to Pakistan nor has it reciprocated in any way.

Again according to Indian sources the voter turnout in the last elections was ‘massive’ and that the various militant organizations within Indian Held Kashmir have lost their clout and credibility but that they still exist there. India has not been able to close them down in spite of intelligence on their leadership and activities—probably because the backlash may revive the freedom struggle. The rape and killing of two teenage Muslim girls in the Shopian area of Indian Held Kashmir led to protests that were put down with excessive levels of force. There was also a furor in the State Assembly indicating the fragility of the ‘political’ environment that is supposed to replace the ‘violence prone’ environment. India has done nothing tangible to promote the political track to encourage and reassure those who have doubts and fears. Nor has India reined in its brutalized security forces.

As summer sets in the Indian authorities have started their usual talk of ‘camps’ in Pakistan. This time locations are being indicated. Indians are voicing fears of renewed violence completely ignoring the statistical trends indicated by their own observers. Also being ignored is their own observation that ‘jihadi’ elements within India and Indian Held Kashmir could trigger events and situations to disturb the India-Pakistan situation. If India is not willing to credit Pakistan with the reduction in militancy and violence and if it is not prepared to carry out demilitarization in proportion to the reduction in violence and if it is not ready to eschew the use of lethal force against Kashmiris then what options do others have?

The logical course of action is to start a dialogue—whether it is called composite or something else does not matter. Even here Indian fears of non-state actors retaliating to progress in talks tend to dominate. The Indian Army Chief has made a totally unwarranted and confused statement about ‘Pakistani capacity exceeding deterrence level requirements’. Surely he should know that it is Pakistan’s prerogative to decide the level of sufficiency in deterrence just as it is India’s prerogative to decide how much it wants to spend on its military build-up and how much on poverty alleviation! The Indian Army Chief has also talked of increased levels of ‘infiltration and violence’ in Kashmir without mentioning any statistics. No one in India wants to discuss Indian involvement in Baluchistan and FATA—in fact the US should note that if this involvement is proved with evidence then the public and media support for the military action in those areas could change. This is not the time for hare brained pro-active policies of the past. The recent indications that the trail of the attack on the Sri Lanka team in Lahore goes back to Tamil Tigers may well take it to Indian support of the Tamil Tigers! India and Pakistan need to talk to each other before it is too late.