is pakistan a failed state?

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
21

pakistan is def a failed state! us pakis love to cry and whine abt the young children killed by israelis by kill our own children by not providing basic amenties such as clean drinking water..bunch of hypocrites we are..unforunately

22

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Talwar: *
....I'd not call Pakistan a failed state because it is clearly not the case.
[/QUOTE]

Thank you for being a voice of reason.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by lussi: *
....pakistan is def a failed state!
[/QUOTE]

Lussi, do not confuse the state of Pakistan with a bunch of Mullahtic idiotics. Mullahcracy is a complete failure and we are trying to get rid of it as soon as possible. The column for religion is already gone from the passport. Shariat courts are next. Soon Mullahtic idiotics will be locked in their hijra hujras.

23

it all depends on what definition of "success" you are using.

if in 1947, you expected the Pakistan of 2004 to be a modernized state with a thriving economy and minimal poverty, then yes it is a failure.

however, only a complete idiot would've expected such results after less than 60 yrs of independence.

i say a "failure" would have been if Pakistan was on the verge of collapse like many African states (which could have happened to a poor country after 60 years). that is not the case, so i say "no" to the title of the thread. if you intended to factor in comparisons with India, then perhaps the answer changes. but that shouldn't be the criteria.

24

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Talwar: *

I'd not call Pakistan a failed state because it is clearly not the case.
[/QUOTE]

Funny, just a few years back, Indians were at the fore front of the "failed state" chorus. Its was the biggest ego boost since the 1971 war... My how times do change:)

25

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by mAd_ScIeNtIsT: *
Pakistan has a GDP per capita greater than 61 other countries, and only 16% lower than that of India.

Pakistan's far from being a failed state. Today it's performing better in almost every respect that 10 years ago.

Unemployed is lower than in 1993, death rates per 1000 are lower, literacy rates are up, we've even successfully managed to lower our birthrate dramatically.

Not only is Pakistan not a failed state, but it is a state that is getting stronger by almost every measure year upon year.
[/QUOTE]

Indias econonly according to Shahid Javed Burki is about 8 or 10 times bigger then Pakistans. That aint to bad considering their population is also about that much bigger then ours. So not doing to bad. At least in relation to India.

26

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PaKpatriot1: *

Funny, just a few years back, Indians were at the fore front of the "failed state" chorus. Its was the biggest ego boost since the 1971 war... My how times do change:)
[/QUOTE]

Let it be O baboo! Talwar is not responsible for what commie leftie Bharati newsmen were spouting few years back.

In fact Talwar happens to be one of the most caring Bharati on this forum and we should all appreciate that.

27

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PaKpatriot1: *

Funny, just a few years back, Indians were at the fore front of the "failed state" chorus. Its was the biggest ego boost since the 1971 war... My how times do change:)
[/QUOTE]

It's been the case on both sides.

Many Indian analysts have been predicting Pakistan's failure for a long time - mostly since the 1990s. Likewise, many Pakistani opinion hawkers have been predicting India's imminent disintegration for years. Neither understand the other side's nationalism. I myself did not "get" the idea of Pakistan until I interacted with Pakistanis in the US and Europe.

The dejection of those Pakistanis who say their state has failed them is perhaps due to high expectations and dare I say a sense of comparison with India. Even as late as the 1980s, Pakistan's middle class was living far better than those in India and comparable to any in Asia bar the gulf states. Smuggled tapes of Pakistani dramas were everywhere in Hindi/Urdu speaking parts of India. But the 1990s were a lost decade for Pakistan and only now people are realizing how much Pakistan dropped during those years and how big a hit the Pakistani middle class took. Meanwhile, India and others caught up and moved on.

I've been pointing out some statistics that Pakistanis should perhaps take a look at with concern, but talking of state failure is going too far. At the very least, Pakistan has a good bureaucracy, a strong military and a farming class (with ties to the former two) that can largely feed the population. The manufacturing sector is picking up. A Somalia or a Haiti for example do not have any of that.

With the right decisions and a bit of economic pain, catching up is achievable.

28

i am seriously pissed off at all the replies. i was too lazy to reply when the owner of this thread posted this thread but i guess typing this will be worth it, some people need to open their eyes. so make a note of the following:

  • Pakistan's energy sector is getting huge foreign investments (875 million dollars)
  • IT sector is looking brighter than ever
  • Telecom sector is doing amazingly well, number of cell phones to double by 2007 after giving 2 additional licences to a dubai and europe based company
  • Media is getting a mega bloom in the country 20+ new channels have started transmission. 10+ are getting their licences. Media tower/cities are being planned in islamabad and karachi (worked on by a malaysian firm)
  • Karachi is turning into a world class city with creek towers, 30+ flyovers, ** Asia's largest building 1500+ feet ** , Mass transit introduced through KCR (karachi Circular railway) project, ** Monorail Mass transit project ** scheduled to be operational by end of 2005 will iprove karachi.
  • Real estate has never looked better in the history of Pakistan: ** Islamabad ** is getting a face lift with new housing schemes (bharia town, DHA. a world class mall is being built in the heart of islamabad, a five star hotel is being planned, . ** Lahore** is getting a ** 1 billion dollar ** housing scheme, Lahore is getting 10+ malls, a 7 star hotel is being constructed, Lahore ring road project is under progress, ** Karachi ** is getting 25 small / medium dams to eliminate its water shortages. Karachi is getting a mega creek city project which will be constructed near its coast 30+ buildings will be erected each housing 600 apartments (golf course, hospital, a college , a lake , mosques are also included in the project). Karachi is also getting a world class theme park (screw six flags). i am keeping my finger crossed for the ** bundle city project which consists of building a resort on a man made island outside karachi and linking it to karachi with a suspension bridge. (saudi company released some renderings and an animation video showing its vision of karachi, project is under consideration) **
  • Airport for islamabad is being looked at
  • Airport /cargo terminal for sialkot is almost completed (runways/taxiways are operational, terminal is being constructed)
  • Islamabad is getting a world class bus terminal. ** Peshawar is getting the largest bus terminal in ASIA ** with 76 seperate gates complete with underground parking for buses.
  • Pakistan now has a secondary sea port: Gawader. In gawader, platinum city, sunset city and other real estate projects are planned to turn gawader into the next dubai and an international airport is on its way.
  • Chaiga/sandak projects are operational now. Pakistan has entered the metals market.
  • Pakistan just rejected a 230+ million dollar loan offer from IMF. We are getting enough foreign investment.
  • Pakistan's Capital market has outperformed hong kong , china, india this year (in terms of growth)
  • Our GDP was predicted at 6%... raised to 6.4% and now we are looking at 7%.

year 2004 has been the brightest year for pakistan's real estate, construction, telecom, energy sector. I dont see all this constitutes as a failure. It is an exciting time for pakistan and its major cities indeed.

29

check www.urbanpakistan.com for more info.

30

nobody should wish neighbor to be failed state

31

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Talwar: *

It's been the case on both sides.

Many Indian analysts have been predicting Pakistan's failure for a long time - mostly since the 1990s. Likewise, many Pakistani opinion hawkers have been predicting India's imminent disintegration for years. Neither understand the other side's nationalism. I myself did not "get" the idea of Pakistan until I interacted with Pakistanis in the US and Europe.

The dejection of those Pakistanis who say their state has failed them is perhaps due to high expectations and dare I say a sense of comparison with India. Even as late as the 1980s, Pakistan's middle class was living far better than those in India and comparable to any in Asia bar the gulf states. Smuggled tapes of Pakistani dramas were everywhere in Hindi/Urdu speaking parts of India. But the 1990s were a lost decade for Pakistan and only now people are realizing how much Pakistan dropped during those years and how big a hit the Pakistani middle class took. Meanwhile, India and others caught up and moved on.

I've been pointing out some statistics that Pakistanis should perhaps take a look at with concern, but talking of state failure is going too far. At the very least, Pakistan has a good bureaucracy, a strong military and a farming class (with ties to the former two) that can largely feed the population. The manufacturing sector is picking up. A Somalia or a Haiti for example do not have any of that.

With the right decisions and a bit of economic pain, catching up is achievable.
[/QUOTE]

I find that no one of any real credibility in Pakistan has ever thought India would break up. The Urdu papers maybe, but the are low brow editorials anyway. But I dont think any of our more respected journalists and politicians have ever thought that. Maybe during the Punjab uprising, but im sure they knew there was a slim chance then too.
The idea of Pakistan being a failed state in India is much more prevelent amongst India's politicians as well as journalist and other icluding the average people.
I just find Indians to much more hostile towards us then we are towards them. Some of it is understandable but a lot isnt..
And yes Pakistanis are very critical of their country, just look at our new papers and media, they are are far more critical of Pakistan then anything else. Rarely do you see anything critisizing anyother country except mybe America and Israel. Im sorta proud of this, shows that we have no delusions of grandeur... Easier to fill your cup if its empty, then when its full as the buddhists say...

32

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Gamma Dilation: *
i am seriously pissed off at all the replies. i was too lazy to reply when the owner of this thread posted this thread but i guess typing this will be worth it, some people need to open their eyes. so make a note of the following:

  • Pakistan's energy sector is getting huge foreign investments (875 million dollars)
  • IT sector is looking brighter than ever
  • Telecom sector is doing amazingly well, number of cell phones to double by 2007 after giving 2 additional licences to a dubai and europe based company
  • Media is getting a mega bloom in the country 20+ new channels have started transmission. 10+ are getting their licences. Media tower/cities are being planned in islamabad and karachi (worked on by a malaysian firm)
  • Karachi is turning into a world class city with creek towers, 30+ flyovers, ** Asia's largest building 1500+ feet ** , Mass transit introduced through KCR (karachi Circular railway) project, ** Monorail Mass transit project ** scheduled to be operational by end of 2005 will iprove karachi.
  • Real estate has never looked better in the history of Pakistan: ** Islamabad ** is getting a face lift with new housing schemes (bharia town, DHA. a world class mall is being built in the heart of islamabad, a five star hotel is being planned, . ** Lahore** is getting a ** 1 billion dollar ** housing scheme, Lahore is getting 10+ malls, a 7 star hotel is being constructed, Lahore ring road project is under progress, ** Karachi ** is getting 25 small / medium dams to eliminate its water shortages. Karachi is getting a mega creek city project which will be constructed near its coast 30+ buildings will be erected each housing 600 apartments (golf course, hospital, a college , a lake , mosques are also included in the project). Karachi is also getting a world class theme park (screw six flags). i am keeping my finger crossed for the ** bundle city project which consists of building a resort on a man made island outside karachi and linking it to karachi with a suspension bridge. (saudi company released some renderings and an animation video showing its vision of karachi, project is under consideration) **
  • Airport for islamabad is being looked at
  • Airport /cargo terminal for sialkot is almost completed (runways/taxiways are operational, terminal is being constructed)
  • Islamabad is getting a world class bus terminal. ** Peshawar is getting the largest bus terminal in ASIA ** with 76 seperate gates complete with underground parking for buses.
  • Pakistan now has a secondary sea port: Gawader. In gawader, platinum city, sunset city and other real estate projects are planned to turn gawader into the next dubai and an international airport is on its way.
  • Chaiga/sandak projects are operational now. Pakistan has entered the metals market.
  • Pakistan just rejected a 230+ million dollar loan offer from IMF. We are getting enough foreign investment.
  • Pakistan's Capital market has outperformed hong kong , china, india this year (in terms of growth)
  • Our GDP was predicted at 6%... raised to 6.4% and now we are looking at 7%.

year 2004 has been the brightest year for pakistan's real estate, construction, telecom, energy sector. I dont see all this constitutes as a failure. It is an exciting time for pakistan and its major cities indeed.
[/QUOTE]

Hate to put a damper on things, but just a few things i thought I could point out.
Karachi has been trying to get the KCR project of the ground for years and nothing has come of it. There doesnt seem to be much hope of it be revived, ever, let alone soon.
Gawadar is looking to be the next terrorist hang out from what I hear...
Balochis are rather upset over it since locals arent getting the jobs they want and they arent going to settle for having people from other provinces set up camp there.
Investment has always been good in energy sector, but not the case in every other sectot because of law and order problems, ineffective and imcompetant judicial system, and other legal problem. Also a lot of red tapism, many incentives given look great on paper but arent being implemented well enough, or at all.
GDP was supposed to be 6.8 this year up from last years 6.4, but due to higher oil costs and bad agricultural year, its been brought down to about 6 percent.
As for everything else, I would love to see it all happen, including the theme park. But lets just wait and see, project in Pakistan have a tendacy of being overhyped and then mysteriously disappearing...

33

I’m afraid you are mistaken here. Virtually every retired General who writes a column in Pak media has said that and more imporantly, those “analysts” who are known to be establishment mouthpieces have said that again and again. If you have any doubt, read what Shireen “Lifafa” Mazari has to say in her latest column:

Our neighbour India continues to be inflicted with insurgencies in its northeastern states, political corruption, a growing gap between the rich and the poverty-stricken, disease epidemics including an AIDS epidemic, Hindu extremism and a freedom struggle in illegally occupied Kashmir.

And then you have the Nazria-e-Pakistan foundation,. The problem is that these people may be few, but their power in Pakistan was and is still vast.

It’s a perception problem, but if you look at those who closely represent the establishment’s views in India, the idea of Pakistan as a failed state has long begun to subside. If anything, India has learnt a trick or two from China - “Don’t wish for your neighbor’s death, wish for mutual and shared prosperity (under laregely your own terms)”

To get a drift of what the current Indian establishment thinks about Pakistan, read this by C.Raja Mohan, one of the Indian strategists closest to the Congress mode of thinking.

Sure. That is is quite sad, regardless of the reasons. I’l be frank to admit that many times, like whenever jihadi groups do something outrageous and I feel people defending them or denying any Pakistani role, I get angry too.

But that is why we need to soften the borders, without trying to erase or overpower the other’s identities. Let’s have Indian tourists in Pakistan, vice versa, exchange of culture, sporting contacts, trade etc. If we do that, the jihadi thugs will slowly get marginalized and Pakistani rulers will themselves have more of a reason to go after them or atleast stop the big attacks.

I agree that we need to make progress on Kashmir simultaneously, but to precondition everything on a Kashmir solution is not going to work. Expecting territorial changes immediately is not realistic.

Let’s hope that the agreement for the pipeline goes through, along with the MFN status to India and Indian accomodation of Pakistani trade concerns. After a few years of getting to know each other without prejudice, who knows what either side might be ready to agree to.

I agree that many Pakistanis have started self-criticism. That is good, but the problem is that these folks have no say so in government matters. Those that form the establishment in Pakistan - the military types, the feduals and the inveterate Nazria-e-Pakistan types DO have delusions of grandeur.

Musharraf himself has said many times that simply because Pakistan has nukes and missiles, it is a leader in the Muslim world. At the very top in Pakistan, most key people show by their words that they think of themselves as the inheritors of the Mughal mantle and always try to punch well above their weight.

In india, the BJP tried such stunts, but got booted out because people were still poor and cared more for their saily survival than any grandiose plans. Who will vote out on your side?

34

"Our neighbour India continues to be inflicted with insurgencies in its northeastern states, political corruption, a growing gap between the rich and the poverty-stricken, disease epidemics including an AIDS epidemic, Hindu extremism and a freedom struggle in illegally occupied Kashmir. "
Yaar, this is a statement of fact, not an attack. India is faced with an insurgency in northeastern states. India does have a lot of corruption, AIDs has risen to ALMOST epidemic porportions, there are Hindu extremists running around, some may even have been in power up until recently, and as for Kashmir, I do believe India is occupying it illegally but thats oppinion you dont have to agree. None of this lends you any support though. I sometimes voice these oppinions, and im definently no a mouth piece for the establishment.
The fact still remains that most people on our side do have good deal of respect for the Indian union, hate its policy but admire its democratic intitutions. So most people dont believe India will disintegrate, and I doubt most would want that or would even care. Pakistans concern only lies with Kashmir, the rest of India is irrelevent to most.
And when you say that these people are few but their point of views count, I think you are contradicting yourself when you say that “these folks have no say so in government matters.”
I hope Indias views are changing, but I hope its changing for the better, India should remeber that while were smaller and have a smaller economy, we do demand and deserve a certain amount of respect. A bara bhai chota bhai relation is not what we want. If China were to make you concede to largely their terms would you be willing to settle?
The point is, you have to have mutual respect.

As for the Jihadists, you seem to imply that India is innocent agrieved party here, and we are the villains, that some how its our reponsiblity to win you over. Pakistanis to have many many grievences as well. And I will be frank and say that Indias obstinance, and sheer refusal to budge,
your denial of any wong doing is just completely infuriating. This attitude is comman amongst Indians for some reason, that they are the injured party… But thats an attitude you people have to change.
But despite our grievences towards Indians, we are still less hostile. And that to despite never having gone to India and being raised on a large helping of anti India/Hindu propaganda…
I will tell you the real reason, because our country does tend to be very introspective at times, and I think many of us do see our faults aswell and can see your side of the story, and thus we can be more tolerant.
Is there that same introspection on the Indian side?

35

As for Kashmir, you know the fear in Pakistani quarters as much as I do... You said it yourself, "Don't wish for your neighbor's death, wish for mutual and shared prosperity (UNDER LARGELY YOUR OWN TERMS)"!Once Pakistans economy for example come to rely more on the Indian market, will India still honor its Kashmir pledge, or will it all have been one big distraction to find a settlement largely under their own terms? A Pakistan that has to rely too heavily on Indian markets would be a very weak negotiator. India has to understand this concern, especially since even now they hold most of the cards. And the Kashmir precondition is there because again of a mutual misunderstanding. Pakistans grievence is solely Kashmir, all other problems are just transient and some what irrelevent. Indians have to realize that true peace can only come with a Kashmir resolution. And to not make Kashmir the precondition would mean having an Indian guarantee that the above dilema wont arrise.

And Pakistanis have been self critisizing for a very long time. And I mean Pak society in general, everyone is well aware of the problems of the state, they disagree on what those problems are, but they have always been critical and somewhat introspective at times.

And these people do count, because im talking about society, not talking about the leadership. A society characteristics can influence it evolution regardless of whether that society is a dictatorship or a Democracy, because leadership arrises from the society itself. Its a slow progress, but I think we will start progressng in the right direction.
And the whole inheritors of the Moghul mantle in debatable, but you may be right, one of the columnists from dawn wrote on that not to long ago.
But punching well above their waist is sorta belittling here. Pakistan has a significantly large population, a relatively strong army second in the region, and amongst the strongest in the Muslim world.
A geo strategically important location which cant be ignored, and nuclear capability which IS a big deal. While we are certainly smaller in relation to India in many ways, we are definently not once to be ignored. Musharaf may act overly tough, but he is a general after all...

36

PP,

I'm not saying that India did nothing wrong. But its an internal matter for India. We do not go about killing Pakistanis in Multan and Quetta do we? So what locus standi do you have to send jihadis into India? Does India make a hue and cry about your army's brutalities on its people?

I'll be the first person to admit that India f1cked up Kashmir and directly provoked the 1989 uprising. Every multiethnic nation has done injustice to one group or another.

But Pakistanis have no say so and no thekedari on that matter to militarily intervene, especially given their past and present treatment of their own Muslim citizens.

Pakistanis like you now need to make a choice. Do you view Kashmir as a human rights or a territorial issue? If it is human rights, you should not insist on land ceding as a solution. If it is the latter, you automatically give up your moral position because all you are asking for is a piece of land with rivers.

BTW, who is asking you to give up anything? The LoC solution just says neither side gives up land. You give up claim to our side, we give up claims on yours. Either way, don't go about wasting lives on a futile attempt to militarily grab Indian Kashmir. Note that despite differences - What all Indians agree on is that there will be no transfer of territory under any circumstances.

You talk of obstinacy. What are you expecting? That India will say, okay Gen. Musharraf, we will forget all the past murders by your jihadis, and BTW here is the deed for Kashmir. Let's all light a campfire and sing Kumbaya?

Territory concession never occurs on the negotiating table. War winners are the only ones get land. India has long given up hopes on Pak controlled land. In any case, given nukes India is not going to win a war that conclusively and Pakistan is never going to win a war on India. Jihadis may annoy India, but they are not going to make India give up land, if anything they make us more determined not to give up and Kashmiris suffer between the army and the jihadis.

The current talks can succeed only if Musharraf gives up any dreams of getting India to give up land. That man thinks he can just fly to Delhi and start redrawing maps over breakfast! He needs a reality check.

The LoC is here to stay for a long time. We can agree to make it soft, Indian troops can largely go back to barracks outside the state with simultaneous withdrawal of Pak jihadis, followed by the dismantling of camps as well as arresting and jailing of Jihadi leaders.

If Pakistan really cares about Kashmir as a Human Rights issue, this should work out. But if you insist on some territorial concession as a guaranteed result - it's not happening.

Either way, it is silly for a country to blame all its ills on a piece of land it never had.

37

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Talwar: *
PP,

I'm not saying that India did nothing wrong. But its an internal matter for India. We do not go about killing Pakistanis in Multan and Quetta do we? So what locus standi do you have to send jihadis into India? Does India make a hue and cry about your army's brutalities on its people?

I'll be the first person to admit that India f1cked up Kashmir and directly provoked the 1989 uprising. Every multiethnic nation has done injustice to one group or another.

But Pakistanis have no say so and no thekedari on that matter to militarily intervene, especially given their past and present treatment of their own Muslim citizens.

Pakistanis like you now need to make a choice. Do you view Kashmir as a human rights or a territorial issue? If it is human rights, you should not insist on land ceding as a solution. If it is the latter, you automatically give up your moral position because all you are asking for is a piece of land with rivers.

BTW, who is asking you to give up anything? The LoC solution just says neither side gives up land. You give up claim to our side, we give up claims on yours. Either way, don't go about wasting lives on a futile attempt to militarily grab Indian Kashmir. Note that despite differences - What all Indians agree on is that there will be no transfer of territory under any circumstances.

You talk of obstinacy. What are you expecting? That India will say, okay Gen. Musharraf, we will forget all the past murders by your jihadis, and BTW here is the deed for Kashmir. Let's all light a campfire and sing Kumbaya?

Territory concession never occurs on the negotiating table. War winners are the only ones get land. India has long given up hopes on Pak controlled land. In any case, given nukes India is not going to win a war that conclusively and Pakistan is never going to win a war on India. Jihadis may annoy India, but they are not going to make India give up land, if anything they make us more determined not to give up and Kashmiris suffer between the army and the jihadis.

The current talks can succeed only if Musharraf gives up any dreams of getting India to give up land. That man thinks he can just fly to Delhi and start redrawing maps over breakfast! He needs a reality check.

The LoC is here to stay for a long time. We can agree to make it soft, Indian troops can largely go back to barracks outside the state with simultaneous withdrawal of Pak jihadis, followed by the dismantling of camps as well as arresting and jailing of Jihadi leaders.

If Pakistan really cares about Kashmir as a Human Rights issue, this should work out. But if you insist on some territorial concession as a guaranteed result - it's not happening.

Either way, it is silly for a country to blame all its ills on a piece of land it never had.
[/QUOTE]

Well, there was that small incident back in 1971 where India did intervene, but why open up old wounds right?
See, Pakistani Jihadist havent gone to India, their activities have been limited to Kashmir and that to too the Valley. As far as we are concerned, i had to say this but no ones attacking India directly by going into Kashmir. As far as we are concerned, its isnt Indias internal matter, and whether you agree or not, thats how people in Pak think.
I can go on and on about the pakistanis grievences, but whats the point, there is enough of that.
Kashmir is both a territorial and human rights problem. Pakistanis have stated that they are willing to accept and independant Kashmir if that is what the Kashmiris choose. That would resolve the Human rights issue atleast. A Kashmir where land is ceded to Pakistan would lso work again if its what the kashmiris want. But unlike India, we realize that three parties are invovles, Pak, India, and KASHMIRIS.
To understand Pakistans obsession with it you have to understand where pakistan is coming from. Both sides have to compramise, and they have to begin by taking in each others sensitivties in mind. Our history, and our identity as a nation is in some ways defined by Kashmir. To leave Kashmir unsettled would be to invalidate the partition. But then I can also understand Indias perspective which is percicly the opposite.
You do say that Pakistan has no thekadari over Kkashmir, but then I would point out that while our policy may seem hypocritical at time, so does yours. How for example can a nation claim to be democracy and yet hold an entire province by force when a large majority of people clearly want independance? I know you think since the majority wants them to stay within the Union then they have no choice, but then majority isnt always right, Indias claim to Kashmir is rather flimsy at best, and war hasnt really won any territiory for any side otherwise the LOC would be permanent border by now... Also India isnt alien to the concept of interveneing in the affairs of other countries either sooo..
All the points you gave opt for the status qu which we can never accept.
We cannnot accept the LOC as the border. But we are willing to make huge concessions as long as they a suitable to all sides. Thats what Musharaf was doing, showing Pakistans flexability. India on the other hand doesnt seem to want to budge...
But by saying that you want to have talks on settling Kashmir, YOU ARE IMPLYING THAT SHIFT FROM THE STATUS QUO IS THE ONLY OPTION.
And the LOC as the permanent border is not the only option, there are others, land conession is not completely out of the question if it handled properly, plus their are other options which may seem more complicated but are still viable. All this can be discussed and argued over, but with dedication an agreement can come about.
Ultimately, the onus is on India, if it really wants Peace it has to go beyond its stated position.
Anyways, not sur how we got to Kashmir but thats my oppinion.

38

PP,

  1. Pakistani jihadis have attacked the Indian parliament, hijacked an Indian plane from Nepal, massacred dozens in a temple in Gujarat, planted car bombs that killed dozens in Mumbai and so on.

  2. Pakistan has officially made it clear that it will not accept an independent Kashmir, period. The plebiscite had only two choices - independence wasn’t one of them. I can give you links from Muharraf’s interviews where he says that he will not accept independence.

  3. Pakistan wants to only include “Kashmiris” from the Indian side who toe Pakistan’s line. Others tey try to kill off or intimidate using the jihadis. When Mirwaiz Farooq wanted to speak to India and criticized the jihadis, his properties were burned and his Uncle was killed. Musharraf refused to allow those in the Northern Areas who ask for independence. Besides, if you care for Kashmiris, why did you force a Mangla dam, gave no power to “Azad” Kashmiris or treat Northern Areas like a colony? Why are you afraid to give them their rights?

  4. Yes, talks mean that you want to move from Status quo. But Status quo does not mean territorial alone. India has made it clear that it will not allow any change to territorial situation under any circumstance. What India says is that we will move our troops, grant autonomy etc. provided Pakistan takes back the jihadis and dismantles their infrastructure.

  5. Pakistan, by giving up UN resoulitions hasn’t made any concession. Concession means giving up something you got. UN resolutions were disowned even by the UN. And they required Pakistan to restore demographic situation as of 1949. By moving away from them, Pakistan has just acknowledged the reality. You cannot pretend to be a king and then one day say, I agree that I’m a common man, so I have made concessions. :rolleyes: Giving up what you never had is not flexibility.

  6. By the above token, take note that India’s official position, enshrined in our constitution, is that the whole of Kashmir belongs to us. LoC solution IS a compromise because we will have to pass a 2/3 majority resolution in the parliament. So when India informally suggests LoC as a solution it IS a concession.

  7. Musharraf made a partial concession by restraining the jihadi groups and likewise India is pulling out 40,000 troops. There are other mutual concessions as well.

  8. Your view of India being obstinate is based on an unrealistic expectation that India will give up land and betrays your view of Kashmir as primarily a land issue. Similarly, if India went to the talks with a view that Pakistan will eventually agree to be subservient to India, we know it’s a foolish expectation. Formalizing the terrirtorial status quo is not an unreasonable proposition, grounded in historical realities.

Bottomline - If you are expecting that in talks, India will transfer land, you are not a student of history. You cannot expect to get land on the negotiation table when you failed to get it by a war.

Ultimately, some Pakistani leader has to have the courage to tell its people that:

  1. Pakistan cannot get land through talks. It has never happened in history.

  2. War is not an option. Going to war will destroy the nation. Using jihadis has already brought Pakistan infamy and is preventing economic improvement.

  3. So let’s try to find a solution that addresses the Human Rights aspect, without insisting on a land transfer.

I hope some day Pakistan gets that leader. In the meanwhile, let’s work to make day to day lives of Kashmiris on both sides easier, have trade etc. That is the only way out.

39

^ I did not read all of ur BS...but remember this..until u guys stop harassing ur minority kashmir population ur not gonna get sustainable peace in the region...and that doesnt well bode good for pakistan either..

40

lussi, do you really believe hindus take trips to kashmir to harass the minority muslims? there is not going to be peace in kashmir until pak stops investing in keep the bullets alive and flying in the valley.