Suddenly all those channels which used to be critical of fundamentalism and favouring Aman ki Asha started hailing Modi and his brand of foreign policy.Any body frothing expletives against Pakistan becomes darling of the Media. Why this sudden change after LEMOA signing with USA?
India has been trying to dehyphenate itself from a failed state Pakistan for a long time while the US government was bent upon keeping the two countries in one orbit in every aspect while at one stage the US government even wanted to make a triangle of India,Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Now all these efforts of somany years have gone waste with every channel in India foul mouthing Pakistan, cross border terrorism and lauding surgical strikes.One can see the trolls in Whatsup, Twitter facebook etc finding our PM as the best PM as decided by UN!!! Suddenly we find Nawaz sheriff occupying lime light in Indian media along with General Shareef the villain of the piece. Anyone voicing contrary opinion is forced to shut shop as they are being branded as anti-national. While all this is happening the Pakistani establishment which controls their state must be smirking with satisfaction as this free re hyphenating occurring without any effort on their part.
The real villain of the piece, one can easily see is the US Government with little help from Modi whom they clearly understood is gullible for flattery if only praise him as the leader who thinks out of Box solutions to complex issues. The following are some of the out box decisions taken by Modi sacrificing vital national interest to please western MNC interests
1. Signing the climate deal
2.Signing LEMOA with USA
3,Signing Rafale deal discarding years of negotiations to get best terms bypassing Defence Finance experts
4.Going to Nawaz. birthday party and not following up on that and giving the GHQ of Pakistani army to sabotage the initiative which should have been expected.
5.Almost complete alienation of PDP and national conference leadership in Kashmir
6. Allowing chest thumping by Defence Minister
7. Politicising of Defence forces
8.Gifting $1 billion to Afghanistan's Ghani who was elected with Pakistan help while the world's richest 35 nations at Brussels pledged only $ 3 billion which may fructify or not. As the Kunduz operation shows the emerging power may be Taliban.
9. Pushing Russians to do business with Pakistan by disregarding FGFA deal and other aviation deals which are vital for IAF.
10. The withdrawal of petition by American government regarding declaring Pakistan as a terrorist state is a clear sign of Modis NRI friends stupidity. as most of the signatures came from India.
11.Alienating China By talking against CPEC. Media highlighting diversion of some small river which will not affect the flow in Brahmaputhra, while talking about Indus water treaty. Venturing into South China sea without getting ASEAN concurrence. USA will not fight China even on behalf of Taiwan and Japan as it can never send soldiers into countries with WMDs.
There may be many more. But what one finds is Media fatigue with Pakistan occupying disproportionate space. The re hyphenation of Pakistan was complete at BRICS SUMMIT which also had heads of Government from BIMSTEC Countries. In his single minded attack on Pakistan at these august conclaves Modi was isolated except may be support from Sri Lanka and Bangladesh which were also qualified But Modi was lectured in open by Myanmar Premier about not clubbing a nation with terrorism as only a few indulge in it. Modi lost an important opportunity to high light BRICS BANK achievements, talk to China about balance of payments, currency reform, inter BRICS trade and ofcourse terrorism which should not have fixated on Pakistan and Mullah Azhar alone but could have been done in a clever way BIMSTEC was the worst case scenario where trade was uppermost in their minds.
Whether this chest thumping is going to win elections in UP has to be seen .Defence Minister Parrikar who seems to have unlimited kitty to splurge on weapons and not on make in India weapon systems like Tejas fighters or Indian DRDO missile defence systems. Surgical strikes could have been milked in a sophisticated way.Just because Congress has Rahul, does not mean BJP can take things granted with Mayawathi is expected show strong results.
Now one can see Indian foreign policy is dictated by NRI interests and how these will affect in the long run is to be seen as American boots come calling in Indian bases and Indian neighbours loose respect for India. If only instead on harping on CPEC Modi looks at the map of India and allows Chinese to construct an Eight lane high way linking China's west to Gujarat coast thus killing CPEC relevance to China. We are actually playing the game for US arms lobby instead of thinking about self reliance
Showing posts with label Foreign Policy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Foreign Policy. Show all posts
Friday, October 21, 2016
Thursday, May 10, 2012
Strategic Defiance of Pakistan ;What India can do?
Strategic Defiance of Pakistan/ What can India do?
When the Senate of Pakistan passed the 14 point plan(40 Point sub plan), many thought it will be a sort of white wash to open the NATO supply route and give fig leaf
to the ruling establishment for getting some green packs.What came out of the exercise which was started on November 2011 by the Defence committee of the Cabinet (DCC) and also
by the Parliamentary committee on National Security (PCNS) which was also whetted by the Defence,Foreign affairs,Law,Finance Ministry bureaucrats of the Government and finally was placed before the Pakistani Parliament was a show of Defiance by Pakistan to USA. Senator Prof Kurshid Ahmed did not approve of the final recommendations though he signed the draft.The PCNS consisted of the following members.
1. Senator Miam Raza Rahhaai. Chairman
2. Senator Dr. Zaheer-ud«Di|1 Bahar Awa1| Member
3. Mr. Nadeem Afzal Condal, MHP; Member
4. Senator Mohammad lshaq Dar Member
5. Sardar Mehtah Ahmad Khan, Member
ü. Senator Wasim Sajjad Member
T. Syed Haider àbhas Rizvì, MNA Member
E. Mr. Asfaadyar Wali Khan, MNA Member
9. Meulana Faza1¿ur-Rahman, MNà Member
11]. Mr. Munir Khan Ürakzai, MNA Member
I1. Senator Pref. Kbursbid .äbmed Member
12. Mr. Ahmad Khan Sherpae, MNA Member
13. Senator Abdur Rahim Khan Mandbkhel Member
14. Senator lsrarnllah Zebri, Member
15. Senater Shahid Hassan Bugti Member
lń. Senator Afrasiyab Khattak Member
The most important directive is that the Foreign policy of Pakistan be conducted as per
the principles of an independent foreign policy to be grounded in Strict adherence
to the Principles of Policy as Stated in Article 40 of the Constitution
of Pakistan, the UN Charter and observance of international law.
the principles of an independent foreign policy to be grounded in Strict adherence
to the Principles of Policy as Stated in Article 40 of the Constitution
of Pakistan, the UN Charter and observance of international law.
Pakistans'nuclear programme and assets including iTs safety and
security’ cannot be compromised. The US-Indo civil nuclear agreement has significantly altered the strategic balance in the region therefore Pakistan should seek from the US and NSG similar agreement. The strategic position of Pakistan Vis-à-vis India on the .subject of FMCT must not he compromised
and this principle be kept in View in negotiations on this matter with USA.
Use of Pakistani Airspace and Military bases will now require Parliamentary approval
and not the approval of the ruling Government establishment. No verbal agreement with any foreign power should be made and they must be reduced in writing if at all made.
The territory of Pakistan shall never be used to stage attacks on any other country and all foreign fighters shall be sent away and expelled.
The focus of Pakistan’s foreign policy should be peaceful environment in its neighbourhood which includes India and Afghanistan; economic progress and social progress should be the main focus.
While maintaining traditional link with allies ; the country is directed to diversify its source of economic,military and political support. To implement this policy the country is directed to engage India in a continuous process which is result oriented which will have the final solution of Kashmir as per UN principles.While strategic partnership with China should be deepened, further strengthening of relationship with Russia and also getting permanent membership of SCO should be prioritised.
I think the biggest significance of the new emerging China/Russia partnership , may be that it establishes an obstacle to western monopoly and protects the rights of the non-westrn world, including the independence of the national interests and diversity of political systems.
ASEAN must be another area of priority for both.
The Iran/Pakistan Gas pipeline project should be actively pursued.
The process of evolving this 14 point plan a long drawn out one and the ministries involved and then the main points makes it an interesting document which has wide acceptance in Pakistani society including the fringe elements.Was it a strategic defiance or a “chaal” in the poker game.The Americans have already acting as the deal to be countered with their own moves and concessions which can be extracted from the sucker India in the form of Siachen withdrawal without AGPL.This withdrawal is linked to NATO supply line reopening and so the urgency shown by Pakistani Army and Hillary Clinton.But the patriotic Indian Army is already showing signs of defiance in the face of American pressure.
With regard to Afghanistan, what India can do to calm the Pakistani nerves.I think the hearts and minds of ordinary Afghans are the best answer to that.
With regard to Kashmir, the American fox is laying the line of independent Kashmir which has wide acceptance amongst all sections of Muslim society both sides of the LOC but not liked by the Budhists of Ladakh and Hindus of Jammu.
I think India and Pakistan can jointly enter SCO and also ASEAN.
With regard to nukes India has not gained but lost only the friendship of Iran. If Pakistan wants same type of relationship, India has not objection as long its own independent deterrence is protected.
The Iran/Pakistan Gas pipeline project should be actively pursued.
The process of evolving this 14 point plan a long drawn out one and the ministries involved and then the main points makes it an interesting document which has wide acceptance in Pakistani society including the fringe elements.Was it a strategic defiance or a “chaal” in the poker game.The Americans have already acting as the deal to be countered with their own moves and concessions which can be extracted from the sucker India in the form of Siachen withdrawal without AGPL.This withdrawal is linked to NATO supply line reopening and so the urgency shown by Pakistani Army and Hillary Clinton.But the patriotic Indian Army is already showing signs of defiance in the face of American pressure.
With regard to Afghanistan, what India can do to calm the Pakistani nerves.I think the hearts and minds of ordinary Afghans are the best answer to that.
With regard to Kashmir, the American fox is laying the line of independent Kashmir which has wide acceptance amongst all sections of Muslim society both sides of the LOC but not liked by the Budhists of Ladakh and Hindus of Jammu.
I think India and Pakistan can jointly enter SCO and also ASEAN.
With regard to nukes India has not gained but lost only the friendship of Iran. If Pakistan wants same type of relationship, India has not objection as long its own independent deterrence is protected.
Friday, August 07, 2009
Obama,Bush and INDIAN NATIONAL INTEREST
Suddenly Indians are wondering what hit them. They were comfortable with Bush but now this so called new Messiah of world Barack Hussein Obama, a black man to boot is asking India to do unthinkable things. Please read the New York times article below. It is very cleverly written.It asks India not to enhance its arms build up as it will lead to arms race with Pakistan while its arms merchants are at present in India selling their wares the F18 Super Hornet and F16 in Bangalore( Indians must understand these fighter planes throw flowers on Pakistan!!!). USA has found that it can influence India's policy through its supporters in Politics, Industry,media and now they have learnt to infiltrate the Foreign office Bureaucracy and may be soon in Indian Armed forces and US can influence in a way that Indians can be fooled to sacrifice their NATIONAL INTEREST with verbose garbage.They have to be told that they are the Biggest democracy and their knees go limp(more than a fair maiden's). When a rider comes that they are home to biggest Muslim population and are SECULAR they just go bonkers. So Indian democracy has no meaning for Obama is sending shivers through the spine of our politicians and seminarists who were comfortable with Bush.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/18/opinion/18sat1.html?scp=18&sq=17th%20july%202009%20Newyork%20times/editorial&st=cse
Barack Obama in Moscow on 7 July said that "America cannot and should not seek to impose any system of government on any other country, nor would we presume to choose which party or individual should run a country ... State sovereignty must be a cornerstone of international order. Just as all states should have the right to choose their leaders, states must have the right to borders that are secure, and to their own foreign policies."
Hillary Clinton in Washington on 15 July explained further "Our approach to foreign policy must reflect the world as it is, not as it used to be. It does not make sense to adapt a 19th century concert of powers, or a 20th century balance of power strategy ... Smart power translates into specific policy approaches in five areas. First, we intend to update and create vehicles for co-operation with our partners. Second, we will pursue principled engagement with those who disagree with us. Third, we will elevate development as a core pillar of American power. Fourth, we will integrate civilian and military action in conflict areas. And fifth, we will leverage key sources of American power, including our economic strength and the power of our example ... The architecture of cooperation we seek to build will advance all these goals, using our power not to dominate or divide but to solve problems."
The new US approach to the world is being shaped with Its pillars may be described as follows: the "concert of powers" of the 19th century and the "balance of power" of the 20th century are no longer acceptable in global politics. The establishment of "spheres of influence" of some major power at the expense of other states is also not to be tolerated.
The 21st century should become a century of "multi-partnerships" for the solution of global problems. Every country capable of transformation in line with the realities and needs of the 21st century is a potential partner. The US will end "democratisation at gunpoint" - the responsibility for the promotion of democratic values rests with the leadership and population of any given country. States are sovereign in domestic and foreign policy and their path of development. The political systems of Individual states must be built on consensus and compromise. There is no more division into "our sons of bitches" and "not our sons of bitches." All states are equal, free to make their own decisions but responsible for their own actions. Well this perfectly matches the wishes of rulers of Pakistan and China.Democracy,human rights are just dirty words which will be used against weak nations like India,Myanmar,SriLanka but not against China,Pakistan or that biggest Democracies of Middleast Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
The Chinese government attaches great importance to the dialogue between China and the U.S. on enhancing energy, climate change and environment cooperation," the state-run Chinese news agency Xinhua quoted State Councilor Dai Bingguo as saying. "Despite differences between our two countries in the basic national conditions, stage of development, historical responsibilities and our respective capacities, there exist conditions, common will, the necessity and broad basis for enhancing China-U.S. dialogue and cooperation on these areas." China’s recent evaluation that the United States is overextended with wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, coupled with a perceived U.S. weakness in the wake of the financial crisis, could imbue Chinese policy makers with the confidence to be more assertive on the international stage in ways that may be consistent with American interests.From one Single hyper power to one super power with multiple great powers is what Chinese perceive.They are happy to be equated with Russia now but will give grudging recognition to South Africa and Brazil but not to India. They want re hyphenation of Pakistan with India immediately.Obama will summon Manmohan just like he summons Zardari,Karzai,Aso.Ofcourse Obama does not even summon Erdogan or Hugo Chavez!
1. China is a one party government. So also is USA where Obama's democrats are ruling. India is a rainbow of rulers even withing UPA.
2. In China party bosses pick Politicians who rule. Ditto with USA. In India the role of party bosses is slowly eroding in Congress,BJP
3. In China Judges are appointed by Political bosses. Ditto with USA. In India the politicians have no say in appointment of Higher judiciary. In fact the the judges of India are even immune to declaration of assets which Indian Politicians have to do before their election.
4. Chinese Government Statistics are manipulated. USA does the same as the case of recent bubble bursts in Fanny Mae,Freddie Mac,AIG,GM shows. Indian statistics are much more
reliable in comparison.Sathyam may be an aberration.
5. Chinese communists are corrupt.So also US politicians. so also Indians
6. Chinese manipulate commodity prices by pumping money. USA is doing the same and is the major reason for speculation in commodity prices. Indians are pumping money into pockets of government salaried class and farmers by writing off loans. Chinese are now the biggest buyers of gold surpassing Indians.
Call to take responsibility for one's own actions is seen by Pakistan as early withdrawal symptom of USA from Afghanistan.Its F16s are bombing tribal areas in the name of hunting Taliban and killing women and children fits easily with Reaper drone attacks in wazirstan. Chinese have also killed nearly 190 Uighur and have arrested 1000 for ensuring stability. The photo above shows a Chinese engineer working feverishly to broaden the realigned KARAKORAM HIGHWAY,But Indians action in Kashmir or Manipur are human rights violations.
Why Indians are muzzled to support Gillani (who is backed by ISI)while a Zardari , who is much more friendly to India was given a dressing down in full public view at G8/G20 dialogue.
Zardari may be is on his wayout with NRO being resurrected by the Chief Justice of Pakistan at the prodding of USA.What changed in between the two summits that we are supporting an ISI backed man instead of a friend?
THINKING INDIANS MUST PONDER ABOUT THIS CHANGE IN US POLICY as well as Indias to suit this US POLICY.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/18/opinion/18sat1.html?scp=18&sq=17th%20july%202009%20Newyork%20times/editorial&st=cse
Barack Obama in Moscow on 7 July said that "America cannot and should not seek to impose any system of government on any other country, nor would we presume to choose which party or individual should run a country ... State sovereignty must be a cornerstone of international order. Just as all states should have the right to choose their leaders, states must have the right to borders that are secure, and to their own foreign policies."
Hillary Clinton in Washington on 15 July explained further "Our approach to foreign policy must reflect the world as it is, not as it used to be. It does not make sense to adapt a 19th century concert of powers, or a 20th century balance of power strategy ... Smart power translates into specific policy approaches in five areas. First, we intend to update and create vehicles for co-operation with our partners. Second, we will pursue principled engagement with those who disagree with us. Third, we will elevate development as a core pillar of American power. Fourth, we will integrate civilian and military action in conflict areas. And fifth, we will leverage key sources of American power, including our economic strength and the power of our example ... The architecture of cooperation we seek to build will advance all these goals, using our power not to dominate or divide but to solve problems."
The new US approach to the world is being shaped with Its pillars may be described as follows: the "concert of powers" of the 19th century and the "balance of power" of the 20th century are no longer acceptable in global politics. The establishment of "spheres of influence" of some major power at the expense of other states is also not to be tolerated.
The 21st century should become a century of "multi-partnerships" for the solution of global problems. Every country capable of transformation in line with the realities and needs of the 21st century is a potential partner. The US will end "democratisation at gunpoint" - the responsibility for the promotion of democratic values rests with the leadership and population of any given country. States are sovereign in domestic and foreign policy and their path of development. The political systems of Individual states must be built on consensus and compromise. There is no more division into "our sons of bitches" and "not our sons of bitches." All states are equal, free to make their own decisions but responsible for their own actions. Well this perfectly matches the wishes of rulers of Pakistan and China.Democracy,human rights are just dirty words which will be used against weak nations like India,Myanmar,SriLanka but not against China,Pakistan or that biggest Democracies of Middleast Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
The Chinese government attaches great importance to the dialogue between China and the U.S. on enhancing energy, climate change and environment cooperation," the state-run Chinese news agency Xinhua quoted State Councilor Dai Bingguo as saying. "Despite differences between our two countries in the basic national conditions, stage of development, historical responsibilities and our respective capacities, there exist conditions, common will, the necessity and broad basis for enhancing China-U.S. dialogue and cooperation on these areas." China’s recent evaluation that the United States is overextended with wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, coupled with a perceived U.S. weakness in the wake of the financial crisis, could imbue Chinese policy makers with the confidence to be more assertive on the international stage in ways that may be consistent with American interests.From one Single hyper power to one super power with multiple great powers is what Chinese perceive.They are happy to be equated with Russia now but will give grudging recognition to South Africa and Brazil but not to India. They want re hyphenation of Pakistan with India immediately.Obama will summon Manmohan just like he summons Zardari,Karzai,Aso.Ofcourse Obama does not even summon Erdogan or Hugo Chavez!
1. China is a one party government. So also is USA where Obama's democrats are ruling. India is a rainbow of rulers even withing UPA.
2. In China party bosses pick Politicians who rule. Ditto with USA. In India the role of party bosses is slowly eroding in Congress,BJP
3. In China Judges are appointed by Political bosses. Ditto with USA. In India the politicians have no say in appointment of Higher judiciary. In fact the the judges of India are even immune to declaration of assets which Indian Politicians have to do before their election.
4. Chinese Government Statistics are manipulated. USA does the same as the case of recent bubble bursts in Fanny Mae,Freddie Mac,AIG,GM shows. Indian statistics are much more
reliable in comparison.Sathyam may be an aberration.
5. Chinese communists are corrupt.So also US politicians. so also Indians
6. Chinese manipulate commodity prices by pumping money. USA is doing the same and is the major reason for speculation in commodity prices. Indians are pumping money into pockets of government salaried class and farmers by writing off loans. Chinese are now the biggest buyers of gold surpassing Indians.
Call to take responsibility for one's own actions is seen by Pakistan as early withdrawal symptom of USA from Afghanistan.Its F16s are bombing tribal areas in the name of hunting Taliban and killing women and children fits easily with Reaper drone attacks in wazirstan. Chinese have also killed nearly 190 Uighur and have arrested 1000 for ensuring stability. The photo above shows a Chinese engineer working feverishly to broaden the realigned KARAKORAM HIGHWAY,But Indians action in Kashmir or Manipur are human rights violations.
Why Indians are muzzled to support Gillani (who is backed by ISI)while a Zardari , who is much more friendly to India was given a dressing down in full public view at G8/G20 dialogue.
Zardari may be is on his wayout with NRO being resurrected by the Chief Justice of Pakistan at the prodding of USA.What changed in between the two summits that we are supporting an ISI backed man instead of a friend?
THINKING INDIANS MUST PONDER ABOUT THIS CHANGE IN US POLICY as well as Indias to suit this US POLICY.
Friday, June 20, 2008
Pakistani Army and foreign policy
The Pakistan Army and foreign policy of Pakistan.
The recent Pakistani election threw up two leaders Zardari of PPP and nawaz Sheriff of PML(N).First it was the turn of Zardari to talk to an Indian TV channel about shelving the Kashmir question just like India is doing with China and proceed with other relations which will bring more togetherness and economic benefits between the two countries.
Then we had a statement from Nawaz Sheriff in which he suggested Visa less travel between the two countries even if India does not reciprocate the gesture.
Now we have Army Chief Kiyani coming out with a statement immediately after these comments that relation between India and Pakistan especially with regard to Kashmir will be the decision of Army ALONE. Now the two ELECTED leaders of Pakistan just shut up and they were shown who is the boss as far as the foreign policy front is concerned. The agents of Pakistan who rule Jammu and Kashmir , immediately came out with the line that 1)The coming Jammu and Kashmir state election with Indian army in place will not be free and fair And so it must be boycotted.Of course the same leaders including maulvi Farook who controls the hazrathbal shrine in Srinagar will not give up on their personal security provided by the foolish Indian state. They openly said that the foreign policy line provided by Pakistani army and endorsed by Musharaff is the line Indian government should follow .Indians noted this with dismay as the infiltration and wire cutting increased along with firing at the LOC. Yesterday it was 5 casualties for the Pakistani army due to misunderstanding between the infiltrating Terrorists who mistook Pakistani army as Indians and killed them.
Of course the 12th June incident involving Afghanistan and ISAF airforce is known which resulted in 12 deaths to Frontier constabulary.
Today we hear Iranian frontier guards have killed a Pakistani hassan Jan at Pangroor who was visiting his relatives on the other side of border.
Pakistan Army was conducting the foreign policy during the regime of Yahyah Khan when 1971 happened and it has to be bailed out by Z.Bhutto.
It was conducting foreign policy during the regime of Zia-ul-Haq when it served the Heritage foundation and was bleeding Indian Punjab.
It was Musharaff who was conducting foreign policy during the regime of Nawaz sherriff and inflicted kargil. He also betrayed Taliban when 9/11
happened. He had no civilian to fall back upon and he became responsible for his own actions.
Now Kiyani may be thinking that his actions to revive Punjab and scuttle the coming elections in Jammu and Kashmir or extend depth into Afghanistan will
have civilian face and so can escape responsibility for its actions.
He must understand the Thackeray editorial in Saamna to raise Hindu suicide bombers also has the same Handlers who is playing Pakistani army's strings.
The nukes of India and Pakistan are the real targets. If Heritage proposal to dismember India or Rand proposal to make independent Kashmir and Baluchistan with
land from Iran and Pakistan are also has the same puppeteer. The Indian think tanks are talking about ethnic cleansing by Pakistan in 1947 when it got 25% of land
from India and accepted only 15% of Muslims while cleansing almost 99% of Hindu population from the land of Pakistan. Some Hindu fundamentalists are talking about ethnic cleansing of Muslims of India as was done in Punjab and Haryana during partition in 1947. Indian subcontinent will disintegrate along with its Nukes. Pakistan army must think like CIVILIAN think tanks
and look whether it wants disintegration of India? Here I want to post again the CRY of anguish of Indian Muslims raised 50 years back and want the Pakistani army establishment
to look at issues in broader perspective.
Letter to Frank Graham UN special rep on 14th august 1951.
It is a remarkable fact that, while the Security Council and its various agencies have devoted so much time to the study of the Kashmir dispute and made various suggestions for its resolution, none of them has tried to ascertain the views of the Indian Muslims nor the possible effect of any hasty step in Kashmir, however well-intentioned, on the interests and well- being of the Indian Muslims. We are convinced that no lasting solution for the problem can be found unless the position of Muslims in Indian society is clearly understood.
Supporters of the idea of Pakistan, before this subcontinent was partitioned, discouraged any attempt to define Pakistan clearly and did little to anticipate the conflicting problems which were bound to arise as a result of the advocacy of the two-nation theory. The concept of Pakistan, therefore, became an emotional slogan with little rationale content. It never occurred to the Muslim League or its leaders that if a minority was not prepared to live with a majority on the sub- continent, how could the majority be expected to tolerate the minority.
It is, therefore, small wonder that the result of partition has been disastrous to Muslims. In undivided India, their strength lay about 100 million. Partition split up the Muslim people, confining them to the three isolated regions. Thus, Muslims number 25 million in Western Pakistan, 35 million to 40 million in India, and the rest in Eastern Pakistan. A single undivided community has been broken into three fragments, each faced with its own problems.
Pakistan was not created on a religious basis. If it had been, our fate as well as the fate of other minorities would have been settled at that time. Nor would the division of the sub- continent for reasons of religion have left large minorities in India or Pakistan.
This merely illustrates what we have said above, that the concept of Pakistan was vague, obscure, and never clearly defined, nor its likely consequences foreseen by the Muslim League, even when some of these should have been obvious.
When the partition took place, Muslims in India were left in the lurch by the Muslim League and its leaders. Most of them departed to Pakistan and a few who stayed behind stayed long enough to wind up their affairs and dispose of their property. Those who went over to Pakistan left a large number of relations and friends behind.
Having brought about a division of the country, Pakistan leaders proclaimed that they would convert Pakistan into a land where people would live a life according to the tenets of Islam. This created nervousness and alarm among the minorities living in Pakistan. Not satisfied with this, Pakistan went further and announced again and again their determination to protect and safeguard the interests of Muslims in India. This naturally aroused suspicion amongst the Hindus against us and our loyalty to India was questioned.
Pakistan had made our position weaker by driving out Hindus from Western Pakistan in utter disregard of the consequences of such a policy to us and our welfare. A similar process is in question in Eastern Pakistan from which Hindus are coming over to India in a large and large number.
If the Hindus are not welcome in Pakistan, how can we, in all fairness, expect Muslims to be welcomed in India ? Such a policy must inevitably, as the past has already shown, result in the uprooting of Muslims in this country and their migration to Pakistan where, as it became clear last year, they are no longer welcome, lest their influx should destroy Pakistan's economy.
Neither some of the Muslims who did migrate to Pakistan after partition, and following the widespread bloodshed and conflict on both sides of the Indo-Pakistan border in the north- west, have been able to find a happy asylum in what they had been told would be their homeland. Consequently some of them have had to return to India, e.g Meos who are now being rehabilitated in their former areas.
If we are living honorably in India today, it is certainly not due to Pakistan which, if anything, has by her policy and action weakened our pooition.
The credit goes to the broadminded leadership of India, to Mahatma Gandhi and Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, to the traditions of tolerance in this country and to the Constitution which ensures equal rights to all citizens of India, irrespective of their religion caste, creed, colour or sex.
We, therefore, feel that, tragically as Muslims were misled by the Muslim League and subsquently by Pakistan and the unnecessary suffering which we and our Hindu brethren have to go through in Pakistan and in India since partition, we must be given an opportunity to settle down to a life of tolerance and understanding to the mutual benefit of Hindus and Muslims in our country - if only Pakistan would let us do it. To us it is a matter of no smaller onsequence.
Despite continuous provocations, first from the Muslim League and since then from Pakistan, the Hindu majority in India has not thrown us or members of other minorities out of Civil Services, Armed Forces, the judiciary, trade, commerce, business and industry. There are Muslim Ministers in the Union and State cabinets, Muslim Governors, Muslim Ambassadors, representing India in foreign countries, fully enjoying the confidence of the Indian nation, Muslim members in Parliament and state legislatures, Muslim judges serving on the Supreme Court and High Courts, high-ranking officers in the Armed Foroes and the Civil services, including the police. Muslims have large landed estates, run big business and commercial houses in various parts of the country, notably in Bombay and Calcutta, have their shares in industrial production and enterprise in export and import trade. Our famous sacred shrines and places of cultural interest are mostly in India.
Not that our lot is certainly happy. We wish some of the state Governments showed a little greater sympathy to us in the field of education and employment. Nevertheless, we feel we have an honourable place in India. Under the law of the land, our religious and cultural life is protected and we shall share in the opportunities open to all citizens to ensure progress for the people of this country.
It is, therefore, clear that our interest and welfare do not coincide with Pakistan's conception of the welfare and interests of Muslims in Pakistan.
This is clear from Pakistan's attitude towards Kashmir. Pakistan claims Kashmir, first, on the ground of the majority of the State's people being Muslims and, secondly, on the ground, of the state being essential to its economy and defence. To achieve its objective it has been threatening to launch "Jehad" against Kashmir in India.
It is a strange commentary on political beliefs that the same Muslims of Pakistan who like the Muslims of Kashmir to join them invaded the state, in October 1947, killing and plundering Muslims in the state and dishonouring Muslim women, all in the interest of what they described as the liberation of Muslims of the State. In its oft-proclaimed anxiety to rescue the 3 million Muslims from what it describes as the tyranny of a handful of Hindus in the State, Pakistan evidently is prepared to sacrifice the interests of 40 million Muslims in India - a strange exhibition of concern for the welfare of fellow- Muslims. Our misguided brothers in Pakistan do not realise that if Muslims in Pakistan can wage a war against Hindus in Kashmir why should not Hindus, sooner or later, retaliate against Muslims in India.
Does Pakistan seriously think that it could give us any help if such an emergency arose or that we would deserve any help thanks to its own follies ? It is incapable of providing room and livelihood to the 40 million Muslims of India, should they migrate to Pakistan. Yet its policy and action, if not changed soon, may well produce the result which it dreads.
We are convinced that India will never attack our interests. First of all, it would be contrary to the spirit animating the political movement in this country. Secondly, it would be opposed to the Constitution and to the sincere leadership of the Prime Minister. Thirdly, India by committing such a folly would be playing straight into the hands of Pakistan.
We wish we were equally convinced of the soundness of Pakistan's policy. So completely oblivious is it of our present problems and of our future that it is willing to sell us into slavery - if only it can secure Kashmir.
It ignores the fact that Muslims in Kashmir may also have a point of view of their own, that there is a democratic movement with a democratic leadership in the State, both inspired by the progress of a broad minded, secular, democratic movement in India and both naturally being in sympathy with India. Otherwise, the Muslim raiders should have been welcomed with open arms by the Muslims of the State when the invasion took place in 1947.
Persistent propaganda about "Jehad" is intended, among other things, to inflame religious passions in this country. For it would, of course, be in Pakistan's interests to promote communal rioting in India to show to Kashmiri Muslims how they can find security only in Pakistan. Such a policy, however, can only bring untold misery and suffering to India and Pakistan generally and to Indian Muslims particularly.
Pakistan never tires of asserting that it is determined to protect the interests of Muslims in Kashmir and India. Why does not Pakistan express the same concern for Pathans who are fighting for Pakhtoonistan, an independent homeland of their own ? The freedom-loving Pathans under the leadership of Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan and Dr. Khan Sahib, both nurtured in the traditions of democratic tolerance of the Indian National Congress, are being subjected to political repression of the worst possible kind by their Muslim brethren in power in Pakistan and in the NWFP. Contradictory as Pakistan's policy generally is, it is no surprise to us that while it insists on a fair and impartial plebiscite in Kashmir, it denies a fair and impartial plebiscite to Pathans.
Pakistan's policy in general and her attitude towards Kashmir is particular thus tend to create conditions in this cauntry which in the long run can only bring to us Muslims widespread suffering and destruction. Its policy prevents us from settling down, from being honourable citizens of a State, free from suspicion of our fellow-countrymen and adapting ourselves to changing conditions to promote the interests and welfare of India. Its sabre-rattling interferes with its own economy and ours. It expects us to be layal to it despite its importance to give us any protection, believing at the same time that we can still claim all the rights of citizenship in a secular democracy.
In the event of a war, it is extremely doubtful whether it will be able to protect the Muslims of East Bengal who are completely cut off from Western Pakistan. Are the Muslims of India and Eastern Pakistan who sacrifice themselves completely to enable the 25 million Muslims in Western Pakistan to embark upon mad, self-destructive and adventures?
We should, therefore, like to impress upon you with all the emphasis at our command that Pakistan's policy towards Kashmir is fraught with the gravest peril to the 40 million Muslims of India. If the Security Council is really interested in peace human brotherhood, and international understanding, it should heed this warning while there is still time.
Dr. Zakir Hussain
(Vice Chancellor Aligarh University)
Sir Sultan Ahmed
(Former Member of Governor General's Executive Council)
Sir Mohd. Ahmed Syed Khan
(Nawab of Chhatari, former acting
Governor of United Provinces and
Prime Minister of Hyderabad)
Sir Mohd. Usman
(Former member of Governor
General's Executive council and
acting Governor of Madras)
Sir Iqbal Ahmed
(Former Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court)
Sir Fazal Rahimtoola
(Former Sheriff of Bombay)
Maulana Hafz-ur-Rehman M.P.
Col. B.H. Zaidi M.P.
Nawab Zain Yar Jung
(Minister Gcvernment of Hyderabad)
A.K. Kawaja
(Former President of Muslim Majlis)
T.M. Zarif
(General Secretary West Bengal Bohra Community)
The recent Pakistani election threw up two leaders Zardari of PPP and nawaz Sheriff of PML(N).First it was the turn of Zardari to talk to an Indian TV channel about shelving the Kashmir question just like India is doing with China and proceed with other relations which will bring more togetherness and economic benefits between the two countries.
Then we had a statement from Nawaz Sheriff in which he suggested Visa less travel between the two countries even if India does not reciprocate the gesture.
Now we have Army Chief Kiyani coming out with a statement immediately after these comments that relation between India and Pakistan especially with regard to Kashmir will be the decision of Army ALONE. Now the two ELECTED leaders of Pakistan just shut up and they were shown who is the boss as far as the foreign policy front is concerned. The agents of Pakistan who rule Jammu and Kashmir , immediately came out with the line that 1)The coming Jammu and Kashmir state election with Indian army in place will not be free and fair And so it must be boycotted.Of course the same leaders including maulvi Farook who controls the hazrathbal shrine in Srinagar will not give up on their personal security provided by the foolish Indian state. They openly said that the foreign policy line provided by Pakistani army and endorsed by Musharaff is the line Indian government should follow .Indians noted this with dismay as the infiltration and wire cutting increased along with firing at the LOC. Yesterday it was 5 casualties for the Pakistani army due to misunderstanding between the infiltrating Terrorists who mistook Pakistani army as Indians and killed them.
Of course the 12th June incident involving Afghanistan and ISAF airforce is known which resulted in 12 deaths to Frontier constabulary.
Today we hear Iranian frontier guards have killed a Pakistani hassan Jan at Pangroor who was visiting his relatives on the other side of border.
Pakistan Army was conducting the foreign policy during the regime of Yahyah Khan when 1971 happened and it has to be bailed out by Z.Bhutto.
It was conducting foreign policy during the regime of Zia-ul-Haq when it served the Heritage foundation and was bleeding Indian Punjab.
It was Musharaff who was conducting foreign policy during the regime of Nawaz sherriff and inflicted kargil. He also betrayed Taliban when 9/11
happened. He had no civilian to fall back upon and he became responsible for his own actions.
Now Kiyani may be thinking that his actions to revive Punjab and scuttle the coming elections in Jammu and Kashmir or extend depth into Afghanistan will
have civilian face and so can escape responsibility for its actions.
He must understand the Thackeray editorial in Saamna to raise Hindu suicide bombers also has the same Handlers who is playing Pakistani army's strings.
The nukes of India and Pakistan are the real targets. If Heritage proposal to dismember India or Rand proposal to make independent Kashmir and Baluchistan with
land from Iran and Pakistan are also has the same puppeteer. The Indian think tanks are talking about ethnic cleansing by Pakistan in 1947 when it got 25% of land
from India and accepted only 15% of Muslims while cleansing almost 99% of Hindu population from the land of Pakistan. Some Hindu fundamentalists are talking about ethnic cleansing of Muslims of India as was done in Punjab and Haryana during partition in 1947. Indian subcontinent will disintegrate along with its Nukes. Pakistan army must think like CIVILIAN think tanks
and look whether it wants disintegration of India? Here I want to post again the CRY of anguish of Indian Muslims raised 50 years back and want the Pakistani army establishment
to look at issues in broader perspective.
Letter to Frank Graham UN special rep on 14th august 1951.
It is a remarkable fact that, while the Security Council and its various agencies have devoted so much time to the study of the Kashmir dispute and made various suggestions for its resolution, none of them has tried to ascertain the views of the Indian Muslims nor the possible effect of any hasty step in Kashmir, however well-intentioned, on the interests and well- being of the Indian Muslims. We are convinced that no lasting solution for the problem can be found unless the position of Muslims in Indian society is clearly understood.
Supporters of the idea of Pakistan, before this subcontinent was partitioned, discouraged any attempt to define Pakistan clearly and did little to anticipate the conflicting problems which were bound to arise as a result of the advocacy of the two-nation theory. The concept of Pakistan, therefore, became an emotional slogan with little rationale content. It never occurred to the Muslim League or its leaders that if a minority was not prepared to live with a majority on the sub- continent, how could the majority be expected to tolerate the minority.
It is, therefore, small wonder that the result of partition has been disastrous to Muslims. In undivided India, their strength lay about 100 million. Partition split up the Muslim people, confining them to the three isolated regions. Thus, Muslims number 25 million in Western Pakistan, 35 million to 40 million in India, and the rest in Eastern Pakistan. A single undivided community has been broken into three fragments, each faced with its own problems.
Pakistan was not created on a religious basis. If it had been, our fate as well as the fate of other minorities would have been settled at that time. Nor would the division of the sub- continent for reasons of religion have left large minorities in India or Pakistan.
This merely illustrates what we have said above, that the concept of Pakistan was vague, obscure, and never clearly defined, nor its likely consequences foreseen by the Muslim League, even when some of these should have been obvious.
When the partition took place, Muslims in India were left in the lurch by the Muslim League and its leaders. Most of them departed to Pakistan and a few who stayed behind stayed long enough to wind up their affairs and dispose of their property. Those who went over to Pakistan left a large number of relations and friends behind.
Having brought about a division of the country, Pakistan leaders proclaimed that they would convert Pakistan into a land where people would live a life according to the tenets of Islam. This created nervousness and alarm among the minorities living in Pakistan. Not satisfied with this, Pakistan went further and announced again and again their determination to protect and safeguard the interests of Muslims in India. This naturally aroused suspicion amongst the Hindus against us and our loyalty to India was questioned.
Pakistan had made our position weaker by driving out Hindus from Western Pakistan in utter disregard of the consequences of such a policy to us and our welfare. A similar process is in question in Eastern Pakistan from which Hindus are coming over to India in a large and large number.
If the Hindus are not welcome in Pakistan, how can we, in all fairness, expect Muslims to be welcomed in India ? Such a policy must inevitably, as the past has already shown, result in the uprooting of Muslims in this country and their migration to Pakistan where, as it became clear last year, they are no longer welcome, lest their influx should destroy Pakistan's economy.
Neither some of the Muslims who did migrate to Pakistan after partition, and following the widespread bloodshed and conflict on both sides of the Indo-Pakistan border in the north- west, have been able to find a happy asylum in what they had been told would be their homeland. Consequently some of them have had to return to India, e.g Meos who are now being rehabilitated in their former areas.
If we are living honorably in India today, it is certainly not due to Pakistan which, if anything, has by her policy and action weakened our pooition.
The credit goes to the broadminded leadership of India, to Mahatma Gandhi and Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, to the traditions of tolerance in this country and to the Constitution which ensures equal rights to all citizens of India, irrespective of their religion caste, creed, colour or sex.
We, therefore, feel that, tragically as Muslims were misled by the Muslim League and subsquently by Pakistan and the unnecessary suffering which we and our Hindu brethren have to go through in Pakistan and in India since partition, we must be given an opportunity to settle down to a life of tolerance and understanding to the mutual benefit of Hindus and Muslims in our country - if only Pakistan would let us do it. To us it is a matter of no smaller onsequence.
Despite continuous provocations, first from the Muslim League and since then from Pakistan, the Hindu majority in India has not thrown us or members of other minorities out of Civil Services, Armed Forces, the judiciary, trade, commerce, business and industry. There are Muslim Ministers in the Union and State cabinets, Muslim Governors, Muslim Ambassadors, representing India in foreign countries, fully enjoying the confidence of the Indian nation, Muslim members in Parliament and state legislatures, Muslim judges serving on the Supreme Court and High Courts, high-ranking officers in the Armed Foroes and the Civil services, including the police. Muslims have large landed estates, run big business and commercial houses in various parts of the country, notably in Bombay and Calcutta, have their shares in industrial production and enterprise in export and import trade. Our famous sacred shrines and places of cultural interest are mostly in India.
Not that our lot is certainly happy. We wish some of the state Governments showed a little greater sympathy to us in the field of education and employment. Nevertheless, we feel we have an honourable place in India. Under the law of the land, our religious and cultural life is protected and we shall share in the opportunities open to all citizens to ensure progress for the people of this country.
It is, therefore, clear that our interest and welfare do not coincide with Pakistan's conception of the welfare and interests of Muslims in Pakistan.
This is clear from Pakistan's attitude towards Kashmir. Pakistan claims Kashmir, first, on the ground of the majority of the State's people being Muslims and, secondly, on the ground, of the state being essential to its economy and defence. To achieve its objective it has been threatening to launch "Jehad" against Kashmir in India.
It is a strange commentary on political beliefs that the same Muslims of Pakistan who like the Muslims of Kashmir to join them invaded the state, in October 1947, killing and plundering Muslims in the state and dishonouring Muslim women, all in the interest of what they described as the liberation of Muslims of the State. In its oft-proclaimed anxiety to rescue the 3 million Muslims from what it describes as the tyranny of a handful of Hindus in the State, Pakistan evidently is prepared to sacrifice the interests of 40 million Muslims in India - a strange exhibition of concern for the welfare of fellow- Muslims. Our misguided brothers in Pakistan do not realise that if Muslims in Pakistan can wage a war against Hindus in Kashmir why should not Hindus, sooner or later, retaliate against Muslims in India.
Does Pakistan seriously think that it could give us any help if such an emergency arose or that we would deserve any help thanks to its own follies ? It is incapable of providing room and livelihood to the 40 million Muslims of India, should they migrate to Pakistan. Yet its policy and action, if not changed soon, may well produce the result which it dreads.
We are convinced that India will never attack our interests. First of all, it would be contrary to the spirit animating the political movement in this country. Secondly, it would be opposed to the Constitution and to the sincere leadership of the Prime Minister. Thirdly, India by committing such a folly would be playing straight into the hands of Pakistan.
We wish we were equally convinced of the soundness of Pakistan's policy. So completely oblivious is it of our present problems and of our future that it is willing to sell us into slavery - if only it can secure Kashmir.
It ignores the fact that Muslims in Kashmir may also have a point of view of their own, that there is a democratic movement with a democratic leadership in the State, both inspired by the progress of a broad minded, secular, democratic movement in India and both naturally being in sympathy with India. Otherwise, the Muslim raiders should have been welcomed with open arms by the Muslims of the State when the invasion took place in 1947.
Persistent propaganda about "Jehad" is intended, among other things, to inflame religious passions in this country. For it would, of course, be in Pakistan's interests to promote communal rioting in India to show to Kashmiri Muslims how they can find security only in Pakistan. Such a policy, however, can only bring untold misery and suffering to India and Pakistan generally and to Indian Muslims particularly.
Pakistan never tires of asserting that it is determined to protect the interests of Muslims in Kashmir and India. Why does not Pakistan express the same concern for Pathans who are fighting for Pakhtoonistan, an independent homeland of their own ? The freedom-loving Pathans under the leadership of Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan and Dr. Khan Sahib, both nurtured in the traditions of democratic tolerance of the Indian National Congress, are being subjected to political repression of the worst possible kind by their Muslim brethren in power in Pakistan and in the NWFP. Contradictory as Pakistan's policy generally is, it is no surprise to us that while it insists on a fair and impartial plebiscite in Kashmir, it denies a fair and impartial plebiscite to Pathans.
Pakistan's policy in general and her attitude towards Kashmir is particular thus tend to create conditions in this cauntry which in the long run can only bring to us Muslims widespread suffering and destruction. Its policy prevents us from settling down, from being honourable citizens of a State, free from suspicion of our fellow-countrymen and adapting ourselves to changing conditions to promote the interests and welfare of India. Its sabre-rattling interferes with its own economy and ours. It expects us to be layal to it despite its importance to give us any protection, believing at the same time that we can still claim all the rights of citizenship in a secular democracy.
In the event of a war, it is extremely doubtful whether it will be able to protect the Muslims of East Bengal who are completely cut off from Western Pakistan. Are the Muslims of India and Eastern Pakistan who sacrifice themselves completely to enable the 25 million Muslims in Western Pakistan to embark upon mad, self-destructive and adventures?
We should, therefore, like to impress upon you with all the emphasis at our command that Pakistan's policy towards Kashmir is fraught with the gravest peril to the 40 million Muslims of India. If the Security Council is really interested in peace human brotherhood, and international understanding, it should heed this warning while there is still time.
Dr. Zakir Hussain
(Vice Chancellor Aligarh University)
Sir Sultan Ahmed
(Former Member of Governor General's Executive Council)
Sir Mohd. Ahmed Syed Khan
(Nawab of Chhatari, former acting
Governor of United Provinces and
Prime Minister of Hyderabad)
Sir Mohd. Usman
(Former member of Governor
General's Executive council and
acting Governor of Madras)
Sir Iqbal Ahmed
(Former Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court)
Sir Fazal Rahimtoola
(Former Sheriff of Bombay)
Maulana Hafz-ur-Rehman M.P.
Col. B.H. Zaidi M.P.
Nawab Zain Yar Jung
(Minister Gcvernment of Hyderabad)
A.K. Kawaja
(Former President of Muslim Majlis)
T.M. Zarif
(General Secretary West Bengal Bohra Community)
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)