news details |
|
|
| Pak-Prime Minister justifies his stand ambiguously to hold talks with his valley based anti India lobby members ahead official meeting | | | A N Bharadwaj | 6/7/2015 11:57:46 PM |
| Ist Part
The Pak-Prime Minister, Nawaz Shrief has justified his stand to hold talk with his valley
based lobby anti-India members on the land of India before the official meeting because of
established practice as they had already been seeking opinion from the so called Kashmiri leaders in the past on the issue that concerned with them, but that negative unbridle movements with them was not sensible that created doubts and misgivings against Indian integrity. To quote the past reference does not mean to re-continue the sweet less self-designing practice for ever on the plea of so called tradition. Congress headed UPA national Government had been ignoring that unauthorized meeting with anti-India elements at Pak-High Commissioner to India office in view of its liberal policy with the presumption of emerging sense of responsibility to them on its own but that its continual provoking and teasing performance was a quite humiliation and disgraceful for Indian ruling leadership, which that uncomfortable and indecent provocative practice did not suit to successive national Government and that practice was stopped.
The talk of guest country diplomat with anti-India elements at the office of Pak-High Commissioner on Indian soil without taking host country diplomat in to his confidence to make it a theatre to hatch anti-India future line of action for human rights violations and to generate unrest and disharmony to defame India internationally was the violation of international law and breach of trust. That game will neither be allowed to play at its office nor will it be allowed to convert it into theater of intrigues and for hatching conspiracies against India. It was an onslaught on its honour and dignity. It was a great generosity of India to allow anti-national elements for unbridles movements to implement Pak-agenda in the valley. It is the only country in the world where its people are free to speak whatever they like without any fear.
Nawaz Shrief further justified it adamantly his clandestine un- diplomatic activities with anti-India elements working on Pak-behest in the valley with the baseless plea that they have already been seeking opinion of the Kashmiri so-called leaders, which was not new innovation. He should know that on very moment India had being objected over their unwarranted activities. It is on the record that his diplomats when ever visited host country- India to hold meeting, before that they used to discuss with their valley based lobby members which was resented every time to keep the dignity of the diplomatic decorum by the Congress headed UPA national Government. After the change of the national Government, it was not necessary for new Government to continue that unofficial humiliating practice to hold talks with anti-India elements on Indian soil without taking in to confidence of the host country diplomats. To jump whimsically on their own to talk to anyone or with lobby members without even any information and consent of the host country diplomats was international violation of diplomatic norms and decorum. 2. He further justified his argument that there was nothing new to seek option of the Kashmiri leaders, but his that assertion had not provided any space to justify his argument. He should have first ascertain the facts before to justify his stand as a Prime Minister of Pakistan, he should add in his memory that they were not Kashmiri leaders; they were the members of his valley based lobby working on his behest in the State to implement his agenda by misleading the people on the basis of proximity of religion. His lobby members were not the representatives of the State people, especially Kashmiri Muslims, but they were merely his supporters working there as spokespersons for his country for harping on his tune as well as the rejected elements of the society. His lobby members were not the representatives of the State people, especially Kashmiri Muslims. They were merely his supporters working there to promote his political interest to damage India. The most of his lobby members were not popular among the masses, and their popularity was up to the turn of their street, and also possessed criminal record at their back. They had neither representative character nor possessed the leadership qualifications. They were the Pak-stipendiary working in the valley for its political cause. In future in case the Pak-diplomats may have desire to meet the popular leaders of the State elected democratically, they can be contacted through the host country. Pak-ruling leadership should follow the diplomatic decorum that on the visit of its diplomats to India in case they have desire to meet the elected leaders or its lobby members, the necessary arrangement for the meeting should be made through the diplomats of the host country.
Pakistan should know that India would not allow to anti-national elements for further any longer period to continue for violence and destruction, indulge in killings to bleed the State, demonstrations and protests, injure and kill the forces by taking disadvantage of liberal democracy of India to serve political interest of their masters, but India would rebuff to protect its sovereignty by all means. The double edged show under mala fide intension, one side restoring peace efforts and other side generating Islamic terrorism to hit India would not go together, which would not yield any results. The Pak-rulers under obligation of social and humanity are bound to decide in accordance with sense of responsibility and sincerity to find the way to provide communal harmony and peace to the people of South Asia. India would never allow processing any peace agenda at the cost of its sovereignty which it has over it legally; Pak-rulers should take in view to surrender the Indian State territory occupied during horrified invasion of State for future prospects as asked by U N Security Council to vacate. In that context, Pak-Foreign office spokesperson Tasnim Aslam rebutted with full confidence of not for not possibilities for any bilateral talk under any condition. She despite non-considering the eventualities of emerging reaction, she provoked with teasing attitude by conceiving new argument that Kashmires were not Indians separatists, they were the people belonging to occupied territory struggling for their right to self-determination, which 3 had been recognized by the U N resolution. So her country Pakistan was a party to the dispute and that contention irrelevant and not acceptable, which appeared in media dated 7th December 2014. Her that self-styled interpretation to justify her after thought stand had no any space to stake claim over the State as aggressor country, which was obnoxious.
She should go first for home work to know the historical facts of the subject before pleading to justify her political rights over the State as desired by her. The Indian sovereignty over the State has already been recognized world over and including also U N Security Council lying in its record. It is beyond challenge. In the light of these factual circumstances, the Pak-ruling leadership would have to decide the future prospects in its the two edged policy. It is up to it now to decide talk whether with anti-national elements vide its whimsical agenda or Government of India to resolve the issue bilaterally in peaceful atmosphere. To be continued |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
