news details |
|
|
| Pakistanis united, Indians divided on Kashmir | | | RUSTAM
EARLY TIMES REPORT
JAMMU, July 18: The collapse of Indo-Pak Foreign Minister-level talks, held at Islamabad on July 15, has led to a serious debate among "opinion leaders" in India and Pakistan. These "opinion leaders include former Army officials, former diplomats, those who held top positions in the intelligence agencies, journalists, political commentators, "human rights" activists, academicians, lawyers and film makers. Sometimes politicians belonging to different political parties also play the role of "opinion leader" and a few of them even speak a language his/her party would not use in public or while participating in TV channel debates. One thing that is common between the Indian and Pakistani "opinion leaders" is that they are the product of western education system and speak English language quite fluently. The governments of India and Pakistan also attach importance to what these "opinion leaders" say and suggest.
It was hoped that the Indian "opinion leaders" would take a very tough and national stand on Jammu and Kashmir and Pakistan. The hope had stemmed from what Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi did to Indian Foreign Minister S M Krishna on the Pakistani soil. Qureshi had insulted, humiliated, taunted, abused and accused Krishna and virtually challenged his diplomatic skills or whatever. So much so that he stated in the press conference, addressed jointly by both the Foreign Ministers, that both he and his Indian counterpart were of the opinion that Indian Home Secretary G K Pillai's statement on David Headley's revelations regarding the involvement of Pakistani Army and Navy in the Mumbai terrorist attack on the eve of their talks was in a bad taste. This assertion of Qureshi embarrassed Krishna, with the opposition BJP accusing him of not "serving the national interest by remaining silent."
The hope that the Indian "opinion leaders" would take a very hard line had also stemmed from the Pakistani stand on Kashmir, Siachen, water, Sir Creek, presence of Indian Army in Jammu and Kashmir, "human rights" situation in the Valley and police-crowd clashes leading to the imposition of curfew in various towns of the Kashmir Valley. Shah Mahmood Qureshi had made it amply clear that Islamabad would not accept anything short of what it has been consistently demanding since 1947 - merger of Jammu and Kashmir with Pakistan on the ground that it is a Muslim-majority state.
However, the ongoing rather fierce debate on the Indo-Pak relations and Jammu and Kashmir indicate serious differences among the Indian "opinion leaders". They are evenly divided. Some of them want New Delhi to call of the talks with the "unreasonable, aggressive and insulting Pakistan". And, almost an equal number of them want New Delhi to forget and forgive and restart the dialogue process with Pakistan. Most of them who want New Delhi to restart dialogue process with Islamabad also want the authorities to deal differently with Kashmir because "Kashmir is a special case" and give it what it wants - autonomy, self-rule and what not.
Some of them, like Pakistanis, describe Kashmir as a "disputed territory." One of them has even gone to extent of saying that "Jammuites are Indians, Kashmiris (read Kashmiri Muslims) are anti-Indians and Ladakhis are non-Indians" and, hence, "give Kashmiri Muslims what they want." He is none other than Prof A C Bose, former Head of Jammu University's History Department. One of them (Mani Shankar Iyer of the Congress) also belongs to the category of "Opinion leaders" who want New Delhi to carry on the peace process whatever the situation. He wants Pakistan to be conciliated. They have been asking New Delhi to adopt a flexible approach towards Pakistan and Jammu and Kashmir. However, one thing that is common among all the Indian "opinion leaders" is that none of them talk about PoK and Gilgit-Baltistan.
The Pakistani "opinion leaders", without any exception, are, on the other hand, one against India like the Palestinians are against the Israelis. They are standing solidly behind Shah Mahmood Qureshi, asserting that he did not do anything that could hamper the peace process. Each one of them is expressing deep concern over what they call the failure of New Delhi to address the Pakistani concerns. Each one of them is condemning G K Pillai's statement and each one of them is defending the mastermind of 26/11, Hafiz Saeed. Our opinion leaders have been saying that the Pakistani civil society (read Punjabi Muslims) is for peace with India. Wrong. The Pakistani civil society, like the Pakistani "opinion leaders", wants New Delhi to kneel. It is not prepared to accept anything short of Jammu and Kashmir.
There is something fundamentally wrong with our "opinion leaders". Their concept of India is flawed. In fact, they want to convert India into a banana republic and they also want New Delhi to give legitimacy to the politics of communalism and separatism. This is the India's major problem. You can tackle Pakistan. You can tackle the Kashmiri separatists and communalists. But you cannot rein in our perverted "opinion leaders" because New Delhi consider them distinguished citizens of the country. In fact, New Delhi consults them quite often. How sad!
Learn lesson from Pakistan, Israel, China and United States, which are behaving as states need to behave.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
