- Suicide bomb hits UN in Pakistan, killing 5
- Suicide car bomb kills 49, wounds 100 in Peshawar
- Gunmen attack Pak Army headquarters; 12 dead
- At least 41 people, inlcuding six security officers, were killed and over 45 injured on Oct 12 in a suicide attack in a market
- Teams of gunmen attacked three security sites killing a total of 39 people
- Bomb kills 10 at Pakistan mosque, police station
Those are the headlines of various Taliban-related attacks in Pakistan territory for the last 12 days. At least 156 people dead, with attacks on the rise and disturbing news of possible coalitions and unprecedented coordination between Pakistani Taliban, Al-Qaeda and Punjabi militants.
What should the world do when it hears of such blaring violence? It should sympathise. India, in particular, should empathise. India daresay that Pak is reaping her own seeds, because the attacks are headed for her, in some time and she must be prepared for the kind of guerrilla warfare of extremists. But, what is India doing? She is issuing statements on Kashmir and Mumbai attacks to bridge relations between Pak and herself. May I ask, with all due respect, who the hell is listening? Poor Pakistan is holding her breath, not able to predict nor being capable to stop the next attack on her innocent civilians. Again, no disrespect to Mumbai attack victims. But, now that India has submitted all the evidence she can to Pak, wait for her to first stand on her own legs and then expect the goods to be delivered.
Be a friend in these dire circumstances and Pak will understand the Indian culture, else, she'll think India as just another vulture! Think, bloody heads.
Dude.. Pakistan is reaping her own harvest, the state gave birth to Taliban with US support, they sponsored with state money the terrorists and big surprise, the Frankenstein is back against themselves.
ReplyDeleteThat India is making statement about Mumbai and trying to make friendship is misplaced as that statement by @shashitharoor is not in the context of the attacks in Pakistan.
I think it is but natural to condemn these attacks but to think that this affords Pakistan more time to waste before they act on the terrorists is juvenile.
The Pakistan government has been given quite conclusive evidence in regarding the involvement of JuD. The state did not ban them. When international pressure grew (temporarily) they banned it, only for it to be revoked. They are in possession of evidence made available by India to act against the perpetrators of the tragedy. Yet they make weak cases on the accused which get quashed within weeks.
Regarding waiting for Pakistan to stand on her own two feet, Pakistan has been on her own two feet for 10 months since December last year after the attacks and each time we look for an excuse to excuse them?
I do not think there is any friendship to be shared in this matters, actions are necessary. With knowledge that state actors were involved to consider Pakistan capable or qualified in any manner to judge the issue was a gross misjudgement, and now to make concessions on their actions further would be a irreversible error.
What you are suggesting is the equivalent of suggesting that we should not bother Hitler because he has internal problems in his party and we should let the issue of concentration camps, extermination of jews be set aside and instead show empathy and hope that he understands good friendship.
I partially agree with your point, Rahul aka 'Assman'. I agree that it is "but natural" for India to raise her concerns about the attacks. I disagree with the analogy you gave, though. It is not the same agencies maintaining the concentration camps and dealing with a hypothetical unrest during Hitler's regime. But, the agencies that have to get intelligence and probe into Mumbai's attackers are the same ones that have to gather information regarding the Taliban's attacks and their next plans. Hope you get the point. India has to show some sensibility is all I'm saying. I have no problems in India raising the points, but I do not agree with its timing.
ReplyDelete"War on Terror" is to 21st century, what cold war was for the 70's and 80's. If we consider the production of arms in the world, America stands first. Not all of these weapons are for internal use. They sell them to various agencies throughout the world. I will not be surprised if Americans are selling them to both sides in Pakistan now. South Asia is a new ground which America has to settle in, to counter China. "War on Terror" hence is a new tool of international pressure. Taliban was created by the US and Pak to counter Russia. The dog outlived and the master will obviously get angry.
ReplyDeleteWhat should India do then? For now, side with Americans and shout over the rooftops in Newyork and Geneva about terrorism and dream of a peaceful world. We don't have enough money for any coup d'etat. So, we should self interestedly side with Americans and then switch if anything ever becomes powerful.I doubt if it happens in the next 50 years. Who wants peace? Shut his mouth with the Nobel medal.
Good one, Tri, agree with you. But, I am addressing a small part of the whole here. In the long term, I believe the larger picture of Taliban, Pakistan and America is for time to map. Meanwhile, China continues to astonish everyone with its growth rate, America continues to sell arms, for it would go bankrupt otherwise, and India strives for good news, like Chidambaram talking to Kashmiris, among a lot of bad ones, like the 2G licensing!
ReplyDeleteP.S.: We have long left the topic under concern here, I should start a different post. ;-)
Still talking on the topic blog post is about, I stand by my analogy. Hitler too would have been the member of his party who had to resolve the issues and he himself would have to be the one to "resolve" the issue of conc camps.
ReplyDeleteAnyway setting aside the analogies, I am glad that you understand my point of view. India has been too gravely sinned against to allow any laxity on Pakistan's part at all.
Besides if you see what Pak has been saying lately, the attitude is getting worse and worse. Far from any concrete action, the cases are getting into more and more trouble, and they are unleashing rhetoric about RAW/India involvement in Baloch unrest. Its a classic "ulta chor kotwal ko daante."
Anyway, as regards the India vis a vis the US involvement in subconti, US is desp to get their Afghan war to seem a success. This need has pitted them against India. One the growing Indian influence in Pak is causing Pak to feel insecure and become a reason for inciting terror in the region. This is a hinderance in US maintaining peace in the region. Secondly, the fight on Taliban in Pak regions makes Pak cooperation paramount. And that means that they would rather that Pak is in good humour. All in all, they are not a dependable ally for the time being and we should follow a independent line of action. Efforts for peace in Afghanistan should be increased and the pressure on Pakistan should be maintained whether US gives us assurances or not.
Well, you are talking like the ones at the top (!) too, then. On the analogy point, it's not the Democratic Pak govt. that's bringing the war on its subjects here (past is past, everyone makes mistakes -- we should leave pointing at her for breeding terrorists), for us to be so harsh on her and compare her to Germany. Pressure on Pak can be maintained by being sensible too. That was my original point. It's highly unprofessional of Pak to allege an Indian hand in Balochistan and FATA (this designation actually makes me laugh at their allegations) and I hope she either stops alleging or starts proving the presence of Indian hand behind the attacks. However, it need not be tit-for-tat by India by being unconcerned of what's happening within a neighboring territory. If we are sensible to her in her direness, may be she'll reciprocate by destroying the terrorism-related infrastructure on her Eastern side too.
ReplyDeleteTo get you more acquainted with what my point is, this is the debate that happened last night (27-10). Watch that and lay the similarities between this post and the debate.