news details |
|
|
| India—Pakistan must first have common definition of terrorist | | |
Tension between India and Pakistan rather than getting eased after
Manmohan Singh-Musharraf meeting at Hawana and joint declaration, has
further escalated, as a result of some unhealthy and negative
developments. The release of Parvez Musharraf's memoirs "In the line
of fire", coming as it does on the heal of the Hawana meet, has the
potential to put into jeopardy the agreement on joint mechanism by the
two countries to tackle terrorism. The credibility of the General
which was always at low ebb in India has further eroded as a result of
the blatant lies and half truths, coming as revelations by him in his
biography. It is not only in India that Musharraf's credibility has
received a set back because of some confessions made by him in his
book and talk claims made in certain matters, but it has received
drubbing even within his own country, as well as in the USA which had
so far been considering Musharraf as a best bet in their war against
international terrorism. Musharraf's assertion in his book that those
dubbed as terrorists by one country, are regarded freedom fighters in
the other country and taking cue from this assertion Pak
spokesperson's contention that most of the persons in the list of
wanted sent by India, including Salahudin, are in fact fighters for
the freedom of their land, makes the entire exercise of joint
mechanism irrelevant. Until there is an agreement between the two
countries as to who is a terrorist and who is not, against whom the
joint mechanism to combat terrorism will function? If Pakistan's
contention of all those involved in militancy in Jammu and Kashmir, as
being freedom fighters and not terrorists is accepted, then the joint
fight against terrorism becomes only a white goose chase. This
definition put forth by Pakistan, if carried to its logical or
illogical end, then Osama bin Ladan and other Alqaeda and Taliban
militants, to capture or kill whom Pakistan claims to be fully
cooperating with USA, too can be termed as freedom fighters and not
terrorists. They can be claimed to be fighting for upholding Islam
against onslaught on the religion by the West. No terrorist admits
himself to be a terrorist. All of them claim to be fighters for some
cause. Even a malicious person operating with motiveless malignity, to
quote Shakespeare, would cite some motive and claim of some grouse for
his action. However the United Nations has clearly defined terrorism
by stating that adopting violent means and indulge in killings of the
innocent to achieve any political motive is terrorism. Until Pakistan
accepts this definition of terrorism and agrees with India about the
status of those waging armed war on India or indulging in acts of
sabotage and subversion are the terrorist, any agreement between India
and Pakistan over joint mechanism against terrorism by the two
countries will be like putting the cart before the horse. In this
regard Former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee's statement,
refuting Parvez Musharraf's version of the failure of Agra summit,
that the talks failed and joint statement could not be finalized
because of Parvez Musharraf's stand that the wanted terrorists by
India, are freedom fighters from Pakistan's view point, is quite
relevent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
