news details |
|
|
| Will BJP clear its stand on the 1999 Colombo talks? | | | NEHA
EARLY TIMES REPORT
JAMMU, Dec 23: Will the BJP review its stand on the March 1999 agreement on Jammu and Kashmir, reached between the then Indian Foreign Minister, Jaswant Singh, and his Pakistani counterpart, Sartaj Aziz, at Colombo during its crucial Jammu meeting? (The agreement, among other things, had suggested plebiscite in the state on regional/district basis, maximum autonomy to Kashmir and its adjoining areas and division of Jammu along river Chenab.) If one goes by what the BJP national general secretary and Leader of Opposition in the Rajya Sabha, Arun Jaitley, said on February 5 in New Delhi, then one can say yes the BJP is reviewing its stand on its earlier position. And, this is most welcome. (February 5 was observed as Kashmir Solidarity Day in Kashmir and Pakistan.)
What had Arun Jaitley said on February 5 while addressing media persons? He had hit the nail on the head and clearly accused the Congress led-UPA Government of "offering talks with Pakistan on a day when Islamabad was parading its anti-India Jehadis" and described the offer of talks as "an abject surrender". He, along with the party's national spokesperson, Prakash Javadekar, had said "India's offer for talks with Pakistan is also an admission of Pakistan's position on (the July 2009) Sharm-el-Sheikh statement and not the understanding of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh that future talks would be about terror as stated before Parliament".
So much so, Arun Jaitley had asked the Prime Minister to give a categorical assurance to the nation that "there will be no compromise on Indian territory in Jammu and Kashmir and took the Congress-led UPA Government to task for buckling "under international pressure when anti-India United Jehad Council (UJC) that includes representatives from Jamat-ud-Dawa were paraded in Muzaffarabad in Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir".
He had not stopped there. He had gone to the extent of expressing "apprehensions" and say: "The Indian offer for talks would effectively mean a composite dialogue (read Kashmir), irrespective of an assurance to check terror infrastructure from the Pakistani side. This would also mean dilution of Indian control over Kashmir Valley and Muslim-dominated areas of Jammu and acceptance of joint-control mechanism, as mooted by former Pakistan President Gen Pervez Musharraf". It needs to be underlined that what he had opposed on February 5 was what his party had virtually agreed to do - a fact, later on, candidly admitted by the Atal Bihari Vajpayee's National Security Advisor, Brijesh Mishra.
Prakash Javadekar had also not lagged behind. He had asserted, and rightly, that "India's Foreign Minister, S.M. Krishna, has diluted the country's stand when he said India expected a few steps from other side on its demand of credible action against terror outfits by Pakistan. Now it is (an) acceptance of the position that terror and dialogue can coexist". He was right for another reason: The Pakistani Prime Minister has openly announced that he could not give an assurance to India that there will not repeat of the 26/11-line terrorist attack in India.
Three days later, former Deputy Prime Minister and BJP veteran LK Advani had taken an almost similar line and opposed the move of the Congress-led UPA Government to resume the dialogue process with Pakistan, a rogue and failed Pakistan. He had asked the Union Government: "Is it USA behind Indo-Pak talks?" The government's decision to start Foreign Secretary-level talks with Pakistan was the upshot of a powerful nudge from Washington, Advani had said. "The question people have been asking in a more straightforward manner is…is its (India's) latest U-turn on dialogue the upshot of a powerful nudge from Washing?", the former Deputy Prime Minister had written in his blog.
Again, on February 11, Advani reiterated his opposition to the Union Government's move to restart the dialogue process with Pakistan and asserted that it was not desirable considering the highly hostile attitude of the belligerent Pakistan.
One cannot but endorse the line that the BJP took on February 5, when the Kashmiri separatists observed a Solidarity Day to identify themselves with what Pakistan and they stand for. Similarly, one cannot but agree with what Advani said on February 8 and reiterated on February 11. This should be the line, which was clear, unambiguous and which the Indian nation wants each and every political party in the country to take so that the Indian unity and integrity is maintained and the Pakistani evil designs are comprehensively defeated.
One can only hope and pray that The BJP would stick to the line its leaders publicly took and do every thing possible to prevent the Congress-led UPA Government from treading a path it has decided to tread overlooking its dangerous fall-out. Almost all the top-ranking BJP leaders are in Jammu and Jammu is the right place for reiterating what Jaitely and Advani said in the month of February 2010. The BJP cannot afford any kind of complacency. It has to establish that what it said on February 5 was what it shall pursue with single-minded devotion and not allow the Congress-led UPA Government to do anything that has the potential of enabling Pakistan and Kashmiri separatists to accomplish what they could not during all these 63 years. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
