news details |
|
|
| New Delhi squandering the advantage, Panun Kashmir | | Indo-Pak Relations -- II | |
STARK REALITY
RUSTAM
EARLY TIMES REPORT
JAMMU, Apr 15: Addressing the seminarians, Retired DGP M M Khajuria said: “Ever since its creation, the conduct of Indo-Pak relations by Pakistan was characterized by brinkmanship and denial. Military dictators and elected rulers alike have traditionally been indulging in double-speak and blowing hot and cold. As a result, numerous efforts at peace making proved fruitless. In this dismal state of relationship a ray of hope for peace, friendship and mutually beneficial relations between two estranged neighbours appeared when Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and his Pakistani counterpart Yousuf Raza Gilani met on the sidelines of the last SAARC conclave in Bhutanese capital Thimpu in April last. To everyone’s surprise the meeting identified ‘trust deficit’ as the core obstacle in the successful pursuance of the Indo-Pak peace process and promotion of good and stable neighbourly relations. It was recognized that no headway in Indo-Pak peace process had been possible because of the persisting lack of trust between the two governments from the day one of the creation of Mumalkat-i-Khudad.”
Khajuria further said: “The removal of trust deficit implied that Pak military doctrine which placed India as its enemy number one be discarded; her terrorist strategic assets be dissolved, cross-border terrorism terminated and the terrorist infra-structure created for promoting and sustaining the hostilities (destroyed). This sensible and mutually beneficial formulation was sabotaged by the Pak army. A stand off ensued after that. Sadly, India blinkered first one again. The climb down came in Thimpu (February 2011), when the Indian Foreign Minister S M Krishna astounded friends and foes alike by claiming that ‘the very fact that the two foreign secretaries met is certainly an indication that solid foundation has been laid for getting the two countries on the sustained engagement.’ Given the state of Indo-Pak relations and the environment in which the meeting took place, the claim of ‘solid foundation’ having been laid in one freak contact can only be laughable. The preposterous claim flies in the face of the ground realities. Pakistan continues to be belligerent. The great opportunity was lost. Let the nation be warned of further capitulation that cannot be ruled out.”
In his presidential address, Prof Hari Om, Ex-Chair Professor Maharaja Gulab Singh Chair, catalogued the blunders New Delhi has committed from time to time to pander to Pakistan, which has been bleeding India with a thousand-cut on a daily basis. He questioned the very rational behind the move of New Delhi to re-engage with Islamabad. He asked the Prime Minister to explain why he replicated the shame of Sharm-el-Sheikh at Thimpu overlooking the national sentiment that is against the idea of reengaging with Pakistan whose single-point agenda is to finish what it calls the “unfinished agenda of partition”, annex Jammu and Kashmir and dismember India.
Prof Hari Om bemoaned and said: “New Delhi has no clear-cult policy towards Pakistan and Jammu and Kashmir”, and added New Delhi, instead of defending and promoting further its paramount sovereign interests in Jammu and Kashmir, has started treading a path that would only culminate in the segregation of Jammu and Kashmir from India, thus paving way for the Balkanization of the country and unsettling everything in the country.” He took to task the Prime Minister and the Indian Foreign Office for their weak-kneed foreign policy and urged them to respect the national sentiment that requires the policy-planners in New Delhi not to yield to the Pakistan and the Kashmiri separatists and communalists.” He further asked New Delhi “not to negate the concept of the state by advocating such ridiculous formulations as neighbours cannot be changed but borders can be rendered irrelevant.” Besides, he urged the Prime Minister to “integrate the state fully into India by treading the path Lal Bahadur Shastri and Indira Gandhi had charted for the nation.”
O N Trisal, an activist and an ardent believer in the concept of Panun Kashmir (Apna Kashmir), also expressed almost identical views. There was consensus that dialogue with Pakistan was just not possible and that what was needed was a policy that neutralizes the baneful influence of Pakistan, protects and advance further the country’s geo-political interests and makes it abundantly clear that New Delhi would tolerate any nonsense anymore. In other words, all the speakers warned New Delhi that the policy it had been pursuing was against the national interests and they were absolutely right. (Concluded)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
