news details |
|
|
| Neighbours can’t be changed and, hence, bilateral talks with Pak would go ahead, says Antony | | Advantage Pakistan | |
STARK REALITY
RUSTAM
EARLY TIMES REPORT
JAMMU, May 30: Defence Minister A K Antony on May 28 imitated Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and declared at Kannur (Kerala) that “we can change friends but neighbours can’t be changed” and, hence, “bilateral discussions (with Pakistan) are going ahead.” Who has asked the Prime Minister and the Defence Minister to change neighbors? None. Nobody would ever ask the Prime Minister and his colleagues to ever do so because it can’t be done. Neighbours are neighbours and they can’t be changed. This is not the issue. The issue is altogether different and the issue is whether or not talks should be held with Pakistan.
There is consensus in the country that there should be no talks with Pakistan. Leave alone Prime Minister and the government that he is leading – government that has only lowered the Indian position in the eyes of the international community; government that has been disgracing the nation almost everyday; government that is involved neck-deep in corruption; and government that has been meticulously and with single-minded devotion negating the sacrifices of those who saved Jammu and Kashmir for India.
Antony, like Manmohan Singh, says talks with Pakistan would go on despite the fact that there exist on the Pakistani soil at least 42 terrorist training camps, all busy in exporting terrorism into India. Which Pakistan he is talking about? Is he talking about that Pakistan about which the impartial investigators like Shaun Gregory, Director of the Pakistan Security Research Unit, University of Bradford, UK, raise many serious questions?
It would be only prudent to quote verbatim from what Gregory wrote in The Times of India (“How long can the world tolerate a delinquent state”, May 29). He, among other things, wrote: “We are used to the idea of delinquent youth, who exhibit a propensity for violence, a disregard for rules, who are corrupt and avaricious, who dissemble, and who keep bad company. But is there such a thing as a delinquent state? We certainly see in Pakistan a state apparatus that has a propensity for both internal and external violence, initiating conflicts with its neighbours and using violence to address many of its internal challenges. We certainly see in Pakistan a state that often pays no more than lip service to the duties and constraints of its own constitution and legal systems or to its obligations under international law. We certainly see in Pakistan a corrupt and avaricious ruling elite who pay few taxes and benefit disproportionately from Pakistan’s economic activity and international aid. We certainly see endless dissembling from Pakistan’s rulers. We certainly see – from Osama bin Laden to Mullah Omar; by way of Hafiz Saeed, Zakir-ur-Rehman Lakhvi, Ayman al Jawahiri, Rashid Rauf, Omar Saeed Sheikh, Dawood Ibrahim, Qari Saifullah Akhtar, Sajid Mir, Abu Qahfa, Mazhar Iqbal, and many others – that Pakistan keeps bad company.” This constitutes Pakistan in the words Gregory.
Something is, it appears, fundamentally wrong with those who are ruling India and managing affairs with Pakistan. Had it not been so, they would not have forgotten 26/11 and restarted dialogue with Pakistan that is being roundly condemned across the globe, barring China and a few other countries, as a rogue and failed state. There’s still time for New Delhi to refashion their whole approach towards Pakistan. They must tell Pakistan in unambiguous terms that they would not talk to her until she destroys all the 42 terrorist camps operating on her soil and that the talks would be on PoK and Gilgit-Baltistan region and not on the Indian Jammu and Kashmir.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
