news details |
|
|
| Do away with symbolic diplomacy: Desai | | Kashmir Settlement | | vKashmir Settlement
Do away with
symbolic diplomacy: Desai
Early Times Report
JAMMU, July 22: Some fake Indian trouble-shooters and peace-mongers have expressed their unhappiness over the Indian foreign policy vis-à-vis Pakistan. One such peace-monger (read Pakistani spokesperson) is Kanti Desai, a close friend of former Jammu University Vice-Chancellor Amitabh Mattoo. Desai claims that he is an expert in international relations as he taught international relations for years.
What made Desai feel unhappy with New Delhi was its failure to endorse the Pakistani viewpoint on Siachen and Sir Creek. He did appreciate the decision of New Delhi and the BCCI to resume cricketing ties with Pakistan, but bemoaned that such a resumption of cricketing ties will not help resolve the Kashmir issue. He dismissed the decision as a "symbol over substance in India-Pakistan ties". He said: "And now we are told cricket ties will resume. But where is the substance? Isn't it time to resolve what could be resolved?" "The Prime Minister (of India) and his Pakistani counterpart need to shore up symbolic with real courage and resolve what is resolvable to create the base for a Kashmir settlement in the future," he also said.
He urged the Indian Prime Minister to do away with the "symbolic diplomacy" and, instead, take recourse to a policy that satisfies and conciliates Islamabad. He wants New Delhi to do two things without losing a moment. He wants New Delhi to accept the Pakistani demand that the Indian Army must demilitarize the Siachen glacial region and he also wants New Delhi to settle the issue of Sir Creek taking into consideration the Pakistani concerns.
Regarding Siachen, he has said: "The Siachen dispute (Siachen is Indian) could be fairly easily resolved. After an avalanche took the lives of over 20 Pakistani soldiers a few weeks ago (April 2012), Islamabad indicated it would like to settle the matter. (Pakistan has no locus standi in the Siachen glacial region.) New Delhi's response has been desultory and largely negative. What exactly is the point of sticking to a hard position on Siachen? What strategic objectives are achieved by holding on to a tiny point of territory at 17,000 feet where both sides lose more troops to the cold and harsh terrain than any military conflict? (The Pakistani presence in the region is illegal.) There is absolutely no strategic worth to Siachen whatsoever...Siachen must be the strategically most bizarre and futile struggle in the world. Only India and Pakistan would waste lives and hundreds of crores of rupees on it everyday. Some in the (Indian) military argue that controlling Siachen is vital for the security of Kashmir and that an Indian presence at Siachen usefully threatens the China-Pakistan Karakoram highway. Given that hardly anyone can move through the glacier with falling into a crevasse or bursting his lungs and given that the Karakoram highway is 200 km away, this is absurd. The Prime Minister should forthrightly tell the military that this is complete strategic nonsense and that we should stop sacrificing the lives of jawans in this absurdity". The Desai's Siachen formulation doesn't have anything against Pakistan which forced India to launch Operation Meghdoot in 1984 to evict the Pakistani intruders from the region. His formulation suggests he knows more than the Army which has been deal with Pakistan since 1947. He wants New Delhi to "add substance to mostly symbolic diplomacy". The meaning is loud and clear.
Regarding Sir Creek, Desai says, "Sir Creek should be next on the list of substantial problem solving; this also was nearly resolved in 1993" (to the satisfaction of Pakistan). Desai also wants Pakistan to add substance by "unequivocally giving India Most Favoured Nation (MFN) status" and that's all. India gave the status of MFN to Pakistan years ago. In other words, he wants New Delhi to compromise its position in lieu of the illusory and petty concession: MFN status.
This is Kanti Desai and this is the solution he has offered to "create the base for a Kashmir settlement in the future". And, remember, Desai stands for a solution that grants an autonomous status to Kashmir. He, like Mattoo and others of his ilk, has no place whatsoever in his solution for the people of Jammu & Ladakh, who are the real victims and sufferers. He, like Mattoo, believes that New Delhi has been unfair both to Pakistan and Kashmiri Muslims. It would be better if one goes through Desai's latest essay "Symbols over substance in India-Pakistan ties" (TOI, July 21) and sees for himself what this fake peace-monger has advocated. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
