Third Strategic Dialogue and Pak-US relationship

If artificial smiles of cordiality, genial and firm handshakes, numerous photo-ops, vows of everlasting friendship and hollow promises for the future are considered the only parameters for success of diplomatic negotiations between high-ranking officials of two countries, then the third round of strategic dialogue between Pakistan and the United States, at Washington DC, has largely been a great achievement. If this round of negotiations between two nations, both playing a decisive role in the fate of terrorism, are evaluated against the facts and practicalities, then finding a ray of hope for peace and stability in the destabilised part of South Asia is little less than a Herculean task.

The latest round of strategic dialogue between America and Pakistan does not offer any hint for constructive change in the violent situation of the region, thus resulting in challenges for Pakistan. We cannot say, in the continuing peace process in Afghanistan (which also includes underground negotiations with the Taliban), what the nature of Pakistan's role will be, and if their legitimate security concerns will be addressed. Before the mid-term elections in the United States, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton urged Pakistani officials to make 'difficult decisions' and go after the Taliban. Before the US president's official visit to India, the Obama administration remained silent on the question of US role in resolving the Kashmir issue, despite the requests of the Pakistani foreign minister. Absence of any substance, except a $2 billion military package, during the news conference of Hillary Clinton and Shah Mahmood Qureshi, is enough to suggest that a collision of interests and differences in priorities still exists.

Military aid worth $2 billion is intended to enable the Pak Army to purchase indispensable military equipment from the United States, to effectively operate against the Taliban and associates of al-Qaeda, but the timeframe of this aid package makes us wonder if the US really wishes Pakistan to take decisive action against the well-funded and sufficiently-equipped militants. A five year aid package, from 2012 to 2016, by the Obama administration, which has made it very clear on many occasions that it will start to withdraw its troops from Afghanistan by the end of July 2011, poses some new questions. If the United States is really serious about accomplishing its mission by the middle of next year, then allied forces, during the next eight months, will try to hit the Taliban hard, so that the US may reap as many advantages as possible. In the same period, on the other hand, to keep the Pak Army insufficiently equipped against sophisticated al-Qaeda suggests murky developments.

This conception is further empowered by the fact that the US has yet to pay Pakistan its share of $2 billion, a smaller part of operational expenses which the US pays annually as a partner in the war on terror. During the third round of strategic dialogue no reference was made to this by the US administration, despite the fact that the Pakistan Army has paid not only for its own part, but also for that of the US. In addition, the US has linked the humanitarian aid for flood victims with the civilian aid to be delivered under the Karry-Lugar bill. It means the US will not pay any additional amount for the rehabilitation of flood affectees.

The above-mentioned facts make it clear that at a time when war on terror has entered a final and decisive phase, Pakistan is being denied any substantial help to stand firmly. Also, the Pakistan Army, which is basically trained and organised to handle aggression along Eastern borders, is being forced to take decisive action against militants in North Waziristan. A military operation in North Waziristan has the potential to put financially weak Pakistan and an inadequately equipped Pak Army (to fight against Taliban ) directly at war with the Taliban in Afghanistan. This possibility probably best explains the hesitation of the Pak Army, which is always mindful of aggression from Eastern borders, to start operations in North Waziristan.

Kashmir is the main bone of contention between India and Pakistan, and has caused three wars between these neighbouring countries. Until the Kashmir issue is resolved peacefully, neither the Pakistani nation nor Pakistan's armed forces can be at peace from its Eastern borders. An appeal made by Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi that the US plays its role to solve the longstanding issue of Kashmir, actually expresses Pakistan's seriousness towards peace in Afghanistan. The Pakistan Army can take serious action against the Taliban and al-Qaeda when it has well-founded reasons to believe that sacredness of Eastern borders will not be violated. Thus demands made by the Obama administration, which clearly prefers Indian approval, at the expense of Kashmiri people and Pakistan's security concerns, are far from being realistic.

We make mistakes in moments, but we bear their results for years and decades to come. While envisaging new geo-political balance, it will be better for the US administration, regional stability and global peace not to ignore historical facts and geographical factors. Humans have a tendency not to learn from history, so history repeats itself. Barak Obama will be visiting India in November. During his stay in New Delhi, perhaps it will become clearer if he wishes to see history repeated, or prefers to alter its course.

( This article is also published on daily The Statesman on October 27, 2010 )
Thanks for visiting Blog From Paris

Independence of Kashmir Draws Near !

An Indian delegation, which visited Kashmir recently to assess the gravity of the current Kashmiri-intifada, must now realise that weak foundations cannot support skyscrapers, and flowers of peace and prosperity do not blossom on the shrubs of injustice and atrocity. The sooner New Delhi understands this, the better it will be for the 1.5 billion people in the region.

Indian policymakers, however, have so far managed to neglect historical, geographical, political and cultural facts. They have successfully subjugated millions of Kashmiris and misguided the international community for decades, at the expense of peace and development in the region. Perhaps it is now time to realize that the brutalities of Indian security forces can not deter determined Kashmiri people for long in their fight for their right to freedom.

To assess the reasons for the current episode of intense and inclusive insurgency in Kashmir ( which are very obvious if one is willing to read the "writing on the wall"), an Indian delegation, led by the Home Minister, visited and suffered in the occupied valley, amongst people shouting "We want freedom" and "Go, India go." It is unclear whether Indian politicians and policy makers in Rajya Sabha, Lok Sabha and Rashtrapati Bhavan are too blind to see the horizon, or whether they have decided not to learn from history. One day every subjugating force has to withdraw and honour people with their right to freedom.

Dialogue and negotiations are favourite, well-known Indian tactics for buying time, prolonging problems and diverting attention from the severity of real issues. Thus, Kashmiri leaders initially refused to meet Indian delegates to indulge in talks which would probably go nowhere. However, when the Indian delegation arrived, Kashmiri leaders chose to have an informal meeting and made their wishes perfectly clear.

Syed Ali Geelani, a separatist Kashmiri leader who met the Indian delegation, told a British media outlet that he demanded India accept Kashmir as an international dispute, withdraw special and emergency powers from its security forces, withdraw troops from the region and release all political prisoners.



Completely ignoring history, India declared Kashmir as its integral part, which means that Kashmir is not an international dispute. As it is very evident, Kashmir has been an international dispute since partition in 1947. Pakistan and India would not have waged war three times had Kashmir been an internal problem of the latter. At the United Nations both countries agreed that Kashmir is an international dispute, and that a plebiscite would be held to decide the status of the disputed territory. U.N. resolutions also record that the Kashmir issue must be solved in accordance with the will of the Kashmiri people. Instead of listening to the global conscience and respecting the legitimate rights of the Kashmiri people, India preferred to ignore U.N. resolutions, suppress the Kashmiri's movement with guns, and crush their demands under military boots.

The official stance of the Indian government on Kashmir is completely unfounded, a fact further strengthened by the way Indian security forces treat Kashmiri people. Rather, it suggests that India is occupying the territory with brute-force. Have Indian security forces ever riddled the chests of protesters in New Delhi? Have Indian police shot similar participants through their heads in Mombai? Have Indian forces razed a Hindu temple in Madhya Pardesh? Never! However, Indian security forces have practised all of the above mentioned gruesome atrocities on innocent men and women of occupied Kashmir. While Indian forces do not consider Kashmiri people eligible for the same rights enjoyed by animals in Western countries, and soldiers of the Indian Army consider Kashmiri women as a source to pacify their lust, how can they declare that Kashmir is an integral part of India?

It is not only people who denounce this occupation. The history, religion, geography, natural water ways and culture of Kashmir suggest that Kashmir was not a part of India, and will not be in the future. Thus, one wonders who gave New Delhi the right to declare Kashmir as its integral part, since Kashmiri people, hills, rivers and mountains do not consider India as their homeland?

Kashmir is burning in the fire of Indian subjugation and atrocities. The struggle of the Kashmiri people has entered a decisive phase and is moving towards its logical and pre-ordained conclusion. Today, the struggle of Kashmir is in the hands of 32,000 widows, more than 100,000 orphans, and relatives of thousands of martyrs. What makes this intifada different from Kashmir's own history of struggle is that today Kashmiri women are also in the streets and on the roads, pelting their hate-filled stones at Indian armed forces, and shouting against heartless, Indian subjugation. One wonders, when a mother incites her four year old son to participate in protest, as a way to take revenge for the killing of his older brother, how long can the Indian government manage to maintain its illegitimate occupation?



The United Nations and Western world should hear the voice of Kashmiri people, who are crying for their unalienable right of freedom. It will make their journey a bit easier. In any way, it has become increasingly difficult for India to suppress Kashmir's struggle for freedom, and sooner or later India will have to grant Kashmiris their inalienable right to live freely.

Blog by Qasir M. Chaudhry

http://www.qasir.co.nr/

Kashmiri Intifada and Responsibilities of Pakistan.

Unspeakable and gruesome attrocities of subjugating Indian security forces against innocent Kashmiri people has set the the valley ablaze, which was once known as 'paradise on earth' due to its breath-taking beauty. Indian forces are massacring Kashmiri population and has killd more than 110 people, including women and children, since June 2010. The current "Kashmiri Intifada" has shaked up New Delhi but has failed to attract due attention from imprudent Pakistani administration and anti-Zardari media.

Kashmiri women and children are playing a consequential part in the latest episode of insurgency in Kashmir. They are pelting stones on the occupant forces and shouting for freedoms. Neither children nor women seem afraid of Indian forces, whose members deliberately fire live bullets at the heads and chests of the protesters.

Yousuf Raza Geelani, the prime minister of Pakistan, has urged Pakistani media, which is already ignoring its responsibilities over reporting the sanguineous events in occupied Kashmir, to report on Kashmir carefully. The moment I read his latest piece of wisdom, I am thinking about the possible meanings of "careful reporting". Does it mean any thing else than that Pakistani newspapers and television channels should deliberately overlook their responsibilities and do not inform what is happening in Kashmir!

The Prime Minister of Pakistan must not forget that 32 thousand women lost their husbands to be the citizens of a free and independent Kashmir. He must aslo remember more than 100,000 children became orphan because their fathers wished to live with Pakistan. Some one must tell him that Qaid-e-Azam, father of the nation, told us that Kashmir is the vulgar vein of Pakistan.

It is the time to realize that Kashmir, which was once sold out by British to a Sikh ruler, is about to turn over a new page of its history. Pakistani administration, politicians and media outlets must come forward with their diplomatic, moral and ethical assist. Otherwise, history and Kashmiris will never forgive us for our coward role at this decisive moment.

For more blogs and articles, please visit my home page