FM meetings : Peace momentum stalls

[DGMO]

anyways bottom line is no kashmir means NO TALK

That's the wrong stance to take. As much as we want K resolved, we can't just dive into it with the trust deficit in place.

India needs to witness sincerity, and after Kargil, the Parliament attack and then 26/11, we're talking about three major events in nine years that have damaged relations.

So what does India want? They want to talk about K, of course they do, you think it's not in their interest to have a stable North? The fact we were talking about K under Musharraf, and according to some had outlined an 'understanding' on a solution, shows that they do.

But how did we get there? Musharraf took verifiable steps, these included ensuring infiltration dropped significanly, Jihadi dontations were impacted, groups were banned, talk of peace increased, cricket diplomacy happened, cultural exchanges took place, Samjhuta Express and bus services were initiated. Therefore, a raft of proposals took place for the Indian Govt to say "hold on a minute, perhaps they are serious in wanting peace?" They were in a position to convey that to the electorate, and take appropriate steps. The judiciary crisis derailed matters, but progress was being made, how anyone can deny that I don't know.

But then 26/11 happened. If 10 hardened members of Bajrang Dal / VHP had ambushed the Marriot Islamabad, Serena Islamabad and ISB Airport and killed 170+, we'd be slightly p1ssed off at our neighbour and also have an enraged population wanting revenge or a break-off in ties.

So we need to talk, we need there to be trust. Ultimatums result in deadlock, and that helps no-one, not us, nor the Indians, nor the Kashmiri's in the long-run.

 

[Valiant_Soul]

Hope this message gets across to your countreymen.

 

[DGMO]

Hope this message gets across to your countreymen.

I'm sure it will. It's common sense, not a great deal more. What we tend to have here is too much talking and not much listening.

And where there are legitimate grievances, I say listen, whether that be to the Kashmiri's saying their human rights are being violated, whether that is Indian's saying terrorists need to eliminated for there to be peace, or whether it's us saying 'these are our concerns on water sharing'.

Let's be adult-like, stop trying to get one over each other through the media and move forward.

 

[ice_man]

That's the wrong stance to take. As much as we want K resolved, we can't just dive into it with the trust deficit in place.

India needs to witness sincerity, and after Kargil, the Parliament attack and then 26/11, we're talking about three major events in nine years that have damaged relations.

So what does India want? They want to talk about K, of course they do, you think it's not in their interest to have a stable North? The fact we were talking about K under Musharraf, and according to some had outlined an 'understanding' on a solution, shows that they do.

But how did we get there? Musharraf took verifiable steps, these included ensuring infiltration dropped significanly, Jihadi dontations were impacted, groups were banned, talk of peace increased, cricket diplomacy happened, cultural exchanges took place, Samjhuta Express and bus services were initiated. Therefore, a raft of proposals took place for the Indian Govt to say "hold on a minute, perhaps they are serious in wanting peace?" They were in a position to convey that to the electorate, and take appropriate steps. The judiciary crisis derailed matters, but progress was being made, how anyone can deny that I don't know.

But then 26/11 happened. If 10 hardened members of Bajrang Dal / VHP had ambushed the Marriot Islamabad, Serena Islamabad and ISB Airport and killed 170+, we'd be slightly p1ssed off at our neighbour and also have an enraged population wanting revenge or a break-off in ties.

So we need to talk, we need there to be trust. Ultimatums result in deadlock, and that helps no-one, not us, nor the Indians, nor the Kashmiri's in the long-run.

firstly dear unknown stranger,

kargil happened because siachen happened!! AS LONG AS INDIA DOESN'T SOLVE KASHMIR no moving forward!!

how can we move forward what can we move forward on until and unless old issues are solved!!!


the root cause of everything is freedom of kashmir valley!!! once that is achevied things can move rapidly until we burry our head in the ground and ignore it all things will remain at a stalemate!!

TODAY INDIA & PAKISTAN ARE HOLDING A GUN AT EACH OTHER BECAUSE OF KASHMIR HOW CAN YOU TALK ABOUT MOVING ANYWHERE UNTIL WE BOTH LOWER OUR GUNS(WHICH CAN ONLY BE DONE IF KASHMIR IS SOLVED)

 

[DGMO]

firstly dear unknown stranger,

kargil happened because siachen happened!! AS LONG AS INDIA DOESN'T SOLVE KASHMIR no moving forward!!

how can we move forward what can we move forward on until and unless old issues are solved!!!


the root cause of everything is freedom of kashmir valley!!! once that is achevied things can move rapidly until we burry our head in the ground and ignore it all things will remain at a stalemate!!

TODAY INDIA & PAKISTAN ARE HOLDING A GUN AT EACH OTHER BECAUSE OF KASHMIR HOW CAN YOU TALK ABOUT MOVING ANYWHERE UNTIL WE BOTH LOWER OUR GUNS(WHICH CAN ONLY BE DONE IF KASHMIR IS SOLVED)

Kashmir is the main issue between both of us, that is undeniable. It's the core issue, even my esteemed Indian members will admit, that sitting at the top of the tree is that issue which things boil down to.

But the point I'm making is that to get to the bigger pie, you need to address a whole lot more to make the necessary inroads.

And Kashmir can be solved, of course it can. My post highlighted that both countries were talking about it, so your claim that India doesn't want to is incorrect.

I think many Indian commentators have hit out at MMS for dragging his feet over Musharraf's four-point solution, and that he should've grasped what Musharraf was proactively pushing.

Kasuri has gone on record in saying that even when talks weren't 'officially' taking place, backchannel secret diplomacy was in full swing in places like Thailand etc. But the point is how did we get there? Measures were taken, differences were narrowed.

Through the prism of our diplomatic struggles, we read cliched phrases like 'you can't clap with one hand' and you can't. But in the mid-noughties that wasn't happening. And if Musharraf was creeping closer to a solution on Kashmir, or even broaching the subject, don't you think there was a nod from the Armed Forces (without whom K can't be resolved)?

And what do you mean by 'freedom of Kashmir valley'? Is that autonomy? Merger with Pakistan? Independence?

 

[ice_man]

Kashmir is the main issue between both of us, that is undeniable. It's the core issue, even my esteemed Indian members will admit, that sitting at the top of the tree is that issue which things boil down to.

But the point I'm making is that to get to the bigger pie, you need to address a whole lot more to make the necessary inroads.

And Kashmir can be solved, of course it can. My post highlighted that both countries were talking about it, so your claim that India doesn't want to is incorrect.

I think many Indian commentators have hit out at MMS for dragging his feet over Musharraf's four-point solution, and that he should've grasped what Musharraf was proactively pushing.

Kasuri has gone on record in saying that even when talks weren't 'officially' taking place, backchannel secret diplomacy was in full swing in places like Thailand etc. But the point is how did we get there? Measures were taken, differences were narrowed.

Through the prism of our diplomatic struggles, we read cliched phrases like 'you can't clap with one hand' and you can't. But in the mid-noughties that wasn't happening. And if Musharraf was creeping closer to a solution on Kashmir, or even broaching the subject, don't you think there was a nod from the Armed Forces (without whom K can't be resolved)?

And what do you mean by 'freedom of Kashmir valley'? Is that autonomy? Merger with Pakistan? Independence?

what is your point???? i said something else you came back with something totally different!!

please elaborate on your confusing respone to my simple questions!

what do you "SUGGEST" we pakistanis should do!

i am sorry you are going around in circles and making no sense!! kashmir is the core issue until you fix the core issue nothing can be solved!

if your roots are weak your tree will not grow straight & strong upward!!

if kashmir is solved by india the 60 years of hostilities will end the "berlin wall" between two nations will fall & i assure you everything will follow BUT until kashmir is solved we will keep the gun pointed at each other & get no where!

 

[ramu]

Qureshi went too far, says Ex-ISI chief

Qureshi went too far, says Ex-ISI chief

 

[EjazR]

Kayani hand behind India-Pakistan stalemate? - Hindustan Times


Pakistan Army Chief, Gen Ashraf Parvez Kayani, met President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani on the afternoon of July 15, just hours before India and Pakistan resumed extended talks in the evening that soured badly, well informed sources said in New Delhi. After two days of bitter slanging match, sources with access to the government see the hand of the Pakistan Army, widely considered the real power centre in Islamabad, in the hardening of posture on Pakistan's part at Thursday's talks that ended in mutual recrimination without any roadmap for future engagement. Although the purpose of Kayani's meeting was to brief the civilian leadership about his recent visit to Australia and the security situation in the country, the India-Pakistan foreign minister-level discussions figured prominently in the discussions, the sources said.

The meeting assumes significance as both sides in the morning struck an optimistic note about the talks between External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna and his Pakistani counterpart Shah Mahmood Qureshi. When it was decided to extend the discussions, it was widely seen as sign of some progress in the talks.

In the preparatory talks of foreign secretaries and home ministers, the two sides had agreed on a set of confidence building measures (CBM) like the exchange of fishermen and prisoners, trade and people-to-people contacts across the Line of Control in Kashmir that will signal a gradual normalising of ties. There was a plan to announce these CBMs at the end of the talks, the sources said.

But things started souring when the two sides sat down for discussions in the evening with Islamabad upping the ante on Kashmir and insisting on a resumption of full-scale composite dialogue against India's incremental approach.

The talks deadlocked after the Pakistani side asked for a time line to resolve what they called "doable issues", including the territorial dispute over the Siachen glacier in the Himalayas and Sir Creek in Gujarat by November, the sources said.

It was against this backdrop that Krishna said here after returning from Islamabad Friday, "I do not know what (Qureshi) means by a timebound solution to these problems. Given their complexity it would not be prudent to insist on a timeframe."

Says Satish Chandra, India's former deputy national security adviser and a former high commissioner to Pakistan: "The (Pakistani) army was definitely behind wrecking the talks. The army does not want the talks to proceed for various reasons."

"A bad relationship with India works to the advantage of the Pakistani Army which calls the shots in Pakistan," Chandra told IANS.

The shifting power games in Afghanistan has also fuelled confidence of the Pakistani Army to play for a maximalist position in its relations with India.

With the US planning a drawdown in Afghanistan in 2011 and tacitly accepting Pakistan's role in the Taliban reconciliation plan, the Pakistani Army feels there is no hurry - a point made by Qureshi when he said "we are in no hurry for talks" - to make peace with India.

"That's why they are increasingly confident of withstanding the American pressure on terrorism. The disturbances in Jammu and Kashmir also encouraged them not to heed to India's concern over the Mumbai terror and trumpet Kashmir and the resumption of composite dialogue," said Chandra.

 

[DGMO]

what is your point???? i said something else you came back with something totally different!!

please elaborate on your confusing respone to my simple questions!

what do you "SUGGEST" we pakistanis should do!

i am sorry you are going around in circles and making no sense!! kashmir is the core issue until you fix the core issue nothing can be solved!

if your roots are weak your tree will not grow straight & strong upward!!

if kashmir is solved by india the 60 years of hostilities will end the "berlin wall" between two nations will fall & i assure you everything will follow BUT until kashmir is solved we will keep the gun pointed at each other & get no where!

I think it's quite clear to me and others on who's confused, and it's cleary not me.

You talk of India not resolving Kashmir, or not wanting to. But then I clearly point out that that is exactly what THEY WERE doing in the middle of the last decade. Are you oblivious to that?

Going around in circles? No disrespect, but I think it is you my friend. I've outlined my thoughts on Kashmir being the core issue, but there needs to be incremental steps before we can get back to the negotiating table.

You clearly don't realise the sore feeling and mark that 26/11 has left on the Indian nation and Govt, and it's only worth having a conversation with you once you've arrived at that mindset.

 

[Hulk]

That's the wrong stance to take. As much as we want K resolved, we can't just dive into it with the trust deficit in place.

India needs to witness sincerity, and after Kargil, the Parliament attack and then 26/11, we're talking about three major events in nine years that have damaged relations.

So what does India want? They want to talk about K, of course they do, you think it's not in their interest to have a stable North? The fact we were talking about K under Musharraf, and according to some had outlined an 'understanding' on a solution, shows that they do.

But how did we get there? Musharraf took verifiable steps, these included ensuring infiltration dropped significanly, Jihadi dontations were impacted, groups were banned, talk of peace increased, cricket diplomacy happened, cultural exchanges took place, Samjhuta Express and bus services were initiated. Therefore, a raft of proposals took place for the Indian Govt to say "hold on a minute, perhaps they are serious in wanting peace?" They were in a position to convey that to the electorate, and take appropriate steps. The judiciary crisis derailed matters, but progress was being made, how anyone can deny that I don't know.

But then 26/11 happened. If 10 hardened members of Bajrang Dal / VHP had ambushed the Marriot Islamabad, Serena Islamabad and ISB Airport and killed 170+, we'd be slightly p1ssed off at our neighbour and also have an enraged population wanting revenge or a break-off in ties.

So we need to talk, we need there to be trust. Ultimatums result in deadlock, and that helps no-one, not us, nor the Indians, nor the Kashmiri's in the long-run.

Excellent post, the bottom-line is if you does not behave seriously on our concern, how do you expect us. Kashmir can be solved if you get serious on terrorism.

 

[ice_man]

I think it's quite clear to me and others on who's confused, and it's cleary not me.

You talk of India not resolving Kashmir, or not wanting to. But then I clearly point out that that is exactly what THEY WERE doing in the middle of the last decade. Are you oblivious to that?

Going around in circles? No disrespect, but I think it is you my friend. I've outlined my thoughts on Kashmir being the core issue, but there needs to be incremental steps before we can get back to the negotiating table.

You clearly don't realise the sore feeling and mark that 26/11 has left on the Indian nation and Govt, and it's only worth having a conversation with you once you've arrived at that mindset.

the bold part explains everything i am very clear on what you meant & said now sir

 

[DGMO]

Kayani hand behind India-Pakistan stalemate? - Hindustan Times
Says Satish Chandra, India's former deputy national security adviser and a former high commissioner to Pakistan: "The (Pakistani) army was definitely behind wrecking the talks. The army does not want the talks to proceed for various reasons."

"A bad relationship with India works to the advantage of the Pakistani Army which calls the shots in Pakistan," Chandra told IANS.

The shifting power games in Afghanistan has also fuelled confidence of the Pakistani Army to play for a maximalist position in its relations with India.

With the US planning a drawdown in Afghanistan in 2011 and tacitly accepting Pakistan's role in the Taliban reconciliation plan, the Pakistani Army feels there is no hurry - a point made by Qureshi when he said "we are in no hurry for talks" - to make peace with India.

"That's why they are increasingly confident of withstanding the American pressure on terrorism. The disturbances in Jammu and Kashmir also encouraged them not to heed to India's concern over the Mumbai terror and trumpet Kashmir and the resumption of composite dialogue," said Chandra.

I'm sure plenty will be said by ex-diplomats and analysts both sides, especially without knowing the true picture. This is just his own thoughts, opinions and a load of hearsay.

I just think it was wrong to expect so much, so soon.

To come out with guff like 'they are increasingly confident of withstanding the American pressure on terrorism' is plain wrong. I'm sure a great deal is being said behind closed doors, and the American's are pushing as much as possible to ensure unsavoury characters are kept in check. Anything that flares up on the eastern front affects the Afghan mission.

Pressure from all external quarters on reigning in terrorists is strong.

 

[Bhim]

If you stick to this silly diabolical wordings against Kashmir, then listen I/we want a solution to disputed Balochistan/NWFP. The people are being killed every day, peoples lives are being ruined, no employment for youth, no education, infrastructure at zero. India will not rest till human rights are restored to these regions which were once glorious regions of united India.

Talking of balls what size balls you wanna see?So you guys are dreaming of another war..Uhhhh?

Now go on and spit venom, I am ready.

 

[amit27]

untold story of 2008's terrorist attack, in the words of its victims and the gunmen. The programme contains graphic images and descriptions of the atrocity which may upset some viewers. Produced and directed by award-winning filmmaker Dan Reed, Terror in Mumbai tells the story of what happened when 10 gunmen held one of the world's busiest cities hostage; killing and wounding hundreds of people while holding India's crack security forces at bay.
Featuring footage of the attacks and interviews with senior police officers and hostages, including the testimony from Kasab - the sole surviving gunman, Dispatches reveals what happened, hour by hour, from the perspective of the security forces, the terrorists, their masterminds and the victims.


Dispatches - 4oD - Channel 4

 

[DGMO]

If you stick to this silly diabolical wordings against Kashmir, then listen I/we want a solution to disputed Balochistan/NWFP. The people are being killed every day, peoples lives are being ruined, no employment for youth, no education, infrastructure at zero. India will not rest till human rights are restored to these regions which were once glorious regions of united India.

Talking of balls what size balls you wanna see?So you guys are dreaming of another war..Uhhhh?

Now go on and spit venom, I am ready.

Bhim, we don't want to spit venom, and the mutual end goal should be that the venom ceases on both sides.

No one wants war, and chest thumping isn't desired also. It's better to hold hands rather than to raise it against one another. Let's keep emotions in check shall we?