Friendship with India

[Contrarian]

Probably true.
Gain enough strength to make the international backdrop not so lop-sided as it is now.

Also remember that, as India gains strength and prominence in the world, it will gain enemies along with allies. Right now, almost no country would consider damaging its ties with India for Pakistan's sake.

So, you think that for this to happen, Pakistan must improve its relative standing vis-a-vis India.

Just growing faster economically than the current Pakistani rate of growth will not reduce the difference. It would only reduce the pace at which India is growing faster than Pakistan.

You realize that for this to happen Pakistan must grow faster than India in absolute percentage terms economically for a sustained period of time - atleast a decade.

So that way, even though in absolute terms, Pakistan might not exceed India, but the stark difference would be lesser.

Do you think this is something that is achievable in the immediate future?

 

[Joe Shearer]

It was just a figure of speech as you need brains to understand a statement. Like i said in the start of this thread that there is no way for India and Pakistan can get together.

Based on figures of speech? Rather than fact? Don't you find it embarrassing admitting this in public?

 

[Vinod2070]

Also remember that, as India gains strength and prominence in the world, it will gain enemies along with allies. Right now, almost no country would consider damaging its ties with India for Pakistan's sake.

That is a very interesting comment.

So you think that "as India gains strength and prominence in the world" and as that inevitably leads us to "gain enemies along with allies", our "enemies" will become your allies?

Is that how a country of 200 million people is supposed to be run?

What is so inevitable about India Pakistan "enmity" anyway? What are the basic causes that will just not go away and that are so important that the interests of the people of countries become secondary?

 

[illusion8]

It was just a figure of speech as you need brains to understand a statement. Like i said in the start of this thread that there is no way for India and Pakistan can get together.

Of course - and it's futile to even try or waste money on useless diplomatic sojourn's across the borders - Indian diplomats could utilize the time to concentrate on more important and pressing diplomatic tie ups than waste time meeting up Pakistani diplomats.

 

[Pandora]

These are not for Indian citizens. These are for one thing to represent India in the projects taken up. A little homework will tell you that these are the precise areas where Indian projects are coming up. For another, they represent the power centres of Afghanistan,, and we wish to be close to the power centres, to ensure that we get our share of development activity. Herat is where the pro-Iranian factions are concentrated; Indian roadbuilding projects have improved communications between Afghanistan and Iran, and it is in the interests of all three nations that trade flows easier and smoother all the time. Mazar-i-Sharif, it need hardly be pointed out to a citizen of the country that sponsored the Taliban, is the centre for the Uzbeks, and an important point of contact with the power centres around that ethnic aixis. We have taken up projects there, and more are planned. Kandahar surely needs no explanation. Jalalabad is the centre of the area where Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan had the most influence (he is buried there), and we believe that there is need to keep in touch with the centres of Pushto influence here as well as in Kandahar.

You had mentioned 'dozens'. What happened to your accounting for them?

and you need one embassy and 5 consulates to manage those projects. Too many claims and very little evidence.

O my God that is just a figure of speech when i said about consulates. I was just trying to explain considerable influence that india is trying to achieve.

It is not like my words can change the fate of indians in afghanistan. Every country has their own interests in their mind. In that context india and pakistan are certainly not the same page.

 

[Developereo]

This is a far better appreciation, but it still baffles me how you can see the balance of political parties exisitng in Parliament, see the predominance of a secular element, never mind the quality and richness of that secularism, and still feel that the right has an edge.

Are you judging Indian administration and Indian society by the antics of the lunatic fringe of Internet Hindus on PDF? If you are, this is the precise reason why I had argued, fruitlessly, with Raza Rumi and Raza Habib Raja to exclude this toxic swarm. I told you so, there, and I am telling you so, again, here, that Pakistani views are being distorted by the excretions of these creatures.

It's not about religion per se. I believe that Indian political elite, for the most part, see beyond religion in terms of foreign policy. There are so many other reasons that stand in the way of normalizing relations:

-- Kashmir
-- Chinese alliance
-- repudiation of the justification for partition

 

[Joe Shearer]

and you need one embassy and 5 consulates to manage those projects. Too many claims and very little evidence.

O my God that is just a figure of speech when i said about consulates. I was just trying to explain considerable influence that india is trying to achieve.

It is not like my words can change the fate of indians in afghanistan. Every country has their own interests in their mind. In that context india and pakistan are certainly not the same page.

Excuse me, but you don't count very well, do you? Dozens is not five, and even the five is not five. Watch closely now:

Herat = 1
Mazhar-i-Sharif =1
Kandahar = 1
Jalalabad = 1
----------------------------
Total of Herat+Mazhar-i-Sharif+Kandahar+Jalalabad = 4

Now please don't take this personally, or as a fallout of the Indo-Pakistani uneasy relationships, but
FOUR IS NOT DOZENS. FOUR IS NOT EVEN FIVE.


At the end of the day, you need to re-read Aesop's fables, and read about the dog in the manger.

Nobody stops Pakistan from offering aid and development support. Nobody obliges Pakistan to restrict herself to supplying Stingers, and nowadays, arms and ammunitions of all sorts, to Afghans intent on tearing the country apart. It is of no use to do this, and then whine about not having the kind of influence that roads, schools and power stations bring.

 

[Areesh]

Well it is Pakistan's choice to make. India has a lot to gain by having friendly relations with Pakistan, but not much to lose if relations are hostile. At least, not as much as Pakistan stands to lose. As the author says, jihad against India is a lost cause for Pakistan. Indian Kashmir is no going anywhere. If Pakistan keeps infatuated with that pipe dream, and this jihad-culture is kept alive in the vain dream of getting Kashmir, Pakistan CANNOT prosper. It is a fact. On the other hand, India can easily keep fending off all attempts by any uniformed or non uniformed Pakistani groups, while growing stronger by the day. It is a fact, whether you choose to accept it or not. India is too big for Pakistan to be anything more than a minor irritant to it.

Imagine this scenario. Suppose India has a national fixation in trying to take Tibet from China, and keeps spending on the military with that delusion. And furthermore its citizens idealize religious nutjobs who train for a jihad against china, and thousands of its men are recruited and trained to cause trouble in Tibet, and they all die at the border or get killed by china. Do you think India will have ANY hope of economic or social growth, if that was India's national fixation, the only dream that gives the nation a sense of purpose? What do you think India will look like in a few decades from now?

The ratio of China's economy to India's is not as big as the ratio of India's to Pakistan's. Nor is the strength of its armed forces. These considerations should give you an idea why people look at Pakistan with pathos when many of its people make these ludicrous claims of "supporting the Kashmir struggle" or "waging jihad against India" or taking Kashmir from India. Unless you learn to forget about India completely, except maybe as a trading and cultural partner, there is no chance for Pakistan to become a modern, prosperous, stable democratic nation.

India is more than happy with the status quo, and has the ability to maintain it for the next 50 years. She will only grow from strength to strength in the meantime. I'm not talking about any superpower delusions, but it is a fact that India is on its way to reducing poverty, becoming one of the strongest military powers, and one of the biggest economies. But what the status quo is doing to Pakistan is another story. So if Pakistan chooses to keep this particular status quo, India has nothing to complain.

Looking at the mindsset of so many Pakistanis, I agree that friendship may not be possible. But that is Pakistan's problems, not India's. India is more interested in building friendships, relations, and partnerships with bigger players.

Adding later: The post just above mine affirms my point.

Fine. India has nothing to offer to us. And whatever it has offered in the past isn't pleasant either. No country can help Pakistan except Pakistan itself. Not even countries like USA and China. It is author's delusion which many of our English medium print media faces that if we have some kind of friendly relations with India can help us a lot. It is total BS that a country like India can help someone when itself can't help itself to solve the menace of Maoism completely since 1967. Kashmir is a historical and ground reality and cannot be brush under the carpet for a pipe dream of friendship with India. It is also a lie prevalent among Indians that Pakistan spends on its military to match India expenditure on its forces. The truth is Pakistan just spends the necessary money where it can keep India restricted to its empty threats in case of any more mumbai attacks. Nothing wrong in that in my opinion.

In other words we need to focus on our country instead of wasting time on useless campaigns like Aman ki Asha. India was always an enemy for us and won't change in the future. We know you very well buddy. India as too many haws in its nation and its establishment. and cannot be trusted. So status-quo is way forward for both of us. Hilarious is that Indians are not happy with that either even though they claim they are fine with status-quo.

 

[Developereo]

People are generally more accepting of others speaking less than perfect English

Like I mentioned, when someone tries to be a smart aleck, then the gloves come off.

our "enemies" will become your allies?

No one is expecting major alliances but, in the same way that China's rise has endeared India to the US, the global landscape keeps shifting.

Is that how a country of 200 million people is supposed to be run?

A country should be run to attain national interests, and international relationships are part of the picture.

What is so inevitable about India Pakistan "enmity" anyway? What are the basic causes that will just not go away and that are so important that the interests of the people of countries become secondary?

Kashmir is the only one I can think of which is a serious impediment to normalization. Everything else can be worked out.

 

[Joe Shearer]

It's not about religion per se. I believe that Indian political elite, for the most part, see beyond religion in terms of foreign policy. There are so many other reasons that stand in the way of normalizing relations:

-- Kashmir
-- Chinese alliance
-- repudiation of the justification for partition

Dear @Developereo, don't you get it? These are figments of your imagination, these are deeds done by super-heroes in a Valhalla of your own imagining. The average Indian politician is a very simple animal, with an enormous appetite at one end, and a political manifesto at the other.

No part of the Indian elite thinks very hard about Kashmir, about China or about partition, except perhaps the BJP when it isn't hating Muslims - and Christians, and the Dalit, and tribals and Nagas and anything and everything that isn't a caste Hindu.

You are imagining a dream world. There is no such Delhi, no such elite, no such anti-Pakistani syndrome. There is inertia, bureaucratic fear of the unknown, pettiness and jealousy and a resentment of people getting what they want with such ease, rather than submitting themselves to the tyranny of the petty bureaucracy for a visa.

 

[Contrarian]

Fine. India has nothing to offer to us. And whatever it has offered in the past isn't pleasant either. No country can help Pakistan except Pakistan itself. Not even countries like USA and China. It is author's delusion which many of our English medium print media faces that if we have some kind of friendly relations with India can help us a lot. It is total BS that a country like India can help someone when itself can't help itself to solve the menace of Maoism completely since 1967. Kashmir is a historical and ground reality and cannot be brush under the carpet for a pipe dream of friendship with India. It is also a lie prevalent among Indians that Pakistan spends on its military to match India expenditure on its forces. The truth is Pakistan just spends the necessary money where it can keep India restricted to its empty threats in case of any more mumbai attacks. Nothing wrong in that in my opinion.

In other words we need to focus on our country instead of wasting time on useless campaigns like Aman ki Asha. India was always an enemy for us and won't change in the future. We know you very well buddy. India as too many haws in its nation and its establishment. and cannot be trusted. So status-quo is way forward for both of us. Hilarious is that Indians are not happy with that either even though they claim they are fine with status-quo.

The entire point is that if Pakistan were to let go of its policy to interfere in its neighbouring countries - things like Taliban, LeT and consequently Mumbai attacks, Parliament attacks would NOT happen.

Thus there would NOT be any need to have a military threat from India.

What part of this do you fail to understand?

 

[Ayush]

kashmir is the biggest hurdle.
as long as this hurdle stays, , practically saying , , friendship is just not possible.

 

[Developereo]

You realize that for this to happen Pakistan must grow faster than India in absolute percentage terms economically for a sustained period of time - atleast a decade.

So that way, even though in absolute terms, Pakistan might not exceed India, but the stark difference would be lesser.

Do you think this is something that is achievable in the immediate future?

Pakistan's goal should be to focus on growth for its own sake, not in competition with India.

I am saying that the current disparity in international clout is ridiculous.

Of course, no one can predict the future, and the disparity could get better or worse over time.

 

[Vinod2070]

Like I mentioned, when someone tries to be a smart aleck, then the gloves come off.

So your "English" gloves come off because someone apparently tried to "to be a smart aleck"?

And English suddenly became your "first and primary" language that you need to defend.

As much as you need to defend the Ummah?

No one is expecting major alliances but, in the same way that China's rise has endeared India to the US, the global landscape keeps shifting.

OK. But what has this to do with the need for keeping the "enmity" alive?

A country should be run to attain national interests, and international relationships are part of the picture.

Same as above? Don't you think the national interests can be served much better with a detente with India?

Kashmir is the only one I can think of which is a serious impediment to normalization. Everything else can be worked out.

Kashmir was about to get solved during Musharraf and Vajpayee time. The same formula can work again.

In the meanwhile it can be on the backburner like in the Indo China case while other issues progress.

 

[Areesh]

The entire point is that if Pakistan were to let go of its policy to interfere in its neighbouring countries - things like Taliban, LeT and consequently Mumbai attacks, Parliament attacks would NOT happen.

Thus there would NOT be any need to have a military threat from India.

What part of this do you fail to understand?

Applies to India too who supports terrorism inside Pakistan from Afghanistan. Another reason why you are our enemies.

As a Pakistan member @Developereo we should be focus on growth for our own sake, not in competition with India