What's new

India accuses Pakistan of fomenting Sikh militancy in Indian Punjab

Sir there are serious misgivings in that supposed claim. Judging that claim on its merit we see following aspects.

1: Contrary to Sikh dominated Indian Punjab, Pakistani Punjab is Muslim dominated and is no longer a province of Punjabis any longer, other ethnicities have embraced the province and its culture.

2: Hassan Abdal and Nankana Sahib are Muslim majority areas,where we have taken genuine steps to allow unrestricted access to pilgrims from other provinces of Pakistan,India and other parts of the world. It by no means is a Sikh city.

3: By Indian constitution, Indian Punjab is your "internal" affair and the sikhs have an inherit right to self determination. It does not apply to Pakistan. There are hardly any sikhs to speak of.

4: Even if Khalistan becomes a reality,and they lay claim to Lahore and other "holy sites" and they want to go on a "conquering spree" than they will be up against the world's 6th largest Army on one side and 3rd largest on the other...is that a smart strategy?....lets say war breaks out, between Pakistan and Khalistan. But before that they will have to build a military force for 30 years to establish a deterrent and then grow their offensive capability to attack on Pakistan and defend against India at the same time. Pakistan has strategic weapons, such a miscalculation will be disastrous for Khalistan....they are more likely to lose territory.

5: I don't see them laying a claim on our cities as credible threat to Pakistan. I believe that they don't deserve a state, if they do make a state it will be troublesome because most of us are multicultural states. Having a chauvinist singular state in this region will be disastrous,i am just against that narrative. They should just calm down and accept that they aren't capable of carving out a state from India. Its better for them to live as loyal citizens of India and stop such efforts at once.

@Argus Panoptes @KRAIT @muse @Developereo @notorious_eagle @Luftwaffe @ajpirzada

Amazing points to bring up....

This should call for a good discussion...Ive brushed on some of the points in my reply to Menace2 Society but will expand on them...

Im heading home shortly so will be sure to post a reply to a very balanced assessment by you when I get to my computer..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
@Aeronaut To reply briefly, we simply CANNOT afford such an misadventure given the state of our own country. Such meddling is not the realm of those teetering on the brink of disaster themselves. Others far clever and resourceful than us will simply use such a plan and turn it against us to add to our already intractable problems which we will not be able to survive.

I totally agree, we must completely disconnect from the Khalistan movement for the foreseeable future. Sikhs are also responsible for inflicting horrendous atrocities on Muslim migrants during 1947. Why should we help them,there is no moral ground for us to help them in training and arms etc. We share no common goal with Khalistan,we don't share a religion,cultural basis and have a traumatic history with them. They need to learn to face the music by themselves.

We can no longer afford any animosity with India. For above reasons, i note down Benazir's decision to pull the plug on Khalistan movement to be a strategic one and the right one. We should be cooperating with India in the areas of Kashmir solution, Siachin,Run of Kuch. The final issue we have with India is mutual disarmament to rid S.Asia from Nuclear weapons for good,or have a robust cooperative mechanism to avoid any lunatic launching doom on the other nation or the increased "Launch by mistake probability".


Pakistan must stay away from Khalistan movement, and don't invest in Khalistani proxies,only idiots would want havoc on their borders. Afghanistan is enough havoc for us right now, do we want another havoc and end up being a havoc sandwich with tomato sauce?...i disagree to this idea. I will rather have Hindus deal with Sikhs than us having to deal with them. I shall repeat again that any attempt to fund,train and arm Khalistani movement is playing against our interests, if they are serious about freedom, they should do it themselves peacefully. However the better option for them is to just chill and live their lives.


@Peshwa @KRAIT @Icarus @sandy_3126 @muse @third eye
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
I totally agree, we must completely disconnect from the Khalistan movement for the foreseeable future. Sikhs are also responsible for inflicting horrendous atrocities on Muslim migrants during 1947. Why should we help them,there is no moral ground for us to help them in training and arms etc. We share no common goal with Khalistan,we don't share a religion,cultural basis and have a traumatic history with them. They need to learn to face the music by themselves.

We can no longer afford any animosity with India. For above reasons, i note down Benazir's decision to pull the plug on Khalistan movement to be a strategic one and the right one. We should be cooperating with India in the areas of Kashmir solution, Siachin,Run of Kuch. The final issue we have with India is mutual disarmament to rid S.Asia from Nuclear weapons for good,or have a robust cooperative mechanism to avoid any lunatic launching doom on the other nation or the increased "Launch by mistake probability".


Pakistan must stay away from Khalistan movement, and don't invest in Khalistani proxies,only idiots would want havoc on their borders. Afghanistan is enough havoc for us right now, do we want another havoc and end up being a havoc sandwich with tomato sauce?...i disagree to this idea. I will rather have Hindus deal with Sikhs than us having to deal with them. I shall repeat again that any attempt to fund,train and arm Khalistani movement is playing against our interests, if they are serious about freedom, they should do it themselves peacefully. However the better option for them is to just chill and live their lives.


@Peshwa @KRAIT @Icarus @sandy_3126 @muse @third eye


Your assessment is flawed. United India on our borders versus broken states....?


Use that brain.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
When Sikhs go nuts > blame the ISI
When Christians gone mad > blame the ISI
When Saudi diplomats is killed in Pakistan > blame the ISI
When the US loses its two wars > blame the ISI
When the Syrian rebels get stronger > blame the ISI
When the Norwegian fishermen can't fish any longer > blame the ISI

Poor Pakistan being blamed for everything in the world. :(
 
.
Lol Sikhs are anti India? Tell that in front of an Indian Sikh and kashmir will be yours. :lol:

LOL. Well I dont have to tell that, my sikh friends tell me that themselves. Infact, in alot of guruduwara in the world, they have placed photos of the sikh bodyguards who killed Indira Ghandhi and worship them as heroes.
I have lived in USA, UAE and New Zealand and met many sikhs there.

:coffee:
 
. .
Your assessment is flawed. United India on our borders versus broken states....?


Use that brain.

United India may not be in our favor but an independent Khalistan will be a disaster for us. India is a growing power in the region, we would be stupid to ignore it for our own good. India for us should represent a business heaven, where we do business and make money. There can never be peace between us,there can never be Kashmir solution between us,unless there is economic interdependence between us. By creating something to lose between both states is the only way we can forge a compromise to bring long lasting peace in our region.

@Peshwa @Argus Panoptes @muse @Yzd Khalifa @KRAIT
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
United India may not be in our favor but an independent Khalistan will be a disaster for us. India is a growing power in the region, we would be stupid to ignore it for our own good. India for us should represent a business heaven, where we do business and make money. There can never be peace between us,there can never be Kashmir solution between us,unless there is economic interdependence between us. By creating something to lose between both states is the only way we can forge a compromise to bring long lasting peace in our region.

@Peshwa @Argus Panoptes @muse @Yzd Khalifa @KRAIT

I see your point and I don't think that Khalistan will become a reality anytime soon. However, we have to remember how India was all too happy to interfere in East Pakistan and we all saw how that turned out.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
yeah... No Khalistan! Period!

Rather than taking a rigid and simplistic approach, we must dissect any given topic over its own merit. The man you have in your avatar is someone i hold deep respect for. Remember the lengths he went to have an independent India.?

We must accept that all social/ethnic/religious groups have a right to self determination. This includes Sikhs as well, however it is a decision for them to make if they want to break away from an India that faces a bright economic future and make a smaller less powerful state,or work for more autonomy and freedom while living in the framework of the India constitution?

If you go,through my above posts you will find out why from a Pakistani perspective Khalistan is a bad idea. It remains India's internal matter and we should let them solve it. Sikh leaders are living in a fallacy that by creating an insurgency they can create Khalistan. They should if they want to, work within the framework of the Indian constitution to gain more economic and cultural independence if they so desire.

Perhaps a few decades down the track India will see it suitable to let them become a state through peaceful transition of power,however as the things are today it will be a blood bath in which Khalistani movement will be brutally crushed by the Indian army and air force.Indian intellectual class should recognize their demands, and should work to heed them as much as they can. If Gandhi geeri is going to be applied instead of Chankia doctrine,it will have desirable results for the both parties.

@Peshwa @KRAIT @third eye @Contrarian @sancho
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
There will always be some who would want to rebel, and there will always be facilitators, the question remains what is the objective of fueling insurgencies in india. As far as geniuses, who want to see Indian state disintegrating, what do they envisage will happen to one of the largest military force in the world. the spill over would be massive enough to wipe out the everything in the neighborhood.

As far as khalistan is concerned, there is no chance in hell that there will be any tactical success in reviving that dud. Sikhs are very well integrated among the general Indian population. as far as fuelling insurgency is concerned, pakistani members should try and reduce their own problems instead of creating problems for India.

And the "intellectuals" who want revenge, and want to live in the past, must realize the ground realities. In this day and age, it will be beneficial for pakistan to have a non-hostile India as a neighbor.
 
.
I see your point and I don't think that Khalistan will become a reality anytime soon. However, we have to remember how India was all too happy to interfere in East Pakistan and we all saw how that turned out.

India interfered in a geographically isolated combat zone,where we thanks to our flawed policies had faced a popular uprising. Inflicting a defeat over an exhausted Army with no supply line,one air force squadron and outnumbered by 1-25 was easy. For us to carry out a similar venture in Khalistan may prove disastrous as it is sandwiched between us and India. For short term gains, we must not forget our long term interests which are our set objectives i-e a peaceful resolution to Kashmir dispute,settlement on Siachin and Run of Kuch. By supporting Khalistan we may win a smaller objective but will lose a larger initiative over our set agenda,which i do not think is a smart strategy.
 
.
Rather than taking a rigid and simplistic approach, we must dissect any given topic over its own merit. The man you have in your avatar is someone i hold deep respect for. Remember the lengths he went to have an independent India.?

We must accept that all social/ethnic/religious groups have a right to self determination. This includes Sikhs as well, however it is a decision for them to make if they want to break away from an India that faces a bright economic future and make a smaller less powerful state,or work for more autonomy and freedom while living in the framework of the India constitution?

If you go,through my above posts you will find out why from a Pakistani perspective Khalistan is a bad idea. It remains India's internal matter and we should let them solve it. Sikh leaders are living in a fallacy that by creating an insurgency they can create Khalistan. They should if they want to, work within the framework of the Indian constitution to gain more economic and cultural independence if they so desire.

Perhaps a few decades down the track India will see it suitable to let them become a state through peaceful transition of power,however as the things are today it will be a blood bath in which Khalistani movement will be brutally crushed by the Indian army and air force.Indian intellectual class should recognize their demands, and should work to heed them as much as they can. If Gandhi geeri is going to be applied instead of Chankia doctrine,it will have desirable results for the both parties.

@Peshwa @KRAIT @third eye @Contrarian @sancho


There are no legitimate sikh demands to begin with, they are very well integrated in the society, they have excellent representation in government, cabinet, military, law enforcement, entertainment, business, technology. You name any d-PSU, you will find sikhs in top position, president to prime minister, have been sikhs. There are no legit reasons for Sikhs to demand a separate state, let alone a country.

India interfered in a geographically isolated combat zone,where we thanks to our flawed policies had faced a popular uprising. Inflicting a defeat over an exhausted Army with no supply line,one air force squadron and outnumbered by 1-25 was easy. For us to carry out a similar venture in Khalistan may prove disastrous as it is sandwiched between us and India. For short term gains, we must not forget our long term interests which are our set objectives i-e a peaceful resolution to Kashmir dispute,settlement on Siachin and Run of Kuch. By supporting Khalistan we may win a smaller objective but will lose a larger initiative over our set agenda,which i do not think is a smart strategy.

+ peaceful settlement and a non-hostile India, favors pakistan over a hostile India and disputed issues. and additionally it wont be feasable for pakistan to have any direct military intervention in punjab sector, one of the most militarized areas of the border.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
I thought Pakistan learnt a lesson from decades of involvement in spreading extremism/separatism in neighboring countries. I guess they have not so probably there will be more lessons on the way for them too..
 
.
India interfered in a geographically isolated combat zone,where we thanks to our flawed policies had faced a popular uprising. Inflicting a defeat over an exhausted Army with no supply line,one air force squadron and outnumbered by 1-25 was easy. For us to carry out a similar venture in Khalistan may prove disastrous as it is sandwiched between us and India. For short term gains, we must not forget our long term interests which are our set objectives i-e a peaceful resolution to Kashmir dispute,settlement on Siachin and Run of Kuch. By supporting Khalistan we may win a smaller objective but will lose a larger initiative over our set agenda,which i do not think is a smart strategy.

I don't think that we should support a insurgency there, but just keep in mind India's role in the past (East Pakistan) and in the present (the high possibility of them supporting the insurgency in Balochistan), thats all. As for Kashmir, Siachin, and Run of Kuch it would be great if these issues could be settled but I don't see that happening in the near future due to external and internal threats and pressures.
 
.
There are no legitimate sikh demands to begin with, they are very well integrated in the society, they have excellent representation in government, cabinet, military, law enforcement, entertainment, business, technology. You name any d-PSU, you will find sikhs in top position, president to prime minister, have been sikhs. There are no legit reasons for Sikhs to demand a separate state, let alone a country.



+ peaceful settlement and a non-hostile India, favors pakistan over a hostile India and disputed issues.

I believe what you are saying is correct,however what we are talking about is not what the situation on the ground is but "how it is perceived" by the other party. Their demands are also going to be how they "perceive" them to be instead of what realistically they can achieve. From my perspective, i want a non hostile India, and reviving a dead horse isn't the price we should pay to earn more hostilities from India.

1: Peaceful resolution to Kashmir dispute
2: Military withdrawl from Siachin
3: Settlement on Run of Kuch
4: Openining up Indian market for our business
5: Opening up energy and logistical corridor for India to C.Asia and Europe
6: Mutual nuclear disarmament and reduction in Armed forces.


These are the above areas we should be working with India, except funding useful idiots, same goes for India.
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom