Bang Galore
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2010
- Messages
- 10,685
- Reaction score
- 12
- Country
- Location
MSA approval or disapproval is irrelevant.
1. MMS had no principle guiding their talks with pakistan. THAT is what was criticised not the talks itself. Just because most idiots failed to understand it, does not make it any less true. Foreign policy is not guided by the lowest denominator.
The harshness is the result of talking blunt, not of disinterest in talks. Stridency was a result of being driven by principles. Again if some people cannot understand the difference then modi govt. is not responsible.
GoI stand always has been to have substantive talks on ALL subject provided the terrorism stops. This however means that if pakistan wanst to talk about kashir, it has to stop terrorism.
All other matters are to be discussed in National interests. This will involve agreements on a common stand on Climate control where Indnia is a Leader representing 88 odd countries, Pakistan included. Recently China too has broken up from US and has come and join India group.
To gain this leadership means India will have to concede some space to pakistan and maybe pak govt. has asked for resumption of cricket to show its domestic audience that it got something bac, from India.
That does make India look soft on Terror, but it also makes India look Strong during Climate change discussions and can guide global policies that is in OUR best interests. During MMS time, India was seen as an obstructionist. Today India is seen as a Global leader.
Once the COP21 ends, India can go back to being hard on Terror, bt COP 21 is and should be our immediate concern.
2. During SCO when Modi and NS met, it was decided that first the ministers will meet, then the NSA will meet and then the Secretary will meet. Only they decided to speak only on Terror.
Pakistan however was not able to sell this domestically so it had to seek a way to pull out of this commitment.
What happened is history. They refused to provide dates for NSA level talks and instead direcly wanted to go with FS level talk. India refused to play ball.
This time pakistan has honoured its commitment and has set up the NSA talks. The meeting happened on 6th Dec. went on for 4 hrs so one assumes it was productive.
The next was FS talk which happened on 8th Dec under the cover of a "conference".
All in All India got what it wanted and paksitan got what it wanted. I fail to see the loss here.
What is the climb down here ? Spell it out for us.
During the cancelled NSA talks, the Pakistanis had a couple of points they were making. One was that India's position of talks on terror & Modi's formulation of no talks on other issues before India is satisfied on the terrorism front was not acceptable to them. They pointed out that India could put off all talks on other issues permanently by the logic of that argument. Hence they insisted on bringing in other issues & finally made an offer to have the FS meet alongside the NSA where they could atleast prepare a road-map for the discussions on other issues. India refused, Sushma Swaraj made that clear as also a statement on no talks being held in a 3rd country.
What has happened now is that the FS's met alongside the NSA's in a 3rd country & the joint declaration left it open to interpretation, the discussions on Kashmir. Exactly the formulation that Pakistan had asked for in August and was refused.
Regardless of whether the discussions were productive or not, the ink was hardly dry and with no obvious proof of Pakistani intentions on terror, let alone actual actions, India then upgraded the discussions to FM level (there was an available option to send MoS MEA, V.K. Singh) where they have now decided that the FS's will talk to prepare a roadmap for future talks. Almost taken out of the Pakistani playbook.
I have no issues with the steps taken, I think they are as valid as the policy to refuse dialogue till certain conditions were met but what is jarring is that the transition from the second to the first has happened without any known change in the Pakistani position. Essentially, we are telling the Pakistanis that there are no red lines that we will not roll back, that this government is essentially no different on diplomacy than the previous one. I also think that if the government had decided to alter its position, the transition could have happened slowly. Why this tearing hurry to go from one end of the spectrum to the other.
However the main point is India is having talks on it own terms which I feel is not bending to Pakistan like what congress have been doing
I beg to disagree.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Salman Khan Acquitted By Bombay High Court In 2002 Hit-And-Run Case
Salman Khan Acquitted By Bombay High Court In 2002 Hit-And-Run Case
..and someone was asking if the Gandhis would be convicted..........