Pak parties pledge peace with India in their manifestos

[SpArK]

Pak parties pledge peace with India in their manifestos

NEW DELHI: Leading Pakistani political parties have pledged to promote peace with New Delhi in their manifestos ahead of the elections next month with the Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) even proposing to do so by linking India with Afghanistan besides energy rich Iran and Central Asian Republics (CAR) via its territory.

The proposal of PML (N), whose leader and two-time Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif is among the frontrunners for the country's top post, is significant as Islamabad has long resisted allowing transit trade between India and Afghanistan fearing New Delhi's is using Kabul to encircle it strategically. India is a leading regional donor having invested $ 2 billion primarily in Afghan infrastructure development.

"Pakistan can also develop a flourishing transit economy because it provides the shortest land routes from Western China to the Arabian Sea, through the Gwadar Port, while linking India with Afghanistan and CAR and providing land route from Iran to India and access to the Central Asian Republics to the Arabian sea and India for oil/gas pipelines,'' the PML (N) said in its manifesto.

The manifesto of Imran Khan-led Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf ( PTI), widely expected to give PML (N) a tough fight, echoes its rival party in part. "Progressive detente with India will benefit both countries if centred on conflict resolution and cooperation especially in the field of energy.''

It lists the resolution of Kashmir dispute as part of Pakistan's core national interest while pledging not to allow the country's territory or people, including its armed forces, to be used by any nation for the promotion of its political ideology or hegemony or promoting terrorism and for destabilizing any state.

The party recognizes terrorism as a growing internal destabilize while promising to move substantively on the bilateral strategic dialogue with India besides rationalizing the defense spending.

Pakistan Muslim League (Quaid) that ruled Pakistan between 2002 and 2007 too recognizes threat to national security "from unconventional sources" and no longer "an issue of defending the country against foreign military aggression from across the border (India)''. It calls for "zero tolerance policy for any non-state actors to plan, organise, train or launch military attacks against any of Pakistan's neighbours''. It says Pakistan can no longer use the argument of "absence of the writ of the state in ungoverned spaced parts of Pakistan" as an excuse as this means "abdication of a fundamental responsibility for happenings within our territorial jurisdiction".

The manifesto of Pakistan People's Party, which last month became the first party to complete its term in office, takes credit for initiating a policy of sustained dialogue with neighbours like India while pledging to pursue stability and peace-building in the region as a policy priority.

It counted normalization of trade with India, which Islamabad had resisted for years in favour of its Kashmir-first policy, among the important achievements of its government replacing old templates that "hinged strategic ties on narrow definitions of national security".


Link

 

[Srinivas]

Some we have to wait for some time to hear the jingoistic statements then

 

[Sedqal]

Wow so you Indian trolls were going on forever that politics in Pakistan revolve around anti-India rhetoric (and wouldn't listen to reason) now you are starting on WHY there is no anti-India rhetoric in party manifestos?

 

[Argus Panoptes]

Pak parties pledge peace with India in their manifestos

NEW DELHI: Leading Pakistani political parties have pledged to promote peace with New Delhi in their manifestos ahead of the elections next month with the Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) even proposing to do so by linking India with Afghanistan besides energy rich Iran and Central Asian Republics (CAR) via its territory.

..............

Link

Wishful thinking Sir.

Since when did the civilian governments get to decide what foreign policy will be, specially towards India? Hint: Never.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Wishful thinking Sir.

Since when did the civilian governments get to decide what foreign policy will be, specially towards India? Hint: Never.

Agreed with that point, Sir.
Foreign Policy with India is decided in Rawalpindi; not in Islamabad. And the distance between Rawalpindi and Islamabad is sometimes very far, too far a distance to be even negotiated.

 

[ice_man]

Agreed with that point, Sir.
Foreign Policy with India is decided in Rawalpindi; not in Islamabad. And the distance between Rawalpindi and Islamabad is sometimes very far, too far a distance to be even negotiated.

and did rawalpindi pull out of the gas pipeline from TAPI or with IRI? or was it your new delhi??? please don't put your rhetorics on us!

to us pakistanis india is last of our concern. but to delhi pakistan is a via to gain support hence opposition always goes on and on about how congress has dhoti shivering problem and can't stand up to pakistan.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

and did rawalpindi pull out of the gas pipeline from TAPI or with IRI? or was it your new delhi??? please don't put your rhetorics on us!

to us pakistanis india is last of our concern. but to delhi pakistan is a via to gain support hence opposition always goes on and on about how congress has dhoti shivering problem and can't stand up to pakistan.

Were you trying to say something??

 

[darkinsky]

any party pleadging peace with india shouldnt be voted, pakistan needs to deal with india not through peace but by clever planning, india doesnt understand the language of peace, and neither can be trusted

 

[schadenfreude]

"Peace" sounds too good a thing. But the "cold-war doctrine" wouldn't let that happen. And any notion of increasing the trade to achieve peace is just impractical. Example: the trades between European nations just before WWII.

 

[Gandhi G in da house]

any party pleadging peace with india shouldnt be voted, pakistan needs to deal with india not through peace but by clever planning, india doesnt understand the language of peace, and neither can be trusted

What did we do ?

 

[schadenfreude]

any party pleadging peace with india shouldnt be voted, pakistan needs to deal with india not through peace but by clever planning, india doesnt understand the language of peace, and neither can be trusted

Apparently all the political parties use the word "peace" in their manifestos directly or indirectly. So voting or no voting is not an issue. What matters to us at this stage is excellent diplomats. Salman Bashir is doing a wonderful job in my opinion. But not as wonderful as he should though.

 

[ice_man]

Were you trying to say something??

the problem is delhi they pulled out of gas pipelines. clearly delhi doesn't want peace with pakistan! rawalpindi is no more choosing it. its delhi which wishes to keep hostilities!

 

[Capt.Popeye]

the problem is delhi they pulled out of gas pipelines. clearly delhi doesn't want peace with pakistan! rawalpindi is no more choosing it. its delhi which wishes to keep hostilities!

India pulled out of the IPI gas pipeline for a number of reasons:
1.The price of the gas itself; the price being quoted by Iran is unsustainable. If Pakistan imports at that price, then Pakistan will find it painful and unaffordable.
2.Pakistan asked for very high charges to wheel (transport) the gas through the pipeline passing through its land.
3.Now this is the most important part. The security of the pipeline itself! If the gas pipeline cannot be secured then it is foolish to spend money on a pipeline that can have parts of it blown up every second day. Nobody, not even Pakistan can guarantee the security of the pipeline. It may be more realistic for India to set up a Gas Terminal in Chah Bahar and then ship the gas from there to Terminals in India by Tankers.
4.With the Sanctions Regime imposed on Iran; finding funding and insurance liability cover for the whole project is so difficult that who knows if it will be even completed in the present atmospherics.

In the light of all the above; let us see when the pipeline actually gets completed IF it gets done at all. India thought it better not to get tied up into a "langda ghora" project. In any case India is tying up/has tied up alternate sources of Gas; from Oman and Qatar.

So don't tie up Peace with some "Gas".

 

[notorious_eagle]

Agreed with that point, Sir.
Foreign Policy with India is decided in Rawalpindi; not in Islamabad. And the distance between Rawalpindi and Islamabad is sometimes very far, too far a distance to be even negotiated.

It does not matter, both GHQ and all political parties are on the same page in regards to relations with India. All strata of society whether its politicians, generals or bureaucrats have realized that good relations with India are in the best interests of Pakistan. If you look at the past statements and actions of GHQ General Staff, it is increasingly in favour of improving ties with India. To put it bluntly, Pakistan stands to gain economically and diplomatically with a friendly India.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

It does not matter, both GHQ and all political parties are on the same page in regards to relations with India. All strata of society whether its politicians, generals or bureaucrats have realized that good relations with India are in the best interests of Pakistan. If you look at the past statements and actions of GHQ General Staff, it is increasingly in favour of improving ties with India. To put it bluntly, Pakistan stands to gain economically and diplomatically with a friendly India.

That is true. I'd say that the benefit will be on both sides. Historically; FP wrt India has been decided in GHQ, Rawalpindi. Now the indications are that GHQ is changing some of its legacy policies; even more so with the 'creeping realisation' that the bigger menace to Pakistan lies within Pakistan, in the shape of increasingly uncontrollable Jehadi groups. Gen. Kiyani seems to represent that thought process. However the question is; after Kiyani. what? Because that strongly-held belief that India poses an eternal existential threat to Pakistan has been taught for long in the Pakistani Security Estt. Have all the overtones of that subsided? You may even be justified in not deciding to be friends with India (after all it is your prerogative) but you would just be masochistic if you persist in labelling India an enemy. The fact is that, India's Strategic Estt. needs Pakistan to exist; and in a stable form. Even GHQ will find it easier to tackle all the internal threats if it can ratchet-down the tensions with India. Ideally GHQ can even consider co-operating with India to tackle rising insurgency; but it is finally GHQ's call on that matter. Rather than hoping that the insurgents can be manipulated to keep the "K-Factor" continually boiling. Because the insurgents are steadily going out of control of anybody and India is steadily beefing up both its resolve and capability to handle that. In any case the "K-Factor" will remain a stalemate for eternity.

Then there is a large constituency in India too that views increasing Trade and Good Relations with Pakistan very favorably. Not because they are a collection of "Pious Saints" but simply because Common Sense says so.