Kompromat
ADMINISTRATOR
- Joined
- May 3, 2009
- Messages
- 40,366
- Reaction score
- 416
- Country
- Location
Pakistan must not be India’s neighbor
By Dr Amarjit Singh Issue Net Edition | Date : 20 Aug , 2013
Does India want good neighborly relations with its neighbors? Yes, but not with Pakistan. Does India love its neighbors? Yes, but not Pakistan. Should India live on good terms with its neighbors? Yes, but not with Pakistan. The reason for these assessments and positions is because there is a choice. People often say that nations cannot choose their neighbors. But, one answer is that they can. China chose to become India’s neighbor by annexing Tibet; Taiwan chose to become a neighbor of China by breaking away; the borders and neighbors in Central Asia changed remarkably during the great game of the 19th century. England chose to annex Wales and Scotland, thereby eliminating them as neighbors; the USA bought a large chunk of territory from France in the Louisiana Purchase to cease to be a neighbor of France; and the USA bought Alaska from Russia, thereby becoming a neighbor of Russia.
In India, there was a conscious choice to not have Hyderabad and Junagad as neighbors soon after independence. And, India chose to have Bangladesh as a neighbor on its eastern flank rather than continuing with Pakistan as a neighbor there. And when the British united India, it took away countries that were neighbors of each other. These are only a few examples in the region and world that illustrate that neighbors can be chosen, borders can be changed, and destinies of people forged. Sometimes, these destinies are forged by battle, at other times by purchase, and at yet other times by negotiation or threat. One example of the latter was Russia’s annexation of Eastern Siberia from China in the earlier part of the 19th century without firing a shot. At the height of its empire, Great Britain was neighbors with much of the world.
It must simply be appreciated that times change, fates change, those down come up, those up go down, the free are enslaved, while the enslaved become free, kings have become paupers[1], and paupers kings[2]. Never should we lose sight of human history.India has tried for 66 years to live peacefully with Pakistan, but has simply not succeeded. India must be mad if what Einstein stated is true. He had said, “t is a sign of madness to make the same effort again and again, and expect different results.” Thus, India has again and again tried diplomacy with Pakistan, hoping that the result will be different each time. Indian leaders – and those in charge of foreign policy — need to see a mental doctor.
Jihad v. Non-Violence
There is no comparison between the practice of jihad in military matters, and that of non-violence in military matters. Given one versus the other, Jihad wins hands down from a military perspective at every occasion. But, as much as the principle of “jihad” in Islam has been twisted for centuries by Muslims to defeat a non-muslim enemy, so much has the principle of non-violence been twisted to forfeit the sword and the rifle. The true jihad is the internal struggle of the mind and soul to break through its bonds and emerge into an understanding and love of God, but that is not how Muslims have interpreted it against the Russians or Americans or British or Sikhs or Hindus.
Similarly the true non-violence is the gradual ascension of the soul rather than forcing the soul to reach higher states of consciousness without establishing and cementing prior accomplishments in the spiritual journey. Thus spiritual non-violence is to attain to higher states by “sahej”, i.e., gradually, rather than pushing and forcing one’s unwilling mind to accept true thoughts it can’t hold. But, this beautiful spiritual meaning of non-violence has been distorted by Hindus and Mahatma Gandhi to forego the use of arms altogether, which is ridiculous. A country cannot survive without a military. To win wars, one needs a strong military, not one that merely achieves a stalemate.
If such be the (false) practice of non-violence and our belief in it, then why keep an army at all? If such is the (false) faith the country has in non-violence than why not believe that the world will save India from harm if India had no army? Obviously, the extent to which the principles of non-violence are applied to foreign policy and state matters can become absolutely paralyzing, as is the present situation in India. The major trouble with non-violence is that it doesn’t fit into the belief of the military. A military swears by violence, while the non-violent practitioner of the modern times abjures the use of the military. They don’t fit, they don’t jive, and they can’t dance together. Non-violence is the complete opposite of what militaries believe. The two cannot be at the same table.
Wrong Belief Systems
A whole generation or two of Indians in government have grown up on wrong belief systems. They have sworn by non-violence, non-alignment, panchsheel, and peace. None of these are relevant in the real world of war. A nation needs violence to protect its honor and sovereignty against hostile attack; a nation needs treaties and alliances in the real world with other countries to multiply its defense capabilities. Throughout history, treaties and alliances have been the backbone of world politics, and continue so today.
Look at NATO, or the alliance between France and Britain to share their armed forces. If Chanakya were alive today, he would agree. But, India wants to go it alone: an idealistic nation in a practical world, presenting misplaced ideas that won’t mix with the world of nations. Similarly the peaceful principles of co-existence are only in religion, not in war – and not with the frailties of the human mind, its desires for honor, or need for survival and prosperity. How many people would give food to the enemy first before eating food themselves? Are we real people or are we lost? Peace is for dreamers and preachers, because war and death are the only reality on Earth. Yes, people (and the Indian government) dream of peace because they don’t wish to face the truth. Peace is not for a nation on the march, or a corporation in competition. To ignore the need of the times is to do so at one’s own peril.
And here, it must be recalled that the world’s great empires were forged by the force of arms: The ancient Persians – the world’s first great civilization; Rome that ruled the “known world” for 400 years, including the British Isles; the Mauryan empire that stretched from Assam to Sindh, and Vijayanagar to Afghanistan, and which had Sri Lanka as a vassal state; the fantastic empire of Cengiz Khan; The vast Hapsburg empire in Central Europe; the Ottoman empire that stretched from the Persian Gulf and Gulf of Aden to Eastern Europe; the conquests of Islam that spanned from Spain to Chinese Turkestan, and past India into Indonesia;
The empire of Great Britain on whose empire the sun never set; the Napoleonic empire that ruled all mainland Europe; or the world’s sole great superpower today – USA, built themselves to that level by the strength of their resources, the power of their arms, the passion in their hearts, and the might of their militaries. Even Japan and Germany that shook the world in World Wart II, which resulted in the beginning of the collapse of the colonial era – a great blessing – was thrust on the world by war. Thus, war also saves and liberates people. We must not forget that war can be a blessing.
War is what makes the world go around and gather motion and momentum – not peace. We are forever improving in our technology, which is a testimony to the war we fight everyday to overcome the temptations of laziness and sloth. It is not in the human’s DNA to not improve, not seek protection, not seek security, or not become better than one’s competition.
It was war that freed the Sikhs from the yoke of the Mughals and Muslim oppression; it was war that carved the Sikh identity; it was war that spurred the Marathas, the Cholas, and the Guptas; it was war that saved the allies in World War II: can you imagine what would have happened had the USA decided to not enter the war, saying that it was a peace-loving nation
The Lies of Pakistan
Pakistan is a habitual liar. It lied in 1947-48 when it said that only irregular militia had entered Kashmir, when regulars fought alongside that militia; it lied in 1965 when it said that the paratroopers found in Kashmir did not belong to their army; they lied in 1971 when they said that they weren’t raping Bangladeshi women; they lied in the early 80s when they said they weren’t arming or training Khalistanis; they lied that they weren’t behind the 36 railway stations bomb blasts in Punjab in the early 1980s; they lied in 1987-88 when they said that they had no Pakistani personnel in Kashmir during the uprising there.
They lied when they said that the Kargil operation was launched without their knowledge by irregular militia; they lied that the attack on the Indian Parliament was not aided and abetted by them; they lied that they had nothing to do with 26/11; they lied that Osama bin Laden was not hiding in Pakistan; they lied that Dawood Ibrahim was not in Pakistan; they lied again last week when they said it was not the regular Pak army that killed five Indian soldiers; they lied … and lie … and lie.
Such lying is the symptom of a deranged mentality – an irresponsible nation that doesn’t have a place in the comity of nations; such lying exhibits a base and debased personality with whom friendship by another is a mistake, let alone being called for. Would you make friends with a snake? Would you have good neighborly relations with mosquitoes that carry dengue and malaria? Would you have good neighborly relations with thugs, dacoits, and rapists? And India wants to negotiate with a pathetic and habitual liar? And India wants friendship with such an entity? Give me a break! Is India in its right mind? How does India think it will trust Pakistan when it lies so much?
How will Pakistan ever be able to fulfill a promise when it will continue to lie about breaking its promises?I wouldn’t touch such a neighbor with a long barge pole; in fact, I would beat such a neighbor with the pole. First, Pakistan lies, and then it lies to cover its lies, and then fabricates more lies to justify those lies, till a time comes they begin to believe in those lies, transforming fully from Jekyll to Hyde. The grass has become the weed; the good has become evil – and now can be trusted no more. What are the IFS and political leaders smoking that they think they can talk Pakistan into a binding resolution? Which mothers’ children are they? Whose honor are they riding on? Why are they denying India their right? Why should Indians not encourage a revolution? France, Russia, China, Japan, and USA have all had their revolutions.
Why not India? But, what can we do? Our worldview of Pakistan needs a dramatic shift; India needs a reality check. But alas! Our leaders have been bought by our enemies. Woe it is to India that won’t enhance defense production, that won’t privatize defense production, that won’t add 100 airforce planes a year to its inventory; that won’t triple naval production – an area of strength for India; that won’t treat its military with respect; that won’t allow the BSF and ITBP to report to the army commander; that won’t create integrated commands on the land frontiers; that won’t encourage engineering education for advancing military technology – that simply won’t – a reluctant to develop country.
India Does Not Need Pakistan as a Neighbor
By now it should be abundantly clear that India does not need – does not desire – does not require — Pakistan as a neighbor. Remember that Pakistan is really India. Only an aberration of history carved Pakistan out of India. It is time for Pakistan to come home and reunite with India. And India needs to take control of its own destiny rather than allow Britain or USA or China to control us. Without a Pakistan, the question of neighborly relations with Pakistan will not arise. There will be no debates about dialogue, peace, and war with Pakistan.
If Pakistan were not to exist, how would you talk to it? India would have changed its neighbors: it would have Baluchistan and Afghanistan as neighbors in the changed scenario. India would have solved the problem of Pakistan in its present form. There would be much less to worry about. Many Indian analysts are reconciled to good neighborly relations with Pakistan because they are reconciled to the existence of Pakistan. They do not think that Pakistan can be eliminated. So obviously, good relations with Pakistan are not a given, in principle.
And how do we stop Pakistan from being our neighbor? By swallowing it, of course.[3] All of India’s short term and long-term aims must now orient to realizing this objective. Every speech by a politician, every trade in the world, and every action across the LOC must have this objective in mind. India must single-mindedly determine to rectify a wrong of history – that of the creation of Pakistan – and close the chapter on Pakistan for all time to come.In fact, there is no other reasonable choice for India if it wishes to preserve its honor and integrity.
The signs of the times, the winds in the trees and the mountains, the firings across the LOC, the portents of actions, the light of the stars, and the hearts of Indians all say that Pakistan must be no more. It is apparent that war is coming to India from the Western direction in a big way – in fact, even if India does not want it. This will be a war one that will transform India, the region, and the world in a profound manner. The tiger will have finally woken from its sleep; the air of righteousness will flare from its breath; it will march to the music it will begin to hear; it will see the light for which it was made; its opportunity is on the march; its time is arriving; India’s tryst with destiny is about to confront it.
It is true that Pakistanis hate India from the depth of their core; and whereas Indians are more restrained, they do not feel friendly towards a Pakistan that beheads its soldiers[4], and sustains a high level of tension across the border, thereby hurting the economies of both India and Pakistan. This state of affairs is hardly tolerable for the mental health of the nations. A decisive battle is the only way to solve this impasse. There is nothing immoral about going to war; no shame in attacking an abuser like Pakistan; no illegality or guilt in foregoing peace with Pakistan.
Democracies Don’t Fight!
Much has been said that democracies don’t go to war against each other. Hence, it is argued that if democracy can take root in Pakistan, the sub-continent’s problems will disappear. But first, we should mention that Pakistan has held a democracy for five years, yet still displays immature behavior. So then, the “democratic” argument goes, give it time to grow up, and all will be well.
However, there is a flaw in that argument. To expect Pakistan to sustain a democracy for very long is uncertain; and its resolve to override the military’s writ and control is absolutely doubtful. Pakistan was a democracy during Kargil, and it has been a democracy this year when it resorted to cross-border violations. And, it is still sure that it trains and gives refuge to terrorist outfits that plot against India. Thus, Pakistan displays bipolar behavior. So, how can we expect peace even with a democratic Pakistan?It is difficult to be friends with a mentally deranged person, and the bipolar disorder that Pakistan displays is most unworthy of friendship.
The adage that “democracies don’t fight” was brought up by white people in the Atlantic sphere. This does not mean that that thought can grow in Asia – a people with different religions, histories, and genes.For India to wait till Pakistan becomes democratic is to fool itself. No Muslim country is voluntarily democratic, and the imposition of democracy, such as in Iraq, may well be short-lived. Egypt’s one-year experiment with democracy is there for all to see and observe that it failed. In any event, democracy notwithstanding, Pakistan is imploding, and may well fall into the hands of extremists who could take control of the country’s nuclear weapons. That will be more disturbing for India than now.
Hence, it is wiser for India to eliminate Pakistan now rather than wait till Pakistan falls into the hands of the extremists.In any event, India will be much stronger without a Pakistan than with a democratic Pakistan. India must show no mercy to Pakistan. Sixty-six years of appeasement is a long enough time. India’s softness will come back to hurt it, but India’s fist will protect and heal India. India cannot be at peace with Pakistan, and the sooner India dispels that misguided notion and thought, the better will it be for India’s health.
The USA has been misled to believe that it must deal with Pakistan and cooperate with them because they are reconciled to the existence of Pakistan as a UN member nation. It has perhaps not crossed the mind of US analysts that Pakistan could be dismembered, which would change the equation USA has with Pakistan. No geographic boundary is sacrosanct in the world, and Pakistan’s boundaries are no exception. Pakistan’s existence as a nation is not written in stone, and even if it is, that stone can be crushed because Pakistan is nothing but trouble in its neighborhood and world, not to mention its record of proliferation of nuclear weapons.
The Shaky Ground of Pakistan
That Pakistan is starting to stir trouble on the Indian front could be a sign that a coup is on its way. No one can say for sure, but Musharraf is still under house arrest and wants to get out. So conceivably, the army can still come to his rescue. Where Nawaz Sharif wishes to control the army, the army wishes to control Sharif, so the army is able to demonstrate time and time again by cross-border fire that they are really in charge, not the civilian government.
Kayani’s term as army chief is also up for renewal in October, and he may wish to stay on in power – or, at the very least – have his own handpicked successor as the next army chief. A battle is already brewing between Kayani and Sharif.
The days for Pakistan are shaky: an already trembling Pakistan has the ground shaking again under it. The terror outfits are loose and on the rampage; Pakistan’s writ does not run over the entire country. And then — as bad that India’s economy is, Pakistan’s is worse. The chances that it will spill into war with India are all too likely. In fact, the Pakistani military may well orchestrate a war to once again justify its own existence. Such a step is always more likely in times of tension and major change, such as the appointment of a new army chief. Though Pakistan may think that it will be able to contain India in a war, the truth is more that this will be India’s great opportunity to end the problem of Pakistan by wiping it off the map.
India’s Great Opportunity
As unfortunate as it may sound, but a blessing in disguise, nevertheless, is that war will unite and bond a fragmented India from Manipur to Maharashtra, Karnataka to Kashmir. War will eventually come to India’s rescue, not to its harm. War is what will catapult India to greatness, not its wimpish, non-violent and non-alignment policies. It is war that will engrave India’s massive destiny in stone and confirm its tryst with destiny.
War will liberate India from itself. For India, war (Mangal) needs to be worshipped[5], for it is war that will unshackle India. Let no one be in doubt: there is no path to greatness on Earth for a nation that does not use war. Besides the great spiritual avatars, only war has made nations great.[6] World histories and geographies are made by military power, the use and exercise of power, and the projection of power. Economic power has no muscle by itself, and is unsustainable without military production and military power.
The Nuclear Threat
The current situation is that Pakistan is a rational actor using a weapon as a threat; India is scared like a cat (or mouse) of this threat and so will allow Pakistan to bleed it. What makes India not realize that it too has nuclear weapons[7]? However, should India find its spine, it is unlikely that Pakistan – being the rational actor it is – will resort to nuclear war. Pakistan uses the threat of escalation after every small incident, such as this month’s attack in Poonch. But, I have come to be of the opinion that Pakistan is using the nuclear card simply as a “threat” and not much more. Once India comes into its own mind, it will realize the folly of patience with Pakistan, and call its nuclear bluff.
However, irrational actors may come into power in Pakistan if India does not act soon. That may assure India’s destruction by nuclear weapons even without Indian provocation. Hence, India must attack Pakistan now – during the regime of Nawaz Sharif – a government that is a rational actor – rather than wait for a chimeric and mythical democracy to take root. The chances that Pakistan will fall into the hands of unwanted elements is far greater than the chance that a strong and vibrant democracy will take shape in Pakistan.
Thus, the window of opportunity might be narrow – only five years, maybe ten. But, the interesting thing is that India doesn’t need to wait for additional military armaments, such as INS Vikramaditya or the Rafale aircraft to defeat Pakistan. Even without those weapons, India is superior to Pakistan, notwithstanding that the Indian military has serious problems of all sorts ranging from communication to fighting fitness to age of the jawans to breakdown of officer qualities to reduction in generalship skills, and so on. The simple story is that Pakistan is worse
India is in a Box but a Destiny Awaits
There is no way out of the tight box that India is in, except through war. India is being cornered more and more by Pakistan and the Chinese build-up in Tibet. Only through war can India liberate itself from the swords hanging over its head.India has a huge destiny awaiting it, only if India does not wait for it! There is always a time to act and a time to remain silent. The need of the hour is to triple naval production[8], and add inventory at a rapid pace through investment in defense production[9], and enhance Indian strike capabilities in all respects in a focused mission.
As regretful as it may sound – but as a blessing in disguise – is that war will unite and bond fragmented India; war will come to India’s rescue and transform its economic development and urban and rural planning, not to mention administrative reforms of all types in civil community; war is what will catapult India to greatness, not its soft policies. It is in war that India’s massive destiny is engraved in stone; war will liberate India from itself, and its superstitions, and poverty, and impoverishment.
India’s pride, mind you, will be restored through victory in war or not restored at all. India should not be found looking away when it is called to military action. But actually, let us rejoice that war will potentially bring a rejuvenated India to the fore, for which India will be more resilient and vibrant. And, let us honor those loyal, dedicated bravehearts of India who will sacrifice their life for this new freedom. Let us shed a tear and offer a prayer for them in advance. Let us be prepared – for the future shall not be long in coming. At the expense of sounding prophetic, I must nevertheless admit that war has started its march on India: I can see it coming in the events around India. But let us not fear; let us leave our mark in history, as destiny wants it. India is being called, and so must answer the calling; India’s moment is arriving – it must rise to the occasion; India is being given responsibility – it must fulfill its responsibility.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference:
[1] Eg., Shah Jahan was imprisoned by his own son.
[2] Eg., Qutub-ud-din Aibek who founded the Slave Dynasty in Delhi.
[3]Read, “Why the Existence of Pakistan is not in India’s interest?” Indian Defence Review, net edition.
[4] In the 1838 war of Heart between Persia and Afghanistan, each side resorted to beheading their enemy soldiers, and displaying the head as a trophy from poles and ramparts, etc. The Persian siege on Heart was inspired by Russia, while a British Lieutenant who was sent to Herat on a spying mission, stayed to help the prime minister of Herat defend the city; beheading Sikh heads was a formal government policy of Farukhsiyar, the Mughal emperor at Delhi, 1713-19. Beheading seems to be a passion of the people of the area to India’s northwest.
[5] Durga reincarnates periodically to wage war to dispel evil; Lord Krishna impressed upon Arjuna the holy and just purpose of the war he was in; Guru Gobind Singh – and Guru Hargobind Singh before him – encouraged military prowess to defend their sovereignty and prayer-full lifestyle. War is a divine gift, and that gift must be used at the right time.
[6] It was war that made USA extend its frontiers from the initial 13 colonies to the Pacific Ocean; through war did the USA gain independence. Are we not grateful for it now for the prosperity it has brought to the world?
[7] Unless it really doesn’t!
[8] Tripling production is important. One additional part would be reserved for export, as a heavy demand for Indian naval ships has been expressed by Southeast Asian nations. The profit from this part would simply imply that the other additional part would be attained at a fraction of the cost.
[9] Rather than spend money on overseas orders.
