Pakistanis becoming less Anti-Indian, but do Indians reciprocate?

[Chak Bamu]

I hate Indians more than I hate Afghans.


This thread sounds like bs.

Meray Bhai, then you are part of the problem too on our side. Hatred is a negative virtue. Please for your sake and ours, step out of it. This is social conditioning, not a religious or ideological value. But many Indians take it as such. This is what drives hatred on their side, along with our misplaced pride in Turkish invasions of 11th & 12th centuries.

I started this thread and you may debate its worth, but it sure is NOT BS.

 

[Spring Onion]

Ordinary Pakistanis have no reason to be anti-India because India is not supporting terrorism against them. However the converse is not true.

 

[Chak Bamu]

Was that officially accepted by Pakistan?
No.
Did you attack us officially in 71?
Yes.
Do you know what happened in 71?

Better not discuss 71. There is not much you can say to defend India's conduct. I know the official line that you would parrot to defend your position, but the whole world knows the truth. Mukti Bahini was a creation of RAW. It is well documented and discussed in Indian publications too. I could say more but this thread is not about 71.

Like I said...
the reason we have the negative mindset because of terrorists still getting harbored, sheltered and trained by you guys. So how do you expect to change our mindset? You first take care of our concern and then we will talk about our mindset ..how about that?

Why do you insist on considering terrorism to be a uniquely Pakistani phenomenon? LTTE? Mukti Bahini? Sindhu Desh? Azad Baluchistan?. Come on now.....

 

[Bang Galore]

When you ban the RSS or do something about them maybe then your demands will hold more weight.

Is the RSS is involved or implicated in any act within Pakistan? No?? I thought not!

We have concerns about the state terror inflicted on the kashmiris.



The indian establishment continues to support the killing-torture of kashmiris......your right nothing has changed.

Neither of that is in the territory controlled by you. No one in the rest of the world will draw that equivalence.

You need someone from outside the system to tell the situation as it is; sort of like calling in a consultant, if you will. If Mr. Aiyar had a stake in status quo, he would not say a word. By this logic nothing would ever change. Great.

If you are castigating Aiyar, then you sure would not give time of day to (former) Ambassador M. K. Bhadrakumar.

Aiyar, while very passionate is somewhat of a loose cannon. He has been put out to pasture by his party because they can't agree with him . Manmohan Singh wants nothing to do with him & his ideas and so relieved him of his ministerial responsibilities a few years ago. Mr. Aiyar speaks for himself & is representative of a very, very, very small segment of people. He is certainly not representative of GoI or INC opinion.

 

[curioususer]

Why do you insist on considering terrorism to be a uniquely Pakistani phenomenon? LTTE? Mukti Bahini? Sindhu Desh? Azad Baluchistan?. Come on now.....

Aren't all these Pakistani?

 

[Chak Bamu]

Aren't all these Pakistani?

Created and / or abetted by RAW.

 

[farhan_9909]

i dont hate indians..but i also wants end of all kind of relation between pak and india..

fence off the border,put ban on the people to visit each other official ban like in pakistan we cant visit israel beacuse of ban imposed by pak govt.similar ban

No hate but at the same time dont want any kind of relation with india.

 

[Bang Galore]

Better not discuss 71. There is not much you can say to defend India's conduct. I know the official line that you would parrot to defend your position, but the whole world knows the truth. Mukti Bahini was a creation of RAW. It is well documented and discussed in Indian publications too. I could say more but this thread is not about 71.

Why do you insist on considering terrorism to be a uniquely Pakistani phenomenon? LTTE? Mukti Bahini? Sindhu Desh? Azad Baluchistan?. Come on now.....

This logic, even if accepted at face value, is still very odd. We are talking about opinions in 2013. What happened pre 1947, in 1948, in 1965, in 1971, 1984, 1999 has been consigned to history. What matters now is the perception in India that Pakistan still supports terrorist organisations which carry out attacks in India. If that changes, Indian opinion is guaranteed to change. Musharraf & MMS came close to formulating a peace agreement. Had that succeeded, I'm reasonably sure that Indians would have changed their views on Pakistan. It didn't, your PPP government reneged on that agreement (back channel), 26/11 happened & the cycle of violence & hatred endures. Today India is more wary, MMS is a lot weaker & any new government in India will have plenty to do before it bothers itself with a peace push with Pakistan. I believe that for the immediate future, we are unlikely to see much movement on this.

It is important to understand that Pakistan's position vis-a-vis India has progressively deteriorated. In 1999, during Vajpayee's bus yatra, Pakistan was in a much better situation which went downhill after the Kargil war, the coup, 9/11, Parliament attacks (in India) etc. The next time a peace deal was worked on, Pakistan was settling for a lot less. That was in 2004. The change in government in India that year pushed the nascent peace process further back & by 2007 when it was being firmed up, the balance had decisively shifted in India's way. That too didn't work & now in 2013, Pakistan is an even worse position from which to negotiate. The last few years have seen the hardening in Indian position to a point where senior Indian decision makers question the need & the ability(of Pakistan) to make any agreement, arguing that a cold peace is the best we can hope for.

 

[Spring Onion]

Alirght guys the morons can continue anti-Pakistan feelings sanoo ki. khud ko khwamakhwa mian halkan kiye day rahay hain yeh log.

Salman Khurshid ki statement ho to its all fault of Pakistan

If Ayar gives statement he becomes a Pakistani

if MMS wants good relations with Pakistan then he becomes a diaper clad toothless congressi for Indians

If Sonia Gandhi talks about invading Pakistan with cultural attacks then she becomes godess kali in the battle against Pakistan but if Sonia Gandhi keeps a mum over her party's soft statement viz a viz Pak relations then she becomes Italian waitress for mahan bharatis.

 

[Markus]

Alirght guys the morons can continue anti-Pakistan feelings sanoo ki. khud ko khwamakhwa mian halkan kiye day rahay hain yeh log.

Salman Khurshid ki statement ho to its all fault of Pakistan

If Ayar gives statement he becomes a Pakistani

if MMS wants good relations with Pakistan then he becomes a diaper clad toothless congressi for Indians

If Sonia Gandhi talks about invading Pakistan with cultural attacks then she becomes godess kali in the battle against Pakistan but if Sonia Gandhi keeps a mum over her party's soft statement viz a viz Pak relations then she becomes Italian waitress for mahan bharatis.

Now replace all Indian politicans with "Nawaz Sharif" and replace Pakistan with India, the literature you will then get will also stand true.

 

[bronxbull]

Iyer is stupid,thats primary.

MMS is a pansy everywhere.

Salman Khurshid still thinks Rohillas rule Bundelkhand.

 

[abdul2]

Well i do not think Indian will easily changed they will take longer time ..

 

[Markus]

Well i do not think Indian will easily changed they will take longer time ..

Stop all terrorism and you will immediately notice the difference in our behaviour.

 

[Bang Galore]

Alirght guys the morons can continue anti-Pakistan feelings sanoo ki. khud ko khwamakhwa mian halkan kiye day rahay hain yeh log.

Salman Khurshid ki statement ho to its all fault of Pakistan

If Ayar gives statement he becomes a Pakistani

if MMS wants good relations with Pakistan then he becomes a diaper clad toothless congressi for Indians

If Sonia Gandhi talks about invading Pakistan with cultural attacks then she becomes godess kali in the battle against Pakistan but if Sonia Gandhi keeps a mum over her party's soft statement viz a viz Pak relations then she becomes Italian waitress for mahan bharatis.

Peace we all want but how will we achieve that peace? There is no magic wand, many Pakistan seem unenthusiastic about putting contentious issues on the back burner & proceeding with other matters like trade etc. Yet most Pakistanis also seem unable to come up with a coherent plane for peace (Musharraf-MMS plan excluded), one that might be acceptable to India. Pakistanis have been unwilling to answer the very important question of what Pakistan brings to the table as its part of the bargain (cessation of terrorism directed against India is not enough). Merely suggesting that India withdraw from Siachen, draw down in Kashmir etc won't cut it. What you will add to the relationship is also key to any future agreement.

 

[Chak Bamu]

This logic, even if accepted at face value, is still very odd. We are talking about opinions in 2013. What happened pre 1947, in 1948, in 1965, in 1971, 1984, 1999 has been consigned to history. What matters now is the perception in India that Pakistan still supports terrorist organisations which carry out attacks in India. If that changes, Indian opinion is guaranteed to change. Musharraf & MMS came close to formulating a peace agreement. Had that succeeded, I'm reasonably sure that Indians would have changed their views on Pakistan. It didn't, your PPP government reneged on that agreement (back channel), 26/11 happened & the cycle of violence & hatred endures. Today India is more wary, MMS is a lot weaker & any new government in India will have plenty to do before it bothers itself with a peace push with Pakistan. I believe that for the immediate future, we are unlikely to see much movement on this.

It is important to understand that Pakistan's position vis-a-vis India has progressively deteriorated. In 1999, during Vajpayee's bus yatra, Pakistan was in a much better situation which went downhill after the Kargil war, the coup, 9/11, Parliament attacks (in India) etc. The next time a peace deal was worked on, Pakistan was settling for a lot less. That was in 2004. The change in government in Indian in that year pushed the nascent peace process further back & by 2007 when it was being firmed up, the balance had decisively shifted in India's way. That too didn't work & now in 2013, Pakistan is an even worse position from which to negotiate. The last few years have seen the hardening in Indian position to a point where senior Indian decision makers question the need & the ability(of Pakistan) to make any agreement, arguing that a cold peace is the best we can hope for.

I disagree with a lot of the above. However, we need to move forward. I just wish to hi-light something I have observed and that is pretty much what Mani Shankar Aiyar is also saying. Hence this thread.

Bottom line is that Indians have become proud, and Pakistanis are reactionary. This is what sustains the cycle of mistrust and hate.

I belong to a generation which grew up knowing that Pakistanis were better off than Indians is almost all spheres. That was before Indian government followed Pakistan's Nawaz Sharif government in derugulation. Pakistan faltered because of weak democratic institutions, while India surged ahead because of its more stable institutions. I used to be the most anti-Indian person among my friends. I have come to realize that peace is the most important and precious state. I do not want Pakistan to be over-whelmed by Indian economy, like what I saw in Bangladesh, but I want good relations with India on basis of parity and respect.

My transformation happened slowly and because my understanding of religion evolved to where I was able to put Jihad, peace, and issues relating to modern political thought in Islamic countries in a more proper context.