AgNoStiC MuSliM
ADVISORS
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2007
- Messages
- 25,259
- Reaction score
- 87
- Country
- Location
Its a central issue between India and Pakistan - that does not mean that there is no focus on socio-economic development. You are taking an isolated quote and twistign it out of context.I agree that this is a belief I personally have held /possibly still do (just not the way you describe it). One of the reasons for this is the repeated statements by Nawaz Sharief/Musharraf that people of Pakistan won't let me settle Kashmir issue. Or that this is the "central issue"
I'm sorry, but this rationale above is absurd. You are pulling these 'percentages' and 'choices' out of your *** really.The way I understand it is that if there is a party that offers 15% GDP growth and making LoC the international border and another party that offers 0% growth to economy while maintaining status quo in Kashmir, people will always pick option 2. Since everyone knows this, the only position offered to Pakistani people is option 2.
Now cost of option 2 vs option 1 is debatable. It clearly does not
cost Pakistan a 15% growth rate decrease, but it is still not zero either. (Neither is it for India).
Kashmir falls under foreign policy, development and progress under domestic affairs. No leader (save Bhutto' rhetoric with the nuclear program - arguable shaped as an existential choice) has argued that the choice is between Kashmir and development - they are two different issues, and politics in Pakistan always boils down to the bread and butter issues, since the political parties have largely similar positions on Kashmir.
Your 'explanation' above is a classic example of Indian 'myth making' or 'brainwashing' in an attempt to denigrate Pakistan.
A very flawed analysis, but it has been discussed elsewhere on several thread so lets not turn this thread into another FATA/Swat thread.Another reason for my belief is the way Pakistan was actively losing areas in the West while trying to gain land in the East. The troops should have been in the West for a long time since land was being lost to Taliban, but Pakistan delayed because Kashmir was more important than NWFP.
There have been a variety of reasons behind not shifting troops into the West, and not all of them have involve India. If you have followed the discourse over the events in the North West with any regularity then you should know that.
Last edited: