Thread: Future of afghanistan

Sorry for going of the topic i jsut wanted to express my views

With the rapidly growing economy and evthin well i dont think any sane indian even a politicial will want a war with PAK.In fact every indian and most prob pakistani wants good relations between india and PAK.Frnkly at least educated indians should maintain their stand of peace and not hate the pakistanis.If evone thinks like Y should we let PAK enter ASEAN .. dude at least one side has to take teh first step.If we take 2 steps towards peace the other side has to take one to save its face. Evone needs good relations with the international community. Even US dsnt like making strong enemies.
We should be more otimistic about it rather than returning what they do to us.
Definitely Terrorism should be dealt with strongly and i think indian army is doing a better job day by day..its clearly visible frmt rapid decrease in cross border instrusions this year.

Lets make a good beginning.Our future generations need enmity and not war.

Tarek,
No I'm not emotional. India and Pakistan has so much gone down for the last 50 odd years. Though we know peace can bring its own dividents, the majority of the people on boh sides are still not convinced about each other.

For instance, the main reason for PM Manmohan's trip to USA (UN) is to press India's inclusion in to UNSC. He was also supposed to meet Pakistani President Musharaff. Now, when a Pakistani minister says that they'll fight tooth and nail and oppose India in UNSC, I dont know how cordial the meeting is gonna be.

It simply doesnt add together, on one hand they oppose us tooth and nail in an international forum, on the other hand they want us to allow them in to a powerful regional forum.

Ray Sahab,
As usual, you ended with a nice poem. Although its intresting to note that a sufi saint sang about Eshwar and Rama. I do know that Kashmiris were by large peacuful before 1989. Its the imprted ones that did much damage by religionizing Kashmiris and their cause.

Originally Posted by Jay

Tarek,
No I'm not emotional. India and Pakistan has so much gone down for the last 50 odd years. Though we know peace can bring its own dividents, the majority of the people on boh sides are still not convinced about each other.

For instance, the main reason for PM Manmohan's trip to USA (UN) is to press India's inclusion in to UNSC. He was also supposed to meet Pakistani President Musharaff. Now, when a Pakistani minister says that they'll fight tooth and nail and oppose India in UNSC, I dont know how cordial the meeting is gonna be.

It simply doesnt add together, on one hand they oppose us tooth and nail in an international forum, on the other hand they want us to allow them in to a powerful regional forum.

Ray Sahab,
As usual, you ended with a nice poem. Although its intresting to note that a sufi saint sang about Eshwar and Rama. I do know that Kashmiris were by large peacuful before 1989. Its the imprted ones that did much damage by religionizing Kashmiris and their cause.

i hope our PM talks about the deal .. where PAK supports letting us enter UNSC. and we let them in the regional forums.But i sincerely feel pakistan is not strong nough to affect our entrance into the UNSC.If the chineese say yes.( since even many in chineese strong positions do suppport increased indian role in UN. and so on..).Pak is definitely out of a big ally. And yes They couldnt even get their F16s they paid for how the hell are they gonna influence Us about indian entrance in UNSC. the americans always think about themselves
Clearly they cant really affect our admission into UNSC. for a permanent seat.
so at least indians can rest down and relax its all in our hands and so its up to us wether we show a good gesture by allowing them into ASEAN etc. or keep the enmity intact.

And yes i dont think PAK President can be so blunt to mention that they will oppose in out PMs face teh indian UNSc claim as then they can never ask indians to let them in regional forums and expect the request to be met.They really have very limited options.

Jay

Please be serious, UNSC membership has not accrued to any member because they or their leadership "Pressed" for it in a single session. Pakistan and Indian, along with the kashmiri (who rightfully curse the both of us) are party to a territorial conflict - a conflict that is being pursued with arms, and with acts of terror, to add spice, the two counties involved are nuclear powers and have displayed the maturity of teenagers.

You really imagine that any Pakistani government could support Indian UNSC membership and veto rights, while out standing armed conflict and conflicting territorial claims abound, while there remains unnegotiated the range and depth of access to economy, remains unnegotiated the leagl frame work to serve as foundation??

Negotiations are not surrender or national interests, they are a furtherance of those interests -- Indian UNSC membership, OK, does that mean India would like support of Pakistan? If yes, how does it propose to define and win this support? Has it proposed a larger security concorde of which the Pakistan is public is ignorant of?

You need to get real and give the matter some thought - Just as UNSC membership is not some legacy, neither was the case that a "veto" in ARF and ASEAN existed - all policy options are designed to accrue a range of benefits, ofcourse in changing strategic dimensions, some policy options no longer accrue "positive" dividends.

Originally Posted by tarek

Jay

Please be serious, UNSC membership has not accrued to any member because they or their leadership "Pressed" for it in a single session. Pakistan and Indian, along with the kashmiri (who rightfully curse the both of us) are party to a territorial conflict - a conflict that is being pursued with arms, and with acts of terror, to add spice, the two counties involved are nuclear powers and have displayed the maturity of teenagers.

You really imagine that any Pakistani government could support Indian UNSC membership and veto rights, while out standing armed conflict and conflicting territorial claims abound, while there remains unnegotiated the range and depth of access to economy, remains unnegotiated the leagl frame work to serve as foundation??

Negotiations are not surrender or national interests, they are a furtherance of those interests -- Indian UNSC membership, OK, does that mean India would like support of Pakistan? If yes, how does it propose to define and win this support? Has it proposed a larger security concorde of which the Pakistan is public is ignorant of?

You need to get real and give the matter some thought - Just as UNSC membership is not some legacy, neither was the case that a "veto" in ARF and ASEAN existed - all policy options are designed to accrue a range of benefits, ofcourse in changing strategic dimensions, some policy options no longer accrue "positive" dividends.

U r rite But how much can the pakistani effort effect our chances.Tehy cant influence the AMEricans to get their F16s The chineese consider pak as a distraction they created for india .They surely wont listen to pak for supporting / opposing indian claim.

Thats what i meant and that deal for PAK support was just a joke .. LOL..though i would realy appreciate if our relations go good nough that pak supports our claim..

wont it be good.

And as far as Legacy of UNSC is conserned Chineese are threatening Taiwan for decades now and they still hold their seat.. Welcome to the new world .It dsnt run completely on ethics power plays a big role.Look at Americans they didnt need UN support for IRAQ.Or better though they created it. Yes all policy options are designed to give more benefits they normally give mor benefit to the more powerful party. Thats the way the world works.Its an old saying in my native language hindi.
"jiski laathi uski bhais"

i.e. he who has the (bamboo) stick in his hand owns teh buffalo.(as he can hit her and thus control her).

Tarek,

A Pakistan govt can pres for India's membership.

But the 'awam' back home will not let it last another day.

Kasuri in an interview to the Doordarshan said so in very guarded words.

"They surely wont listen to pak for supporting / opposing indian claim."
Then why get bent out of shape over this ??

"Chineese are threatening Taiwan for decades now and they still hold their seat.. Welcome to the new world .It dsnt run completely on ethics power plays a big role."

Nothing new world about this - now Chinese are not involved in any armed hostility, nor were they involved when UNSC membership was granted, and you seem to have forgotten the "One China" statements thqat continue to mark Chinese good behaviour.

Listen, no need to to be emotional, UNSC membership is not Pakistan's to give or not give - Mr. Blair's statement is there for all to see, he supports India in the UNSC and "as the years pass" the case for india will grow stronger.

I don't know why some choose to deal with this issue arrogantly - You gotta give to get - this is a crude way of saying that there has to be a general concord between India and it's neighbors and it is not in the interests of anybody to allow the "years pass" - it little feeling and a lot more thinking, that what is required.

Ray - under the present circumstances, certainly -- what is the rush suddenly, the talks have yielded, well, not much, when the talks actaully do present movement, actually do begin to fully represent HOPE, I think the people on all sides of the border will be very quick to point out the advantages -- a lot of work remains to be done - A India on the UNSC that can look out for core Pakistani interests and a pakistan that can ensure the obstacles to the develoment of Indian trade and security continue to attenuate, well, sure - lets talk about it, lets see what we can work out, the issue of kashmir needs to be dealt with such that the satisfactiuon of the kashmir is paramount, after all, we all want ot avoid "local nationalism" from continuing to mar the march of great nations.

Originally Posted by tarek

"They surely wont listen to pak for supporting / opposing indian claim."
Then why get bent out of shape over this ??

"Chineese are threatening Taiwan for decades now and they still hold their seat.. Welcome to the new world .It dsnt run completely on ethics power plays a big role."

Nothing new world about this - now Chinese are not involved in any armed hostility, nor were they involved when UNSC membership was granted, and you seem to have forgotten the "One China" statements thqat continue to mark Chinese good behaviour.

Listen, no need to to be emotional, UNSC membership is not Pakistan's to give or not give - Mr. Blair's statement is there for all to see, he supports India in the UNSC and "as the years pass" the case for india will grow stronger.

I don't know why some choose to deal with this issue arrogantly - You gotta give to get - this is a crude way of saying that there has to be a general concord between India and it's neighbors and it is not in the interests of anybody to allow the "years pass" - it little feeling and a lot more thinking, that what is required.

Ray - under the present circumstances, certainly -- what is the rush suddenly, the talks have yielded, well, not much, when the talks actaully do present movement, actually do begin to fully represent HOPE, I think the people on all sides of the border will be very quick to point out the advantages -- a lot of work remains to be done - A India on the UNSC that can look out for core Pakistani interests and a pakistan that can ensure the obstacles to the develoment of Indian trade and security continue to attenuate, well, sure - lets talk about it, lets see what we can work out, the issue of kashmir needs to be dealt with such that the satisfactiuon of the kashmir is paramount, after all, we all want ot avoid "local nationalism" from continuing to mar the march of great nations.

well said.