Madinat al-Muslimeen Islamic Message Board
|07/10/01 at 23:18:20|
|AoA brothers & sisters!!!|
I was just wondering would you like to share your thoughts on what is
going on between India & Pakistan at the moment especially in the
context of the forthcoming summit between the two countries.
Isn't this summit so sudden esp. in the background that India was not
even recognising the military govt. in Pakistan but was the first one to
congratulate Pervez Musharraf when he appointed himself as President?
Some say that actually INdia congratulated him even BEFORE he became the
How interested is US, China & Russia in the outcome of this summit?
Are they going to split up the state of Jammu & Kashmir without even
confiding with the Kashmiri Muslims?
Do you think tri partite solution will work?
What will be the reaction of Kashmiri & Pakistani Muslims especially
the mujahideen groups if Kashmir is "SOLD" over to India or to US?
Will China accept this solution?
Is everything being done because of the US which now wants to surround
If Pakistan plays by the US rules, won't it lose its last remaining
|07/10/01 at 23:38:13|
This discussion needs to be moved to the Ummah Center.
Very interesting topic. I have a lot to say on it. But once it is moved in the right place.
|07/11/01 at 19:09:39|
uh oh... let's see the sparks start to fly...
here we go, get ready for some Anti-Hindustan info...
i just ask that anyone who is replying on this thread, please consider people's feelings. asalaamu alaikum. abdullah,.
|07/12/01 at 01:42:46|
|Isn't this summit so sudden esp. in the background that India was not even recognising the military govt. in Pakistan but was the first one to congratulate Pervez Musharraf when he appointed himself as President? Some say that actually INdia congratulated him even BEFORE he became the president.|
Yes it was surprising to some degree but it was not something that shocked me. I would put it as it mildily surprised me. I think congradulating him when Mushara appointed himself as the President was not all that surprising, because technically he is the President now and so technically they do have to congradulate him. Despite that the Indian government wants the government returned to civilan rule.
How interested is US, China & Russia in the outcome of this summit?
They are not. Everyone will hope in their wildest dreams that India and Pakistan will kiss and make up but everyone knows that it won't happen. It's all rhetoric, these governments will put out statements praising the summit and the efforts made by both countries but it's all rhetoric. It may be that it is the first step for a wish to come true in the future for all parties involved, including US, China, and Russia. Right now even Pakistan and India won't get anything out of it, it is not likely these three governments will either. If India and Pakistan actually achieve something with this summit and have more of these in the future then in the long run of course these three countries will achieve some positive benefits.
Are they going to split up the state of Jammu & Kashmir without even confiding with the Kashmiri Muslims?
I don't think Musharaf is that dumb. If he does that the kashmiris will kill him, and if he escapes the kashmiris then the pakistanis will kill him. If he did that then he wouldn't be able to come back to Pakistan or be alive the next day actually.
Do you think tri partite solution will work?
Nope. Each side won't give in, they haven't before and they won't now. And anyway, kashmiri representatives are not invited to the meeting which has made the kashmiris and their leadership very angry. So it's not a tri partite meeting.
What will be the reaction of Kashmiri & Pakistani Muslims especially the mujahideen groups if Kashmir is "SOLD" over to India or to US?
Anger of course and likely the assasination of Musharaf will follow and the jihad will continue. Kashmir isn't for Pakistan to sell over to anyone. It can be sold over to India but why in the world would it be sold over to the US? What are they going to do with it? They certainly can't/don't want to make it a colony. And they certainly don't want to make it into the 51st state of the US. The public would kill them, and I doubt such an idea has even crossed anyone's mind. Every now and then in the Congress a resolution is killed demanding that Puerto Rico be made the 51st state of the US. They don't want that, why in the world would the want kashmir??? That jus doesn't make sense.
Will China accept this solution? Is everything being done because of the US which now wants to surround China?
What do you mean by this? The US is trying to contain China economically by developing a friendship with them. I don't think it has anything to do with the US.
If Pakistan plays by the US rules, won't it lose its last remaining friend, China?
It has nothing to do with the US or China. What exactly do you mean by that?
I think that India and Pakistan are both trying to be good by showing the US that "look we are trying to come to terms here, so please why do't you lift these sanctions off of us?" And the US will say, "yes you did try" and they are likely to lift the sanctions and impose their hegemony over the region more than ever
This is my guess. Let's see what actually happens.
|07/12/01 at 16:56:16|
Anik, why is it "anti-hindu" to protest at the inhumane atrocities being practiced by the Hindus against innocent muslims in Kashmir ? Would your attitude be different if it was your mother/sister/wife who was gang raped when pregnant, and then gave birth to a son with a broken arm ?
|07/12/01 at 23:42:33|
and let me take a deep breath and say, I am not trying to stir argument,
I love you brothe rin Islam,
but we always pin other religions and say it's the religion,
and when we act, say "judge the people, not Islam"
I think their has to be equity in that concern... and btw I know of accounts from both sides...I just returned from there. asalaamu alaikum. abdullah,..
|07/14/01 at 03:20:51|
|FRI JUL 13 2001 11:07 A.M. G.M.T. |
Kashmir dispute threatens to deadlock Indo-Pakistan summit by Giles Hewitt
NEW DELHI, July 13 (AFP) - This weekend's peace summit between Pakistan and India was flirting with deadlock before it even began Friday, as both sides hardened their stands over the key issue of Kashmir
On the eve of Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf's arrival in New Delhi, he said in an interview published in the Dubai-based Gulf News that any move towards accepting India's sovereign claim to Kashmir would cost him his job.
"Nobody in Pakistan can accept this and expect to stay in power. No leader in Pakistan can do this and expect it," he said.
Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee, meanwhile, told the Press Trust of India that New Delhi's stance on Kashmir as an integral part of its territory stemmed from "the core principles of our nationhood."
The bickering over Kashmir and its position on the summit agenda has exposed the shallowness of platitudes from both leaders about burying the past and looking towards the future.
Ever since Vajpayee extended his summit invitation to Musharraf in late May, both sides have engaged in an indirect war of words over the direction the discussions should take.
For Pakistan there is only one real issue -- the bloody and seemingly intractable territorial dispute over Muslim-majority Kashmir which has been the cause of two full-fledged wars between the now nuclear capable South Asian rivals.
The constant refrain from Islamabad has been that only when the Kashmir issue had been fully addressed can other matters of pressing bilateral concern be scrutinized.
"The main issue is Kashmir," Musharraf reiterated in his Gulf News interview.
"If the Kashmir issue is progressing well, I don't mind progressing up all issues. But nothing can be done at the cost of Kashmir."
India has been equally adamant that Sunday's summit in the Taj Mahal town of Agra should revolve around a "composite dialogue" in which Kashmir would comprise just one element together with issues like nuclear confidence building and trade.
"It (Kashmir) is not the core issue," Indian Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh said Thursday, adding that New Delhi would have nothing new to offer in Agra in the way of proposals on resolving the Kashmir dispute.
Divided between the two countries and claimed by both, Kashmir has been the thorn in the side of bilateral relations ever since the partition of the Indian sub-continent in 1947.
An armed Muslim separatist insurgency in Indian-controlled Kashmir -- which New Delhi alleges is sponsored by Pakistan in the form of a "proxy war" -- has claimed more than 35,000 lives since its launch in 1989, according to official Indian figures.
Pakistan, which puts the death toll at 70,000, denies the charges of "cross-border terrorism" but extends open moral and diplomatic support to the unrest.
In Kashmir itself, which was paralyzed Friday by a separatist-called strike, insurgency-linked violence that has left 123 dead in the past week claimed 16 more lives, police said.
Despite the apparent deadlock over the summit's focus, the mere fact that it is taking place remains a source of some optimism.
Official contact between India and Pakistan has been frozen since a 10-week conflict along the disputed Kashmir border that broke out in May 1999.
In that context, the Vajpayee-Musharraf meet is in itself a breakthrough, but observers fear the haggling over the agenda will nullify the opportunity it presents.
"When both sides go into a summit like this they are bargaining; bargaining internally because of domestic compulsions and with each other," said Kanti Bajpai, a foreign affairs expert at New Delhi's prestigious Jawaharlal Nehru university.
"In public, they should have got out three or four areas they have at least agreed upon for discussion. But even that doesn't seem to have happened," Bajpai said.
Former Indian external affairs minister Natwar Singh said the positive statements that initially followed the announcement of the summit had been negated by the subsequent wrangling.
"I don't think there will be a breakthrough. Our effort now should be to avoid a breakdown."
Copyright (c) 2001, AFP
|07/17/01 at 05:50:52|
|Kashmir issue blocks summit deal |
Pakistan's insistence on focusing on the Kashmir issue led to the two sides failing to reach agreement at the Agra summit, Indian Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh has said.
Indian spokeswoman Pakistan's President, Pervez Musharraf, returned to Islamabad late on Monday night after three days of talks failed to produce a joint statement.
The two countries have fought two wars over Kashmir and the issue threatened to become a nuclear flashpoint in a conflict in 1999.
They are believed to have failed to agree on the wording of a final document that would reflect their divergent positions on Kashmir.
The Indian foreign minister would not say how close they were to an agreement, merely saying: "Complex negotiations and discussions hang by a thread."
But Mr Singh sought to put a positive gloss on the summit saying he was "disappointed but not disheartened".
Correspondents say the enthusiasm and goodwill, which marked the opening of the meeting, were apparently replaced by uncertainty after the opposing views of the two sides received a public hearing.
Kashmir remains at the heart of these differences. India accuses Pakistan of supporting armed militants in the region - Mr Singh refers to the issue as "cross-border terrorism" - but Islamabad denies the accusation.
The last hours of the summit, held in the Indian city of Agra, saw frantic efforts from both sides to reach some form of agreement, and even reports of a draft joint statement being drawn up.
According to Pakistan, the statement was scuppered when India requested changes to the document, and neither side could agree a revised form of words.
In a brief statement, Indian spokeswoman Nirupama Rao said: "I'm disappointed to inform you that although the commencement of a process has taken place... the destination of a joint agreement has not been reached."
However some positive signs did emerge from the meeting, including an agreement that further, regular high-level meetings between the two countries would take place in the near future.
Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee has also agreed to visit the Pakistani capital Islamabad in September or October.
But the BBC's Adam Mynott says these are modest achievements compared to the high hopes for a breakthrough in relations before the summit.
Speaking to the BBC, a leading Indian political journalist warned that the lack of a breakthrough could lead to an escalation of the violence in Kashmir.
"Somehow, nobody expected any failure," said Seema Mustafa. "[The meeting] seemed to indicate that they were moving to a certain degree of peace, but a hard-line view seems to have prevailed," she added.
Violence has flared up in Kashmir since the talks opened on Saturday, with reports of dozens of people killed and injured in heavy fighting between Indian soldiers and Islamic militants.
|Nothing came out of it, surprise, surprise|
|07/18/01 at 05:16:30|
|It turned out just as everyone had guessed: "doom at dawn and love at midnight with occasional break-ups, patch-ups and breakfast," |
hehee... i like that line a lot, especially about breakfast.
Now let's wait and see what happens with the sanctions that were imposed on them.
TUE JUL 17 2001 08:07 A.M. G.M.T.
India, Pakistan peace bid bruised but not broken: analysts
by Palash Kumar
NEW DELHI, July 17 (AFP) - The collapse of summit talks between the leaders of arch-rival nuclear powers India and Pakistan has left their bid for lasting peace in the region badly bruised, but not broken, analysts said.
The consensus among foreign policy experts and media pundits here was 'no' to any suggestion that the summit was a complete failure.
"I don't think there is any reason for such a negative outcry," said Dilip Padgaonkar, editor of the Times of India newspaper.
"There were too many expectations. Two years ago, India and Pakistan were not even talking. Now at least a bilateral dialogue has been initiated," Padgaonkar said.
"They were speaking on such sensitive issues that both sides had to be prudent and cautious which they have been in the outcome. The fact the summit has taken place is positive."
The two-day summit between Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee and Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf was the first for two years and had fuelled hopes of movement towards ending more than five decades of hostility that have included three full-scale wars.
But the summit ended acrimoniously around midnight Monday, after seven hours of negotiations to find a mutually acceptable joint declaration imploded over the thorny issue of Kashmir.
Given the stated positions -- Pakistan considering Kashmir the core issue and India seeking a broad-based dialogue -- defence analyst Brahma Chellaney felt one of the reasons for the collapse of the talks at Agra was too much stress on semantics.
"Both wanted a successful summit on their own terms which just wasn't possible. We spent the entire three days in Agra quibbling over semantics and conceptual differences. Substance was not at the centre of the negotiations," Chellaney said.
"Even if we had managed (to draft a declaration) where would substance have come in?" he said.
Political analyst Anirudh Sinha agreed with Chellaney in saying that the dialogue broke down due to "mutual intransigence and belligerence" which swept aside initial gains.
"Both India and Pakistan will now have to establish a fundamental line of mutual trust from where any further negotiations or a process of dialogue can take off," Sinha said.
Shekkhar Gupta, editor of the Indian Express newspaper, felt there was still plenty of room for optimism.
"The process of dialogue has not broken down. They have just not agreed upon a document," he said. "It can only move on like this because there are very serious problems between the two countries. We should celebrate every incremental shift by both sides."
During the summit, Vajpayee had accepted an invitation to visit Pakistan.
Padgaonkar said the breakdown of the talks had to be placed in their historical context.
"The relationship between India and Pakistan is a rollercoaster ride -- doom at dawn and love at midnight with occasional break-ups, patch-ups and breakfast," he said.
"It is an emotionally charged relationship and that is what we have seen in the outcome," Padgaonkar added.
Observers were agreed that the main gain from the summit in the shadow of the Taj Mahal was that the two leaders had met at all.
"The success of Agra is that it took place. Period," said an editorial in the Indian Express.
"That two nations that had rained ammunition on each other exactly two years ago, actually sat down and tried to arrive at a resolution to a complex hostility is not defeat. It is a beginning, and a brave one at that.
"Agra is now history. But it must not be forgotten. It must be regarded as a small but crucial step in the subcontinent's long trek to a new future."
That theme was taken up by Indian Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh at a press briefing on Tuesday.
"This is not the end of the exercise," Singh insisted.
"The caravan of peace will continue on its march and I have no doubt, on some auspicious day, will reach its destination."
Copyright (c) 2001, AFP
Individual posts do not necessarily reflect the views of Jannah.org, Islam, or all Muslims. All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the poster and may not be used without consent of the author.The rest © Jannah.Org