The Viewer's
Forum is a platform where you can share your views with others on
any particular current issue.
CE
Gen. Musharraf has offered a no-war pact to India and a
mutual reduction in armed forces. How do you view this offer
and how should India
respond to it?
Please
Note
The views in
this forum are from the contributors' perspectives.
The Editor does not necessarily subscribe to the views. Only
those
opinions will be included that bear the name and
country of the sender.
Please
send your opinions at
vf@jang.com.pk
Your
Opinion
- Zain-ul-Islam, you
mentioned that none of your Indian counterparts had a
solid reason to deny the no-war pact. But you never
answered my question as to whether Pakistan is willing to
sign an agreement where they will eradicate all training
camps and any military help to Kashmir. They can provide
moral support. Personally I think that it is a good offer
from Musharraf but he needs to elaborate more on it than
just a "no-war" pact. India still has other
concerns in Kashmir which he never addressed in the
no-war pact. If India signs the no-war pact, it fears
losing its military advantage against Pakistan, which in
turn can help Pakistan to elevate their insurgencies in
other parts of India knowing that they cannot have a full
scale war with India. Also before such an agreement can
be signed, there has to be an atmosphere where there is a
glimpse of trust and hope.
Would China sign such an agreement with Taiwan? Taiwan
would be more than willing to know its only going to help
them since they are the underdogs in the event of a
full-scale war with China. China would never make such a
mistake, as they would lose all leverage against Taiwan
and lose their upper hand in negotiations. Personally, I
would love to see Musharraf's no war-pact statement come
true because we both have too much to deal with
internally that we can ill-afford to spend our money on
weapons. It makes me proud every time I hear India
launches a successful missile and the same night I could
be out on the street looking at the same 5-year-old, in
the dirtiest clothes, asking me for money. I ask my self-
he, this poor little guy is an Indian too, look at him,
we have a nuclear bomb, does he even know that. I just
turn my head and ignore him. It's another sad story in
our world. I just feel we could have used that same money
for so many good things.
Ashish Soni
New York
- Zain-ul-Islam from Norway
has plenty to say regarding the viewers who have written
in the forum. Zain, you think that Pakistan is an
honourable country, why aren't you living there? Is it
because like many who are fleeing Pakistan you can't
trust the leaders of your country to keep their word. No
sane country would sign a no-war pact with Pakistan. Has
Iran?
Abdul Paul
USA
- India has been betraying
the Kashmiris since 1949. The time has now come that they
should allow Kashmiris to decide their future path. Gen
Musharraf has given a goodwill gesture and Indian
authorities should respond positively. But the Indians
are in the habit of betraying the other nations. They
will never accept General's offer as it goes in their
interest. Whenever, there is any political crisis in
India, they raise the question of Kashmir and bluff their
population. General Musharraf is to be congratulated for
giving this goodwill gesture and now it is upto his
Indian counterpart either to accept it or reject it.
Hasan Naqvi
Toronto, Canada
- The move just taken by
General Musharraf is quite understandable. By offering
this peace deal on the one hand he has assured the World
that he is a peace loving man wishing to take whatever
steps are necessary to resolve the key issue of Kashmir
without further bloodshed. In my opinion it is probably
the last chance India has. If they ignore this last peace
initiative she will be doomed and they soon shall
understand what Jihad means to Muslims and what makes us
give our lives in the way of Allah. They must understand
that Muslims, despite differences, have a strong tendency
towards a spending a life in accordance with the
teachings of Islam and freedom is one of them which can
be achieved peacefully by mediation or by Jihad to defend
and to get our rights, that is in our case is plebiscite.
Mohammad Jawad Alam
Pakistan
- To my Pakistani brothers.
Please understand that Akhand Bharat is the foolish dream
of BJP /RSS and not that of the majority of Indians. For
majority of Indians life is spent trying to keep the body
and soul together in abject poverty. We Indians will fool
ourselves if we try to act as big brother with our
neighbours. It should be remembered that size of our
population is the cause of our misery and not glory. The
main aim of every Indian is to improve their standard of
living. Nuclear blasts conducted by BJP to get cheap
popularity is the root cause of our recent tension. The
Kargil episode is the fallout of Indian jingoism after
the nuclear blasts. Lahore bus journey of Atal ji cannot
wash out the mistrust of decades between us. India being
larger has more responsibility to create an atmosphere of
peace. Kashmir problem should be solved by a big-hearted
gesture from us to hold plebiscite in Kashmir. If you
love something you must let it go, if it comes back it is
yours; if not, then it never was. Indians must understand
that in this century the use of brute force and might can
only bring us sorrow. We should have a win-win
relationship with all our neighbours. My message is
simple: remember the Dohas of Kabir and try to act as
responsible citizens of the world. If the CEO of Pakistan
has offered No-War pact, then India should respond
positively. However, knowing the devious minds of our
BJP/RSS government I doubt if such a generous offer will
be accepted. We can only pray to almighty that some day
we will stop this killing of innocent people and live in
peace.
Jyoti Bhattacharya
Calcutta
- Pakistan should never
forget that it has always been the aggressor and always
been the loser. Well, it is up to them to realise that
dreams can never be achieved through bloodshed and force,
and definitely not in the name of RELIGION in this era.
Jehad is a concept of the past and nobody is going to buy
it. Furthermore, even if the Indian Army is brutally
killing people in the valley, it is for the Indian
government and the agencies to check it, not terrorists
who just kill innocent people either because they are
non-Muslims or are unwilling to listen to them, in the
name of religion. In fact, it is disgusting to even label
them as freedom fighters. Instead, Pakistan should check
their activities, so they become a part of a civilised
society.
Mallica
India
- In today's world it is not
necessary to wage a formal war to achieve the desired
results. The requirement now is to have a strong economy
and a balanced foreign policy to apply the pressure for
achieving the desired objectives. As for India is
concerned, especially in relation to Pakistan, she cannot
be relied upon any further. It has always been India to
initiate aggression against Pakistan. Forceful take-over
of Kashmir, Hyderabad, Junagarh and East Pakistan are
bitter examples, which speak of the Indian character and
her designs. Interference in the internal affairs of the
rest of the neighbouring countries is well known to the
world and the countries concerned. Let's work in the
direction of making Pakistan a strong country. This
capability alone is enough to take care of Pakistan's
interest. Let us not waste time in futile exercises. We
should put our house in order and march together as a
united nation to achieve the desired goal.
Tanoli
Pakistan
- Zain-ul-Islam ran out a
brilliant analyses. What he said is mostly true. But Mr.
Zain I too could similarly reason in favour of India,
which would be perfectly logical as yours. The question
is not who is on a higher moral ground. The only question
is: Kashmir is currently divided in two parts. Can any of
the two claimants (India and Pakistan) agree to redraw
borders? The answer is no. This is just not possible in
any case. So either war or bilateral negotiations are
possible. Kargil war and Lahore bus were indicative of
these two options. But both the efforts have failed. Now
what?
Manav
Japan/Indian
- Well, I just want to
elaborate a little on the point made by Mr. Rizwan Ihsan
from Pakistan. He criticised Mr. Musharraf for not
accepting the Lahore Declaration or for blaming the
Sharif government. First of all Nawaz Sharif had never
been a prime minister but a cheater, looter, thug,
plunderer. These four words are apparently enough to
describe him the Sharif family. Whatever Musharraf is
doing now is just for the sake of poor people who had
been starving for a long time. Musharraf is not trying to
increase his bank-balances. Nawaz Sharif just popped in
somehow and got toppled by the strict and judicial
trials.
Rizwan Bashir
Denmark
- I am sure and it is my
belief that one day India will beg of Pakistan for talks
over Kashmir as Israelis begged for talks with Hizbullah
over Lebanon. Hizbullah refused to talk and continued
their struggle and then what happened, Israelis ran away
from Lebanon. That is exactly what will happen in Kashmir
and the fate of Indian dream in Kashmir will not be any
different from their counterparts.
Mujahid
USA
- I would like to respond to
a posting by Piyush from Canada. I apologise for not
knowing Piyush's gender. He/she bemoans "lack of
common sense" in the Pakistani establishment, of
course by "common sense" he/she means that
Pakistan should bow to India's Brahminism in South Asia.
Likewise he/she suggests that the solution to the Kashmir
problem is to give Kashmir to the Brahmins and slaughter
anybody who opposes.
Where Piyush sees a society destined to be a superpower
in quarter of a century, I see a country where women are
being burned alive for practising witchcraft. It is
absolutely true that India has made spectacular strides
in software industry, but it is also true that India has
the world's largest population of illiterate people,
world's largest population of prostitutes, world's
largest population of AIDS sufferers, world's largest
population of Tuberculosis patients, world's largest
concentration of leprosy, world's largest population
living below poverty line, more Indian children will not
live to see their first birthday than any other
nationality on the face of this earth. I have not said
these things out of anger or malice, I can back them up
with credible data, nor do I draw any solace from these
sorry facts.
I simply want Piyush to understand that there is a lot of
diversity in this world and there is no one "common
sense". It is not that we don't have "common
sense", just that Muslim "common sense"
does not have anything in common with the Hindu
"common sense". Piyush, please understand that
it is not an accident that after living together for a
1,000 years, we did not become one people.
Mustafa H. Rizvi
USA
- Such an offer from a weaker
party could be a ploy for propaganda but has no substance
behind. India or no India. We better not waste time and
efforts in such useless activities. It is only from a
stronger position that one can dictate terms. In
relationship between states, it is the rule of the jungle
that prevails. No logic, no niceties! Simple is that. So!
What is the answer? It is very clear. Let's work in the
direction to achieve the desired strength. It would
require putting one's house in order, getting organised
and disciplined to improve upon:
a. Judicial System
b. Governance System.
c. Economy.
d. Foreign Policy.
e. Strong and High-Tech Defense (But incapable of
interfering or taking over own political governments).
f. National Pride and Self Respect.
g. Resolving to face the challenge both at individual and
institutional levels.
It is better to be at a giving end rather than a
receiving one.
Tanoli
Pakistan
- Gen. Pervez Musharraf is a
man of peace and he offered peace to India many times,
but India rejected the peace offer. Now, we should get
Kashmir by force and let India suffer.
Anwer Waseem
Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
- 'No war pact' is an
excellent political statement from Gen. Musharraf.
Pakistan media and government should propagate this pact
at international level through all its resources. Convey
this message to the world that Pakistan is a peace-loving
country and we like no war. If this campaign gets
attention from the world, then Pakistan will get more
friends than foes. Secondly, Pakistan should never
withdraw its political and moral help for Kashmiris at
international level. Plus also send a strong message to
the world that Kashmiris are fighting their own freedom
war with their own resources. Whether or not India signs
this treaty Pakistan will definitely get benefit out of
its "no war pact".
Tahir Aziz
Totonto, Canada
- Without going into
historical details and at the same time visualizing the
contemporary situation logically, it seems that this
offer has bleak future. But at least, it speaks for the
goal, which must have been achieved by now, in order to
uplift this highly poverty-ridden region of the world. On
the other hand this may serve the purpose of a political
move to draw some pressure on Indian government to act
logically instead of presenting childish behaviour. After
making this short opinion I intend to forward my remarks
regarding the thinking of my beloved Indian viewers one
by one.
a) RAVI-SINGAPORE: Let’s talk about the era between
1948-1965, for which I hope that both parties will agree
that the period was free of cross-border terrorism. Was
the problem of Kashmir solved and durable peace achieved
in this era?
b) ASHISH SONI-NEW YORK, ANANTH-USA: Contribution of
logical comments is highly appreciated.
c) Dr RASHID KHAN-AUSTRALIA: Little people talk about
little things. Let’s not be among those people who
are devoid of even a bit of intelligence and build their
opinion on the basis of politically motivated statistics
portrayed by the elements with vested interests. I myself
belong to Sindhi and Muhajir family and enjoy every
opportunity which others are enjoying. Moreover I have
got exceptionally fast friends from Punjab and NWFP.
Please read your statement again and weigh it against
logic.
d) NAVEEN-INDIA: We have forgotten Hyderabad, Junagadh
& Manavadar and East Pakistan. So can you forget
Kashmir for durable peace? Your saying "rules are
same for everyone" is agreed. Annexation of
Hyderabad was made on the basis of Hindu majority in that
state. May I ask that why the same rule was not applied
in case of Junagadh and Manavadar (64% Muslims) and
Kashmir (more than 80% Muslims)?
e) RAMESH-USA: Can you kindly suggest something heavenly
which can build goodwill between two hostile entities
having a burning issue like Kashmir? Secondly, did the
gentleman talks of 50s, 60s and 70s solve the Kashmir
problem even when the clear UN resolutions were present?
f). SURINDER PURI-INDIA: Why don't you reveal this fact
that your PM came Lahore to shelve Kashmir problem in the
form of bilateral issue so that Pakistan should not be
able to internationalise this issue anymore? How can we
expect a man to become so sweet for us who just 8 months
ago after the nuclear tests vowed to attack Pakistan and
threatened to annex it with India?
g). AMOL B-USA Please read the history critically from
unbiased authors and you will come to know that who
forgot the accepted right of self-determination for
Kashmiris? So the habit of forgetting the agreements is
of Indians. Regarding convincing people and parties of
Pakistan I would just say that it is an old habit of
Indian to lengthen the matters by using lame excuses. It
happens where there is no wish and will to solve the
problems.
h) ANIL SHARMA-INDIA/US Dear! Who gave you the authority
to talk about our political problems in such a manner?
People gave him mandate on 12 Oct and Supreme Court gave
him the authority for 3 years.
j) MOHR KHAN-CANADA Yes! You are right that Pakistan
cannot defend herself that is why India ran towards USA
for mediation during Kargil episode. Moreover if you
think we can not defend ourselves then why don't your
government make an attempt to complete her dream of
Akhand Bharat for which she vowed just after nuclear
tests.
k) PRAVEEN-USA Choice of your words for comments does not
reveal the learned and polite background. After all you
have to learn from the language of your leaders.
Language, which your PM used during UN Summit, exhibits
good example. Similarly language usually used by Mr.
Fernandes, Mr. Advani and your media are not the last
examples to be enlightened. I can just quote an Urdu
poetic verse here: Keh Raha Hai Shor-e-Darya Se
Samundar Ka Sakoot Jis Ka Jitna Zaraf Hai woh Itna Hee
Khamoosh Hai
Regarding Vajpayee's visit to Lahore I have replied in
para 'g'. Your saying, "Deeds speak more than pacts
and signatures" is agreed. In the same light let me
say that you exhibited glorious deeds for last 52 years
in case of Kashmir, in case of East Pakistan (1971), and
in case of Siachen Glacier (1984). You say that Pakistan
should stop meddling with India. Basically your country
is very innocent. This was Pakistan, who meddled with
China in 1962, with East Pakistan and with Sri Lanka. I
cannot forget the statement of Mrs. Indira Gandhi, which
she issued after 1971 war that if the same type of
opportunity arises in Pakistan in future then India would
play the same role.
l). SRINIVASA RAGHAVAN-MADRASS Let’s visit your
side. Indian PM said recently in New York, "I am
still a member of RSS and if you get me 2/3 majority, I
will build Ram Mandar at the place of Babri Mosque".
Please check, he may have some different definition of
secularism for world's biggest secular democracy. In
response to the question of contradictory statements by
CE, I would like to request you to compare the statements
of your PM, which he issued after the Indian nuclear
tests and at the Lahore. It was a 180-degree turn around.
Please view your relations critically with all your
neighbours and then decide that who is Hitler. I think
China was never the part of Akhand Bharat so you should
not have any problem with the existence of China. So what
I would like to suggest that please don't use the bogey
of Chinese threat for the sack of getting financial and
military aid from USA & Russia. Even if you think
that China is your enemy then please get your Defence
Minister out of confusion so that he may decide a big
issue of labeling either Pakistan or China as No 1 enemy.
m) ARUN. R-INDIA May I ask "Will India publicly
apologise for East Pakistan tragedy and Siachen, and give
compensation to the Pakistani soldiers’
families?" If answer is in yes then I hope we can
also follow suit.
Until now I have intentionally kept myself away from
Kargil. It was almost in all the comments of my Indian
friends, so I decided to reply it at the end. I have
never read and seen conquerors crying about the wounds,
which they receive during, fight. If you know someone
then please enhance my knowledge also. Your media and
government is shouting like anything that you won at the
Kargil. So dear friends I will request that please keep
the sanctity of your victory and don't cry like losers.
Look at us we are not crying about it. You talk that
first we should stop meddling in Kashmir only then
negotiations may start. If I accept this blame then you
should hold responsible your 700000 Army men who are
unable to cover a border of few hundred Kms. You should
also not forget what your country did with us in 1971 and
1984. So if it is on both sides then why are you crying?
Please face it with courage as we have faced, or sit down
and find a better and durable solution. Moreover please
guide your government to clearly declare that whether
Kashmir is an issue or not because without defining this
fact, if ever the negotiations are held, they will be
fruitless. I think you can be that much efficient to
decide status of Kashmir in 52 years. I am highly
disappointed that none of my Indian friend came up with
solid reason to deny "No War Pact" offer. More
or less they talked about the same things, which their
media and leaders are repeating for the last one year.
There are certain proven facts and I quote here, "As
you sow so shall you reap" and "It takes two to
quarrel". You are facing the results of what you
did. Basically it is not only you or we who start war.
Both parties are involved in it. Let’s think on this
matter positively at least on our individual stage.
Lets start thinking logically and in the right
perspective with the intention of increasing happiness,
peace and well being among the miserable people of this
highly populated region. Every long journey starts from
the first step.
Zain–ul-Islam
Norway/Pakistani
- Mr. Musharraf’s
proposals are like putting the cart before the horse.
No-war pacts and reduction of armed forces come AFTER the
cessation of hostilities not AMIDST raging hostilities.
Moreover, how can Mr. Musharraf offer such serious and
sweeping proposals on his "personal" guarantee?
We all know (as he said in New York "I am
in-charge") that he IS the current "king"
of Pakistan. For that, every body in Pakistan (the news
media or the politicians) takes him seriously and treats
him respectfully - not because of his life of political,
economic, and social contributions - but because of his
army. But will a foreign country like India take him or
his proposal seriously? This is the question the country
should ask first. Does the good General have the mandate
from the people of Pakistan to offer such history
altering plans and proposals?
Mr. Musharraf should either seek the mandate from the
people before he could be taken seriously outside his
country. Or the good General should relieve his shoulders
of this very heavy burden and transfer it to that of an
elected politician of Pakistan. Otherwise all those
"offers" end up in the overflowing trashcans of
rhetoric and more rhetoric.
Nasah
USA
- India is a country from
which one cannot expect peace. India is a terrorist
country self. Therefore General Musharraf should not say
like that!
Ali
Norway
- It’s quite clear the
general was trying to pull off another PR stunt.
Otherwise if he was so sincere, why did he not attend the
Indian PM's speech? Pakistan must realise that its
duplicity will not pay any more dividends. India and the
world at large desire real peace. For those in doubt
about the duplicity of the General, the following article
written by a Pakistani journalist, should be interesting:
http://www.outlookindia.com/20000925/coverstory.htm Pakistan must first show its
intent in action, before taking about peace.
Vijay
USA
- It looks strange that a
"General" who staged the Kargil drama to remove
the elected Government without thinking about the
consequences, is now talking about "No War
Pact". Pakistan was never in danger by anyone except
it's own army Generals, who put Pakistan at risk in 1965,
1971 and 1991 to maintain their grip on the 80% of the
national resources and the lucrative commissions. It's
only an eye-wash. They will never let 80% of the pie go
out of their hands by normalizing relations with India.
Tahir
USA
- Naveen from India should
learn facts before writing. The 50,000 trapped Pakistani
army in the then E. Pakistan fighting against 300,000
Indian army in the west and 100,000 mukti Bahini
(majority Hindus) from the east can in no way kill 3.5
million Muslim brothers in E. Pakistan. Hitler's trained
army in Germany could only kill 5 million Jews over the
period of 6 years and comparing to that fact an army
trapped by the hostile country can kill 3.5 million in
less than two to three months. It does not justify. These
are the Indian lies and cowardly propaganda to cover up
their dirty conspiracies.
Joseph
USA
- To all our friends from
across the border: don't you see yourself when you
mention cross-border terrorism (East Pakistan; Sri
Lanka)? I bet 1 billion people still stand up and
celebrate 1971 war. Well, guess what, our generation will
never forget that period. And for all those who jump up
and down about Pakistan's interference, look at yourself;
does it remind you of Nepal, Bhutan, Sikkim &
Bangladesh? What has become unnerving for you Indians is
that Pakistan is becoming very painful for you in Kashmir
and there isn’t anything you or your big army can do
about it. All you can do now is count your lucky stars
that the West (because of its own interest of getting
real cheap tech workers) is siding you.
Azhar Hussain
USA
- I think our General has got
so many wonderful ideas although most of those are
useless. Now he is offering to sign a "No War
Pact" with India. I am not against the idea but I
wonder what else he can offer to India. He passed so many
orders and Punjabi Janta is very busy misusing his orders
as usual. The Punjabis are using these ordinances as
tools against Muhajirs, Baluchis, Sindhis, Saraikis and
Pushtuns. Our army is very happy that they are getting
rid of corrupt public servants. They should realise that
Punjabis are using Army to fulfil their desires. Army is
being used by Punjabis for kicking off all the other
groups from Public Services of Pakistan.
Haroon Khan
Chicago, USA
- It is a great offer. It is
in the best interests of poverty-stricken people of both
the countries. But alas! Indians are still singing the
same old song of "Atoot-Ang" in this 21st
Century and not ready to implement the UN Charter.
Indians should learn from the history in which Atoot-Angs
of their best Ally (USSR) have created so many
"Angs" that Historians had to re-shape the
World Atlas/Globe. Some Indian friends have acknowledged
plebiscite as per UN Charter; Mr. Sharma and Ramesh have
called Pervez Musharraf an usurper. I think these fellows
are too nosy. They should simply mind their own business
and leave those things for Pakistanis. Let me remind them
that Pakistan by the grace of Allah is not only walking
perfectly but also dares to pay India with the same coin.
So don't take that offer as our weakness. Have some
courage and tell your leaders not to spend money on the
arsenals of destruction; instead spend that money for the
betterment of our people. The world realises that there
is Kashmir issue and is a flash point these days among
two-nations.
Shaukat Chauhan
New York, USA
- Had Nawaz Sharif been
offering the same, he would be termed as an Indian agent.
It is ironic that if politicians initiate such a move our
military directly or indirectly resists it. As they did
it to the Lahore Peace Declaration by embarking on Kargil
conflict. I would like to ask General Musharraf now that
he is so interested in for peace deal with India, what
was the purpose for Kargil conflict and what was wrong in
Lahore Declaration.
Rizwan Ihsan
Pakistan
- I pray for Pakistan all the
time, and hope it will progress and emerge as the most
developed country in the world. Gen Musharraf
doesn’t have to offer such kind of things to India;
its no use. By the grace of ALLAH and HIS PROPHET
MUHAMMED (PEACE BE UPON HIM) nobody neither India nor
U.S.A can harm Pakistan. India is afraid of us and will
be afraid for years and years, so please Mr Musharraf
don't ask them for friendship; I'm sure they'll beg of
you for friendship.
Owais Noorani
USA
- Pakistan has always
proposed the best solutions to the big brother
"India" for the resolution of the persisting
problems between the two countries and India always
responded negatively. The offer of 'no-War pact' and 'The
reduction of 'The Armed Forces' by Gen. Musharraf is
certainly a good proposition but the question is whether
India is going to respect these pacts (i.e first the
Indians must be ready to negotiate and make such
agreement). In the past, they have never kept their word.
The two countries should try and solve the basic problem
which has been persisting since independence and that is
the problem of KASHMIR. Without which both the countries
might even start expanding their armed forces and start a
never ending race of hi-tech. and nuclear weapons.
Mohammed Hassanali
Paris, France
- No war pact! Never! Time is
fast approaching to put Pakistan out of its misery!
Abdul Paul
USA
- No war pact is a stupid
thing to offer. We would have never listened to Clinton
for pulling back the freedom fighters from Kargil. India
would never dare to attack Pakistan; she knows she will
lose Kashmir, Punjab, and the rest of the India will
disintegrate into small rajdhanis like it was prior to
Mughal Emperor Akbar who united India. Let India bleed in
Kashmir, and stay on the icy hell of Siachen and bleed to
death like the Soviet Union, so the choice is for India.
Come to senses and act like a real big brother and let
the Kashmiris decide their own future; stop subjugating
them with raw force that did not helped them in the past
nor will help in future.
Ghazan
Pakistan
- If Mr.Musharraf is so
concerned about peace and stability in the region and if
he really cares about Kashmiris, then instead of offering
a no-war pact and reduction in arms - which by the way he
did to please the world - it will be more useful if he
ask the Hizb to talk to Indian government without the
precondition of involving Pakistan in it. Let him declare
that Pakistan will not interfere if both the Hizb and
India start negotiations and declare ceasefire. Alas! It
will not happen because Musharraf and Pakistan are not
concerned about Kashmir or Kashmiries. As long as the
fire is burning in Kashmir, as long as Kashmiris suffer,
the world will take notice of Pakistan. I hope Kashmiris
will understand this sooner.
Naweed
USA
- We have been listening to
this a lot "Vajpayee made a trip to Lahore by bus to
achieve peace. Why is Pervez Musharraf's offer
better?" I think that the Indians are tuned to
Indian media only. They need to get one point and then
start tossing it over and over again. Yes Vajpayee made a
good move by visiting Lahore. But what he failed to
perceive was that by visiting Lahore just for the sake of
publicity is not sufficient. The root cause of dispute
between India and Pakistan is Kashmir. And I believe that
was the major cause that lead to the Kargil war. How can
we improve peace with India when we know it very well
that they have been involved in terrorising the innocent
people of Kashmir. Why BJP does not agree to conduct a
plebiscite in Kashmir if they are so serious about peace.
Why don't they allow journalists to dig in Kashmir to see
what's the reality? Should we trust BJP the party that
has been responsible for the demolition of the Babri
Mosque? Should we trust BJP, the party that has been
responsible for the rape and killing of Christians in
India? Should we trust BJP the party that has been
responsible for the increase in religious intolerance in
India? How can we trust?
Syed Mohsin Ali Naqvi
Chicago, USA
- As an Indian from the
North-Eastern part of India (which along with Punjab, if
I had to believe the Pakistani newspapers, is dying to
break away from Indian "oppression" for 50
years), I have a few questions to my Pakistani
neighbours. First, how do you expect us to believe your
CEO when your own country has been betrayed by your armed
forces numerous times in the past fifty years? Second,
why is your CEO now so sincere about peace when just less
than two years back he back-stabbed our Prime Minister
(and made him look like a fool in front his countrymen)
who was in a genuine mission to find peace with you?
Three, how do you expect us to believe a General who did
not have minimum decency of accepting the body of your
soldiers who died fighting in Kargil? You should realise
that despite coping with great losses, we and our armed
forces bestowed more honour to your fallen soldiers than
your Generals did. Fourth, to a sceptical Indian it is
easy to understand why Pakistan is offering a
"no-war" pact. After all, with terrorists all
over the world on its payroll, you can afford to do it.
S. Bhasan
USA (Indian)
- In his posting, Mohr. Khan
states that India gave all the land it conquered, back to
Pakistan in 1965 without any concrete benefit in return.
Mr. Mohr. Khan needs to read the account of 1965 war on a
web site run by "Times of India". Even by
India's account India was not the victor in the 1965 war.
I think Mohr would be glad to learn that India got back
1600 square miles of territory from Pakistan in return
for only 400 square miles of territory returned to
Pakistan. Most of the territory India won was in Sindh
desert. Pakistan won prime land in
Punjab and Kashmir.
Mustafa H. Rizvi
USA
- It looks common sense has
always been an absent commodity in Pakistan's Government.
One can not build a sturdy structure on faulty
foundation. Why does the current (previous too) Pakistani
government keep harping on the same proposal again and
again? If they are really interested in the peace, the
solution is very simple - ban and prosecute Lashkar-T,
Hizbul-M and other outfits like those and stop the
nonsense that military is the only institution which can
stabilise the country. What an irony, whatever Pakistan
is going through and has gone through in past is only
because of its Generals only. Has anyone heard a term of
Institution's Self-Correcting Mechanism - this is what
happened in USA in 30s and 40s and this is what is taking
place in India, Bangladesh and lots of other developing
countries. Today BD stands much better image-wise in
International arena than Pakistan. The Pakistan
establishment must give it a thought. The world is
marching forward and Pakistan is marching towards 400
A.D. Just one suggestion of mine can improve the image of
Pakistan 100 times and that too in just a couple of
weeks. All Pakistani media should stop editorial, opinion
and letters for two weeks because the world sees Pakistan
through these pages only. These pages make me puke
because they are so repetitive, very poor in quality,
very lengthy, devoid of any logic - except everywhere
these writers see conspiracies, providing solutions for
every problems world is facing. Very often this make me
think of a saying - Chirag taley Andhera.
Let me end this letter by asking why doesn't Pakistan
Establishment hold a referendum in Pakistan about joining
back with India. The result may surprise my lot of
learned writer and readers of this paper. If Pakistan
becomes one of India's provinces at least Bihar will
become a very reputable state of India.
Piyush
Canada
- Why can't Pakistan and
India be good friends like many other countries?
Nilson Sizz
Norway
- There is no point talking
about a no-war pact and the General very well knows it
wouldn't be accepted and he'd blame India for it. The
General should show sincerity in his deeds rather than in
words. Tell him to stop the cross border terrorism first
and talk about peace later.
Ravi
Singapore
- We should tell the Indians,
Americans and Chinese that we are no more a part of their
power game and they should play it away from our borders.
This one-way action will help us learn something about
the realities and there is a possibility we may be able
to overcome our problems. Offering no-war pacts to a much
bigger adversary is an act of self-deceit and it has not
paid us in the past and it will continue to fail us in
the future.
Muhammad Ahsan Yatu
Pakistan
- Well that's great! I think
India should sign the no-war pact so we both can elevate
our economies, but then will Pakistan sign "a
no-terrorism support" with India. It can provide
moral support but no training camps. I wonder if Pakistan
is willing to do that in return for a "no-war"
pact.
Ashish Soni
New York
- I think so. The
manufacturers of War equipment make good money with
Indian-madness, because Indian leaders are daydreaming of
becoming a superpower. Such warlike situations are good
for countries that sell their weapons.
Nasser
Germany
- Mr Srindahr suggested that
India and Pakistan merge and become one country. I would
just like to say if you Indians really believe that you
cant survive without Pakistan, we are ready to take you
as our fifth state.
Khalid Chohan
Chicago
- I am sorry to ask but what
else Pakistan has got to offer? Now Pakistanis especially
Punjabis are very busy Baluchis, Muhajirs, Sindhis and to
some extent Pushtuns. Under these circumstances, it is a
good idea to make peace with India so that Punjabis
should be able to crush other Pakistanis, kick them out
of Public Services and close the doors of all the
opportunities.
Dr Rashid Khan
Australia
- Everybody knows the
mentality of Indians. If you look at India's history,
always an outsider invaded India and ruled. There is no
need to offer such favours. After the nuclear test India
talks in different tone and sometimes says China is their
enemy number 1 and sometime Pakistan, but after
Pakistan's nuclear test they again talk politely. Indian
army is so powerful and brave that they can't free some
peaks from a limited number of people and in the end they
are begging help of the USA.
Asif
USA
- Gen. Musharraf in his
speech at the UN summit, quoted that more than 70,000
innocent people were killed by 700,000 Indian troops in
Kashmir, and later at a different meeting "He
suggested that bitterness of the past should be buried
and replaced with cooperation for the future". (with
reference to Bangladesh). Why can't Pakistan forget the
UN resolutions of holding a plebiscite in Kashmir and
start cooperating with India on lots of issues? Why cant
they forgive the Indians for killing 70,000 people (not
to mention the fact that they want Bangladesh to forget
the killing of 3,5 million innocent Bengalis) and move
forward. The rules of the game are same for everyone and
the day Pakistan starts realising that, there will be a
solution for Kashmir.
Naveen
India
- Let Pakistan learn to walk
before it can run. Stop all cross-border terrorism or
giving moral support to militants (as Pakistan puts it).
Establish free trade to benefit both countries. Build
goodwill & then introduce no-war pact. It is in the
interest of both countries or for any country to have
peace. Sit down and talk like gentlemen about Kashmir in
the spirit of give and take.
Ramesh
USA
- "No war pact",
Common defence", No first attack",
"Abstaining from using forces", and so on are
excellent ideas offered by Chief Executive. These are
very practical not only for Pakistan by also for India.
Whenever and wherever there is war, it creates lots of
problems and economic crises. We cannot bear a big budget
for defence. Govt. of Pakistan should activate local and
international media to explain that we want peace in the
region, in the world. India should accept this reality
and must start the talks with a clean heart. If both
India and Pakistan meet with clean hearts, we will get
results. We should pray to ALLAH that this works.
Mohammad Tayyab Khan
Kuwait
- As usual India will never
respond positively; India still dreams of Pakistan to be
part of Akand Bharat. So peace offer from Pakistan is
just as news bulletin from any one of their own states.
They know that Pakistan will never invade or initiate war
in the Indian territory, as Pakistan is itself a peaceful
country, and faces too many internal and external
problems. Pakistan should strive towards peace and offers
for positive dialogue as it is the need of time, and to
survive amongst international community.
Feroz Afridi
Doha Qatar
- It is indeed a most
positive offer from Gen. Musharraf to which India must
respond positively. The acceptance of this offer by India
will definitely pave the way for peace and tranquillity
among the people of both the countries always sitting on
the dynamite for the last five decades. But India will
not accept this offer because of the short-sightedness of
Indian leaders who always consider the disputed Kashmir
as their integral part. Unless, dialogue between India
and Pakistan on the Kashmir issue is initiated, the
General's offer for no-war pact and reduction in the army
will be a myth.
S.Abdul Waheed Bukhari
Pakistan
- Gen. Musharraf should have
come to know by now that offering no-war pact and arms
reduction to India is of no worth. I do admire his
thinking of bringing peace to the region but what can one
do when the other side is not ready to accept any such
plan? We have to keep in mind that Indian thinking is
flying high because of the latest American interests in
their country. So they are not willing to accept these
offers. Indian authorities and a few people are having
this wrong idea that now Pakistan is suffering from bad
economy, and it cannot sustain any war with India. So to
buy time to recover from its problems Pak govt. is
offering these peace plans. To answer this Gen. Musharaf
should stop these offers and put all his efforts to
restoring Pakistan's economy and to the welfare of its
people. Nothing to mention that stand on Kashmir issue
should remain strong and according to the will of the
people of Pakistan.
Maqsood A. Qureshi
Kuwait
- It is really a bold step
taken by General Pervez Musharraf which will lead to
peace and prosperity of the two countries. India should
not respond in her old traditional way; it should rather
give a positive response this time. The reduction in
mutual armed forces will provide an opportunity to spend
the extra budget on development of the social life of the
poor people, although they don't have anything to kill
their hunger yet they have atomic bomb for the
destruction of humanity.
Iqbal Munir
Japan
- I think Gen. Musharraf is
trying his best for Indo-Pak peace but in my view we
should not accept any friendship from Hindus. At present,
BJP is trying to get 3/4 majority in the parliament and
after that they can dream for Akhand Bahrat, therefore
please be prepared and work for a strong Pakistan only.
Ayub
Canada
- Vajpayee made a trip to
Lahore by bus to achieve peace. Why is Pervez Musharraf's
offer better? Why does it make more sense? It was he who
destroyed the peace moves that were being made by India.
His credentials have become suspect. He did not show
sincerity to even his own soldiers and refused to claim
the bodies of the dead of his army. How can India believe
that he is sincere in his offer to a country he views as
'enemy'? He has believed in 'keep doing and keep denying'
when it comes to proxy war. He needs to sweat and feel
where it hurts. It is easy to announce a lot of plans for
the eradication of poverty. Let us see from where he gets
the money to do it. His desperation is understandable, as
he will soon have to prove his achievements to his own
countrymen. Kashmir is a millstone around the neck of all
Pakistani rulers, as they cannot get it and cannot ignore
it. After all, they have promised moon to their own
people. The heat is on and Pakistan has even advertised
the rules for the export of nuclear material. What is
next Mr CEO?
Surinder Puri
India
- India cannot keep up with
promises. They could not keep their promise they made 53
years ago- to hold plebiscite in Kashmir. Why does
Musharraf think that any talk or any other agreement with
India will be honoured by India. One cannot trust a
Bannia. We have a saying that "Banniya ka baita jab
girta hay to kuch daikh kar hi girta ha".
Mumtaz
USA
- There is nothing new about
the offer of "No War Pact". Nawaz Sharif had
offered Lahore peace process. Previous rulers had offered
Shimla accord. The problem with all these peace offers is
that the moment the ruler in Pakistan changes, everyone
forgets about all the accords. Musharraf doesn't need to
convince Indian leadership of the No War pact. He should
first convince his own people and the political parties
which are going to succeed him. If he can convince them,
only then can India seriously think about any peace offer
of Pakistan. Otherwise, we don't want another Kargil-like
situation immediately after Lahore process.
Amol B
USA
- I think India and Pakistan
should merge to become a one country.
Sridahr
India
- Isn't this the same Gen.
Musharraf who subverted Pakistan's constitution and now
rules Pakistan without seeking a public mandate? Isn't
this the same Gen. Musharraf who started the Kargil war
and blatantly lied about the identity of encroachment
atop Kargil mountaintops? Why, he can be at war and not
at war at the same time! And maybe his plan to reduce
armed forces is just to call Pakistani regular 'freedom
fighters' like he did during the Kargil war. This is a
person that both India and Pakistan should be concerned
about. The General doesn't have the authority to reduce
armed forces without seeking the approval of the
Pakistani people. I hope Pakistanis find the courage to
take back control of their country from this usurper.
Anil Sharma
India/US
- India should not fall for
General Sahib's no-war pact. General Sahib knows very
well that Pakistan cannot defend itself against India,
with its poor economic condition. It has no money to
maintain its defense forces for long period of time.
Pakistan wants to buy time, get its house in order and
then ferment trouble for India. India should not make the
same mistake as it made in Tashkent where it gave away
all the land it won in 1965 war without any concrete
benefit in return. Therefore, this offer of No-War pact
is hogwash and carries no advantage for India.
Mohr. Khan
Toronto, Canada
- India should respond
positively to Gen. Musharraf's offers. The General
appears to be more sincere now than before, given the
changed world situation. India should immediately stop
all missile-testing programmes and should end its missive
development. It should destroy all nuclear warheads and
accept friendship with Pakistan. It should also commit a
no-war pact for at least a decade. And India should sign
the CTBT first so that Pakistan will follow suit.
Cheng Son Nan
Taiwan
- So how can a country like
Pakistan be trusted? If the leader of the so-called Hindu
nationalist party could come all the way to Lahore,
recite passionate poems about friendship and the wish for
no-war, and better still, if he could visit the
Minar-e-Pakistan, and proclaim that a successful Pakistan
is in India's interest, and after all that you do a
Kargil on India, how do you so naively expect that India
will believe Pakistan anymore? If India offers a hand of
friendship and you cannot accept that, why should India
accept your proposals? It is easy to sign a no-war pact
and then wage a proxy war by sending in terrorists. Since
you have reneged on your promises of friendship, what
should India's premise be, to believe Pakistan? If the
Kargil effort of Pakistan had succeeded, would you have
offered talks? You are doing so only after testing the
fact that India is serious about defending every inch of
her borders in J&K and that there is no way you can
defeat India militarily. After learning these rude
lessons of reality, you want to talk anywhere anytime,
and offer a no-war pact. Stop your proxy war now. Deeds
speak more than pacts and signatures.
In Pakistan, the warring factions are the army in
collusion with the rich politicians, and the masses. That
is the war. Your masses have lost. It seems that Pakistan
was just a convenient creation of the top power-hungry
brass to perpetuate themselves, and they have proved it
in 53 years. Stop the war against your poor. Sign that
no-war pact first. If Pakistan stops meddling with India
and learns to live like a good neighbour, any reasons for
war automatically go away. You don't need artificial
instruments like a no-war pact. You will sign it and then
get bolder and wage more proxy wars anyway, just like you
thought you could get away with Kargil in the false
security of your nuclear weapons. A no-war pact is an
exercise in futility given Pakistan's track record.
Praveen
USA
- Excellent idea! We should
all pray to Allah that these plans work as the government
has taken excellent steps.
Mashood Yunus
USA
- It is one of the old things
done by our Foreign office in the past since they can
suggest nothing new. They can talk about such gimmicks.
For these two countries that cannot even hold talks, for
them it is a far-fetched idea which has no connection
with reality. Mr. Sattar should make the leader of Nation
speak some thing new and away from the beaten track.
Obviously India can reject the idea; it will never accept
it. First of all we need to come on a Diplomatic Platform
with a credibility and then talk of these things. When we
say Kashmir is a core problem and such declarations can
not bring any dividend home except keep the Nation busy.
Let us talk something new which can be called a smart
move and difficult to reject. It must at least attract
the world opinion!
Mahmood
Lahore, Pakistan
- "No-war pact" is
wonderful for all the nations in the world but who will
believe somebody who breaks his own country's
constitution instead of obeying it and goes home when
retired.
Abdul Ghaffar Khan
Saudi Arabia
- A no-war pact in my opinion
will not be accepted by India, at this juncture. A
serious threat lies to India's security because of
gun-wielding Kashmiri militants who are backed by
Pakistan. To counter this, if the situation in the
Kashmir valley becomes unmanageable, or if it leads to a
limited war between militants and the Indian security
forces, then India will have to seriously consider the
option of attacking the militant base in Pakistani-held
Kashmir. This would eventually bring in the Pakistani
army to war. India is aware that Pakistan cannot afford
to withdraw its claim on Kashmir.
Ananth
USA
- The problem with General
Musharraf is his credibility. In a bid to impress upon
the world that he is a peace-loving leader and that he
wants peace with India, he is trying all sorts of tricks.
The call for no-war pact is for the consumption of the
international audience while the call for jehad and
nuclear war is for his domestic audience. Ultimately, he
has to return to Pakistan and face the mullahs, so one
can imagine which of the two will be his true posture.
India has long been used to such contradictory statements
emanating from the Pakistani establishment and will treat
it with indifference. Given the history and birth of
Pakistan and, later the Bangladesh debacle, it is wishful
thinking to expect that Pakistan will EVER be comfortable
co-existing with India. It is almost like Hitler calling
for a no-war pact with Russia and we know that piece of
history now.
Pakistan has to accept that no matter how much the forces
are reduced, India will remain militarily superior to
her. It is ridiculous to expect a huge nation like India
to allow herself to be weakened. Unlike Pakistan, India
has an equally hostile China to worry about and also
India doesn't employ terrorists as reserve army as
Pakistan did in Kargil. As an Indian I will be more
comfortable with a hostile Pakistan than a Pakistan that
indulges in double-speak.
Srinivasa Raghavan
Madras, India
- If this has been said with
all sincerity then it should work. If this is just an
eyewash statement/rhetoric for the consumption of the
western press like the ones saying, "Pakistan
military was not directly involved in the Kargil
fiasco" or that Pakistan does not directly support
the "Mujahedeen groups" operating in Kashmir,
then we all know what this all means.
If the government in Pakistan is able to cut down the
budget and the number of armed forces then it will be a
major step, since this will mean that quite a few
dollars/rupees can be freed to spend on the education and
health and uplift of the poor in the country. Will this
reduction, by the way, also mean that the perks and
spending on the "military brass" will be
reduced as well? It was quite interesting to note that
General Musharraf denied this fact on the Q&A with
Riz Khan on the CNN that the Pakistani generals were the
highest paid. Well probably not in terms of the dollar
value but in terms of perks, etc., at comparable levels
they are really pampered.
Kamran Niaz
Pakistan
- 'No war pact', 'common
defence', ' no first attack', 'abstaining from using
force' and so on are not new ideas. They have been
offered before and the Indian response is also well
known. Suppose India agrees this time to join some kind
of these pacts then are we going to trust them? Didn't
India sign the UN resolution granting right of
self-determination to Kashmiris? When Nehru was saying
publicly that if Kashmiris would opt to part with India
we would accept their decision with dignity; at the same
time wasn't he sending more and more troops there to
suppress the demand for self-determination? After signing
that no party will try to alter the 'Line of Control' by
force, who occupied the Siachen Glacier? Did a 'No war
pact' stop Hitler from attacking Russia? The truth is
that these type of pacts do little to stop wars. Only
justice which in turn will generate mutual respect and
trust will stop armed conflicts. India refuses to talk,
refuses to admit that there is some dispute to be solved,
refuses to honour its commitment witnessed by the UN,
refuses any type of mediation, refuses to accept any kind
of court that could give impartial decision or opinion on
the dispute, and then you have an offer of NO WAR PACT!
Absurd! It is OK only as a political manoeuvre.
P.S. Balance of power is a better guarantee or peace.
Mohammad Anar
Dubai, UAE
- Chief executive's offer was
really good and very practical not only for Pakistan but
also for India. This is the need of the time that all the
issues with India and our internal problems are solved.
We don't want any more wars with India, which create more
problems and economic crises for us. Pakistan cannot bear
this big a budget-spending on army except to spend on
increasing the quality of life of the people. Pakistan
Government should overhaul its local and international
information media and make it more effective to explain
to the world that we want peace in the region and India
is always denying to do so. If we effectively able to
convey our valid point of view to the world then India
will face the international pressure. No country will
survive having International pressures especially in this
era. If we are able to clear our position then India has
no other solution and will definitely come to the
negotiating table. The Government should immediately
start democracy in the country for getting recognition
and favour from the world.
Tahir Ahmad
Lahore, Pakistan
- I feel that this is just
old wine in a new bottle. First ask him to control the
terrorists, then publicly apologise for Kargil, atone for
Kargil by paying compensation to the Indian soldiers
families and then we shall see about talks. Otherwise
forget it.
Arun.R.
India
Send this page to a friend!
The News International
Pakistan