- Ignore Kashmir, as the United States does, and the conflict seems incomprehensible. Include Kashmir in the picture, and it all makes sense.
- This confrontation ravages Afghanistan, where the Northern Alliance, which was organized to fight the Taliban, is backed by money and weapons from India.
- The United States still sets much of the global agenda. If it hopes to salvage any remotely positive outcome from its massive, nine-year-old war in Afghanistan, then it should move a resolution over Kashmir up on its list of priorities.
Mohsin Hamid has written a brilliant article in the Washington Post describing the deep rooted reasons for the war in Afghanistan. This has been brought up several times, and the Obama Administration tried to focus on it in the beginning. Bruce Riedel before he showed his true Indophile colors also wrote extensively–on resolving Kashmir.
That agenda was lost. The US needs to refocus on resolving Kashmir so that the Bharati occupation of Kashmir ends. The Kashmiris recognize this and this months rebellion by the Pro-Pakistani majority in Kashmir speaks volumes about what the Kashmiris want.
LAHORE — The United States is struggling to implement a strategy for Afghanistan that will improve the lives of the Afghan people and allow U.S. troops to go home. Part of what makes it so difficult is the way Washington views the conflict: through the lens of what officials have dubbed “AfPak,” a war in the southern part of Afghanistan and the adjoining border areas of Pakistan. Though the acronym is falling out of official favor, the AfPak mind-set remains.
A different shorthand for the war might help. “AfPInd” may be less catchy, but it is far more useful. Peace in AfPInd requires not U.S. troops on the ground, but a concerted effort to bring India and Pakistan to the negotiating table, where under the watchful eyes of the international community they can end their hydra-headed confrontation over Kashmir.
But that’s not how the United States sees this conflict. Mutual mistrust has bedeviled the U.S.-Pakistani alliance since the Afghan war began in 2001. Certain suspicions surfaced again recently in military documents revealed by WikiLeaks alleging that members of the Pakistani intelligence agency collaborated with militant groups fighting the United States in Afghanistan. Both Pakistani and U.S. officials have said that the information is old, unreliable and not true to the situation on the ground. Yet the recriminations and controversy have a “here we go again” feel. After all, we’ve seen this pattern before.
In 1947, when Hindu-majority India and Muslim-majority Pakistan were partitioned into two countries, the status of the region of Kashmir, with a Muslim-majority population and a Hindu prince, was unresolved. The United Nations said Kashmiris should hold a referendum, but both India and Pakistan seized parts of the territory, and since then the two countries have been at each other’s throats.
Enter the United States — not once, but three times.
In the 1950s and 1960s, Pakistan and the United States were allies. The United States gave Pakistan weapons and $2 billion in economic aid; it thought that the Pakistani military would be a bulwark against communism. The Pakistani military thought the United States would help it against a much larger and hostile India.
Then India and Pakistan went to war in 1965. American leaders castigated Pakistan for using U.S.-supplied weapons and terminated the alliance.
Fast forward to the 1980s, and Pakistan and the United States once again were allies. The United States gave Pakistan weapons and $3 billion in economic aid; it thought that the Pakistani military would be a bulwark against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. The Pakistani military thought the United States would help it against a much larger and hostile India.
Then the Soviets were defeated. The United States castigated Pakistan for developing nuclear weapons (to counter India) and terminated the alliance.
Today, Pakistan and the United States are allies for a third time. Over the past decade, the United States has given Pakistan weapons and $4 billion (and counting) in economic aid; it hopes that the Pakistani military will be a bulwark against terrorist groups in the region. The Pakistani military hopes the United States will help it against a much larger and hostile India. Then . . .
By now, the recurring failure in the Pakistan-U.S. alliance should be obvious: The Pakistani military views it primarily as a means of reducing the threat from India, and the United States does not.
But perhaps the United States should.
The reason the Pakistani military continued to back jihadist groups, jointly set up with the CIA in the 1980s, after the Soviet Union was defeated in Afghanistan was that it believed the same tactics could be used in Kashmir against India. And the reason the Pakistani military remains obsessed with shaping events in Afghanistan is because that country is the site of a power struggle between Pakistan and India — what commentators in Pakistan go so far as to call a “proxy war.” It is what Ashfaq Kayani, the Pakistan army chief, means when he speaks of Pakistan’s desire for “strategic depth” in Afghanistan.
Fighting terrorists or fighting the Taliban — or indeed, fighting in Afghanistan at all — addresses symptoms rather than the disease in South Asia: the horrific, wasteful, tragic and dangerous six-decade confrontation between India and Pakistan over Kashmir.
This confrontation ravages Afghanistan, where the Northern Alliance, which was organized to fight the Taliban, is backed by money and weapons from India, and militant groups among the southern Pashtuns are backed by Pakistan. It is a big part of why peace eludes the country, even though the Soviets left a generation ago.
Ignore Kashmir, as the United States does, and the conflict seems incomprehensible. Include Kashmir in the picture, and it all makes sense.
At the moment, the Pakistani military uses militant groups to put pressure on India to negotiate, and India uses terrorism as an excuse not to negotiate. By so doing, both sides harm themselves greatly. The vast majority of people in South Asia, who like myself desire peace built on compromise, find our hopes held hostage by security hawks.
The situation is not improving. India’s stance toward Pakistan has hardened since attacks by Pakistan-based militants on Mumbai killed 173 people in 2008. And here in Pakistan, militants are killing even more civilians, police officers and soldiers every month — more than 3,000 Pakistanis in 2009. Some of the preschools I’m considering for my daughter now have snipers on their roofs and steel barricades at their gates.
Meanwhile, the United States has placed 100,000 troops in Afghanistan, where they can do little to eliminate the single biggest problem that nation faces: being made into a battleground by its neighbors.
The United States still sets much of the global agenda. If it hopes to salvage any remotely positive outcome from its massive, nine-year-old war in Afghanistan, then it should move a resolution over Kashmir up on its list of priorities.
Peace in AfPak is failing because the term itself is a willful illusion. Peace in AfPInd will not be easy, but the term rings true, and that at least offers a start.
Mohsin Hamid is a writer based in Pakistan. His most recent novel is “The Reluctant Fundamentalist.” The real problem in the Afghan war is India, Pakistan and Kashmir, By Mohsin Hamid, Sunday, August 8, 2010; B04
Dirtroad an Indian adds:
Bhutto was no friend of India. But he belonged to the same rationalist and sociaist school that built up the great leaders of 60s. He understood the real problems and though his solutions were not always perfect…(like he could have stopped the breaking of Pakistan if he wanted to)..sometimes the appreciation of the problem leads to right steps.
Possibly a peaceful resolution was possible within Asia itself..between India, Pakistan and Russia playing the mediator. Russia would have gladly turned a greater friend of Pakistan as it would have got to the warm waters and it would have slighted China. It was easier for Russia to handle India too.
Possibly we all fell victim to the great game..with US moving fast to dislodge Bhutto and put a retrograde regime in control in Pakistan. It had to act fast as Iran by then has slipped out its fold and Afganistan was becoming a russian influenced state too.
We cannot put the clock back..but as said..an autopsy can still show us the disease. Militancy and a zero-sum game may not be the way forward. And at the end US will still be playing a mediator. Hasn’t it proved enough that with all its so called good-will it is hopelessly out of touch in Asian politics?
With Russia gone..India really has no option now but to depend on US. Unfortunately due to civilizational conflict .. North and South of Himalays..it will be near impossible for Indians to trust the chienese…the same with China too.
Seems we are hopelessly mired in the logjam..but hoping for the enemy’s annihilation may not be the best goal forward for either side
the new spelling stand corrected in this new message
The only way to peace in the world is to Balkanise Pakistan. AFPAK special envoy and the world powers are working on it. You will know the results soon.
Open your eyes and see what is going on. Even [...] is not happy with ISI
Ram
Your opinion is not shared by the world or even by Bharatis.
Bharat is terror central trying to destabilize all her neighbors in pursuit of an insane dream of Akhand Bharat (Greater India) which supposedly stretches from Afghanistan to Indonesia. This hegemonic nightmare is based on a demented interpretation of Hindu religious texts
In every human endeavor and statistic Pakistan is either better, or equal to India. In those few areas in which India is better, it is better only marginally.
The simple fact is that India is a dilapidating millstone on South Asia pulling down a dozen countries and forcing arrested development and cretinism on the entire region. While Indians starve–its Nero-like aristocracy is wasting $2 billion on a Russian rust bucket. Unable to produce a plane, the pugnacious and corrupt Indian politicians want to waste $10 billion on 126 fighters–to pursue its wild maniacal dream of becoming a truculent hegemonic bully. Impotent in its struggles with manufacturing, India buys Viagra in the shapes of guns, and ships which would allow to continue its aggressively expansionist conquest in the revanchist madness of creating “Greater India”. It is in Afghanistan, not because of trade, but because of religious dogma and extremist warmongering
Dear editor…tired of reading the same paragraphs in every rejoinder. Please at least para-phrase.
Kashmir was quiet till 1977…and Bhutto was quite content to focus on rebuilding pakistan. He understood something very early which pakistan is yet to realize today. He realized that both US and feudal mullahdom is toxic for Pakistan. and he was taking conscious steps to veer towards Russia and to other powers. It was his contract with neculear deal with France besting the US that brought down his fall.
The result is for all of us to see….both what Bhutto feared have happened. US dominates or affects Pakistan by its policy and a militant islam infests it. Kashmir was put on boil by Zia who wanted to shift the focus of the country to things other than what Bhutto fought for.
Bhutto was no friend of India. But he belonged to the same rationalist and sociaist school that built up the great leaders of 60s. He understood the real problems and though his solutions were not always perfect…(like he could have stopped the breaking of Pakistan if he wanted to)..sometimes the appreciation of the problem leads to right steps.
Possibly a peaceful resolution was possible within Asia itself..between India, Pakistan and Russia playing the mediator. Russia would have gladly turned a greater friend of Pakistan as it would have got to the warm waters and it would have slighted China. It was easier for Russia to handle India too.
Possibly we all fell victim to the great game..with US moving fast to dislodge Bhutto and put a retrograde regime in control in Pakistan. It had to act fast as Iran by then has slipped out its fold and Afganistan was becoming a russian influenced state too.
We cannot put the clock back..but as said..an autopsy can still show us the disease. Militancy and a zero-sum game may not be the way forward. And at the end US will still be playing a mediator. Hasn’t it proved enough that with all its so called good-will it is hopelessly out of touch in Asian politics?
With Russia gone..India really has no option now but to depend on US. Unfortunately due to civilizational conflict .. North and South of Himalays..it will be near impossible for Indians to trust the chienese…the same with China too.
Seems we are hopelessly mired in the logjam..but hoping for the enemy’s annihilation may not be the best goal forward for either side.
Dirt
I like your brilliantly written narrative and want to save it somehow. Maybe I will just add it to the article where you commented.
“Mullahdom” is a bogey created by Bush to rationalize his invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq–and perpetuate war in West Asia.
You must remember that Bhutto a self-admitted wine drinker (thoree see peeta houn, ghareeboun ka khoon nahin peeta) imposed prohibition and declared Ahmedis as Non-Muslim. So while the RSS, the BJP and the Bajrang Dal grew in Bharat there was a reaction to the events of 1971 in Pakistan also. This of course was fueled by the CIA during the 80s.
You are right about Bhutto and other leaders of the 60s. Bhutto had a soft corner of Nehru, and I remember him saying on national TV that he admired Nehru. Of course he disagreed with Nehru and had contempt for his daughter whom he thought of as mediocre intelligence who didn’t get good grades in Berkley.
I recently re-purchased ZABs “Myth of Independence”–and it gives us great insights on how to deal with the Great powers. In fact I am writing an article from that great book and it will be published soon.
I agree with most of what you have written. However you forgot that Bhutto as a great Pakistani nationalist was also the architect of Pakistan’s alliance with China. After 1971 he brilliantly built a relationship with Russia and got Pakistan’s first steel mill from Moscow.
You may also know what it was Bhutto’s conspiracy with Amin which may have led to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan–with Amin forming new alliances and moving Afghanistan away from the USSR. Stanley Wolpert reaffirms that the August 14th coup in 1974 was engineered by Bhutto and for the briefst moment Khondakar Mushtaque announced a confederation with Paksitan on Bangladesh Radio. Khondkar was quickly sidelined by other elements in Dhaka.
Bhutto was threatened by Kissinger who promised to “make an example of him”. Bhutto went to Raja Bazaar Rawalpindi and showed the world the letter from Kissinger. The declassified documents of Kissinger’s meeting with Bhutto amazingly record that no notes were taken during that meeting. This is very strange because all other meetings of Kissinger were meticulously recorded. I found it amusing to see Kissinger berate Indira Gandhi–he apparently detested Indira, and what we know now–it was mutual.
You are right “hoping for annihilation” serves to purpose.
The move forward has to be based on solving Kashmir–and Bharat may have to get off its high horse–too much is at stake for Delhi. I personally see the “Chenab Solution” as a permanent boundary between Pakistan and Bharat where parts of Jammu go to Bhrat and the Valley goes to Pakistan. This solves the issue. Sir Creek can be resolved amicably by agreeing to a compromise. The demilitarization of Siachin is a viable solution. However thees solutoin require a very strong Nehru like leadership in Bharat, and a ZAB type of leadership in Pakistan–which is missing
…and so it goes
dear web master,
Kashmir problem could have been solved amicably during the time of late Nehru. He lived up to 1964 . India was saved but Pakistan problem starts. oic was born in 1971 but u failed to pass resoulation about Kashmir as core issue for Pakistan(oic consists 54 countries)now u hv go door to door to big powers asking for honorable settlement of dispute (branded by western countries) kashmir but it is by nature not a dispute. Now if it lingers u have left with one option to fight officially or unofficially. if u dont believe either of any one of them .then forget about kashmir.
regards
Abu
The OIC has passed several resolutions on Kashmir.
The Kashmiris themselves have been agitating for accession with Pakistan for the past several decades. Half of Kahsmir has been liberated–the liberation of the other half is inevitable. The current crisis for Bharat in Kashmir is the tip of the iceberg
As the Kashmiris say–Kashmir will be liberated by “any means’ available–the Kashmiris want annexation with Pakistan and no power on earth can stop it.
web master,
please ptv world add english in news bar . i dont know urdu. please do it fast and implement it
regards
Abu
Which newsbar are you talking about.
If you don’t read Urdu, maybe the message was not meant for you–and perhaps the message is meant for those who cannot read Urdu!!!!!
there is some dispute going on in middle east. why dont you add that too. and there r other disputes going on in other parts of the world. would you also like to add that too in the acronym . funny you dont mention anything about the 1971 war. are still to ashamed to speak about it?
Binoj:
Not at all, we mention it all the time.
Do you remember a thousand years of Muslim rule? Let us remind you.
Most Indians are extremely proud about the export of its terror to Pakistan in the 70s. If the Indian sponsored LTTE terrorists had been successful in creating a Hindu Tamil state in Lanka-these very same people would have been ecstatic. If the Delhi sponsored terrorists had been successful in creating the Chakma Republic Indians would be over joyed. If the Bharati sponsored terrorists had been successful in creating the republic of Tibet—Delhi would be in high heaven. Bharatis are very proud of the terror tactics of the Mukti Bahni–which had recruited 80,000 Hindus (Gene Manekshaw’s biography). The Mukti Bhani dressed as Pakistani soldiers ravaged Muslim Bengal—blaming Pakistan. Then Bharat sent terrorists into the Chittagong Hill tracts into its former ally. Delhi cries like a baby on terror in Mumbai—but Bharatis are very proud of sending armed terrorist into a sovereign countries in Nepal, China, Lanka and Pakistan.
You are looking down. When “computer coolies” feel like chest thumping about 1971 and about 45000 Pakistani soldiers and 45000 civilians look up from your keyboard and go outside–whichever town you live in, Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkota, even Banaras–and look up…the towering Muslim minarets and the huge Islamic domes will remind you of 1000 years of humiliation. A battle is not a war–a viper injured is more dangerous than a viper alive.
Kashmir will continue to bleed half the Bharati army.
Poor pakistanis still believe that they can get kashmir. be content of what you have. first try to save your FATA & SWAt regions. Kashmir…haha ha…. perhaps when a child is born in pakistan has his first words..kashmir…
Rahul
Don’t worry about Pakistan. Just hear the slogans from Srinagar in Indian Occupied Kashmir
“Bhooka Nanga Hindustan”
“Dil seh piyara Hindustan’
They taunt the Bharati forces:
“Bhago Bhago Lashkar Ayah”
“Jeeway jeeway Pakistan”
HIndu muslim hatred is the real problem.
This well documented and reaffirmed/ reorganized by british in 18th cent as ” biblical aryan-ind0-euro brotherhood” was the siver bullet that eased india’s plunder , dravidian,aryan race divide and hindu muslim hatred and partition. Dr chatterji had said that Hindus felt ” a hidden pleasure” to be the bothers of europeans. An average hindu and muslim still believes in this hocus/pocus and gratest racial fraud of biblical creationists, judeo-chritianity. Most hindus tend to ignore this biblical geneology. It is well known that Human orignated in africa and biblical racism has been the great fraud that pulled down Ottomans and moghal india. Kindly review this in ” urdu/hindi an artificial divde, african heritage and british colonialism”.
The book discredits all racism, biblical and hinduic and p resents the indianism through ” out of african evolution”. IT attempts to remove the greatest VENOM from south asia, Hindu vs hindu and hindu vs muslim hatred and see india through evolution and human right.IT is the answer to all angularities that exists in pakistan that Mr Jinnah mentioned in his first speech and all hinduic racism as well.
Indian shooters are winning gold medals in Olympics as well as in world shooting championships thank u Arab dogs of Kashmir u gave us a good shooting practice.u Arab dogs do not speak the word Kashmir because this is given by people of Kashmir & Bharath from their own language Samskrutha [Sanskrit] . check ur barking arab dictionary to the world Kashmir. Then think who are kashmirees .ur judgement day is near, because we decided that day for u.
dear editor. ptv world stelitte tv
regards
You are a part of the humiliation. Do u really think you are the true muslims. actually you are the converted ones from India
Binoj
A thousand years of Muslim rule makes you very frustrated–but there is nothing you can do about it. You have to come to peace with it–and not let the towering Islamic minarets and the Muslim domes within your cities bother you.
Your temple indoctrination tells you that “Muslim Converts” are bad and evil.
“Converted” is a badge of honor for Muslims–not a label of disparagement as you make it sound. The inability to Hinduism to hold people within its fold is reflective of the bankruptcy of ideas and vacuity of logic. In “Post Hindu India” Dr. Kancha says that 450 million Hindus, Dalits, Scheduled classes and tribals are ready to convert to Buddhism, Christianity and Islam–leaving a rump Caste state in Bharat surrounded by a sea of Muslims, Hindus and Christians.
PS: Most of your flame baits have nothing to do with the topic on hand and simply outbursts against Muslims, Islam or Pakistan. If you want your comments to be published they should be pertinent to the topic at hand and devoid of racist epithets. Our program automatically eliminates and dumps racially charged comments without the admins seeing them
the name Kashmir is originated from Sanskrit not Arabic.we the people who first inhabited and give the land name Kashmir .these muslims invaded it and killed the people of Kashmir.This is our age we take it back from them .if these arbas are the original inhabitants of Kashmir they would give the land a arabic name.but in their ugly arabic they have no name other than our Sanskrit word Kashmir for that beautiful land .these arabs must send or go to their native land arab deserts