Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Idea Of The Day -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (42749)	5/27/2002 8:23:23 PM
From: greenspirit	Respond to of 50167

Defiant Musharraf refuses to back down over Kashmiris' 'fight for liberation' By Peter Popham in Delhi 28 May 2002 Independent (UK) Pakistan has failed to offer even the tiniest olive branch A very different Pervez Musharraf appeared on the world's television screens last night. This was not the pliable, obliging figure who dumped the Taliban at a word from President George Bush, who claimed to have sealed Pakistan's border against fleeing al-Qa'ida forces and who, when that proved untrue, allowed American forces to go into action in Pakistan. This time, in the face of India's recent threats to fight "a decisive battle", General Musharraf, Pakistan's President, gave no ground and made none of the concessions that had been expected. Instead he nailed his colours to the mast of Kashmiri liberation. His speech was preceded by a recitation from the Koran that called on Muslims to prepare themselves for war but to embrace peace if the enemy was also ready for peace. He spoke of "atrocities" being committed by "Hindu extremists and terrorists" against Muslims in Kashmir and in the state of Gujarat, combining that with an appeal for dialogue. In the speech he made on 12 January he promised not to allow Pakistan or territory for which Pakistan was responsible – code for the Pakistan- controlled sector of Kashmir – to be used for terrorist attacks against India. But since then, according to American intelligence reports, he has allowed 50 to 60 training camps in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir to start up again, harbouring some 3,000 fighters training for the anti-Indian jihad. He has enabled them, with the help of Pakistani security forces, to infiltrate Indian Kashmir. One such mission resulted in the Jammu massacre of 14 May in which 34 died, mostly Indian soldiers' families, and which provoked the crisis. But last night General Musharraf gave bland reassurances no infiltration was taking place across the Line of Control, Kashmir's ceasefire line, and went out of his way to endorse the cause of the fighter. "A liberation struggle is going on in Kashmir," he said, "and Pakistan cannot be held responsible for any action taken against Indian oppression." Increasingly the West sees the Islamic jihad as in indivisible menace: if it is to be checked anywhere it must be checked everywhere. But for General Musharraf, as for the mass of Pakistanis, there is a world of difference between support for the Taliban and for militants in Kashmir. The Kashmir dispute is nearly as old as the Pakistani state; the two came into existence only months apart, and Kashmir's illegal (in Pakistani eyes) accession to India was the original sin of the postcolonial dispensation. In the "two nation" theory of Pakistan's founding father, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, all the Muslim-majority states of imperial India belonged in Pakistan. Kashmir was stolen by India through fraud. The Kashmiris were never consulted; and when, in 1949, the United Nations mandated a plebiscite to settle the question, India ignored it and ignores it still. Kashmir, as Pakistan sees it, is the nation's righteous cause; the "poor Kashmiris" are the Muslims who must be rescued from the tyranny of the Hindu infidel. During the past 50 years, Kashmir has been the one cause that has brought Pakistanis together. And Pakistani leaders forsake the cause at their peril. President Bill Clinton bullied Nawaz Sharif, the Prime Minister, into ordering Pakistani troops back from Kashmir in the summer of 1999, to defuse the Kargil crisis. From then on, Mr Sharif was a marked man. The day after General Musharraf seized power in October that year, the streets of Islamabad were eerily quiet. The only indication there had been a change of guard was the banner on the locked gate of parliament, exhorting "Liberate Kashmir". General Musharraf has tried to be tough on sectarian terrorism, and had few qualms about ditching the Taliban. But the Kashmir struggle is his badge of honour. Himself an immigrant to Pakistan from India, his patriotism is open to doubt; loyalty to Kashmir is the infallible way to demonstrate it. Additionally, Kashmir has long been a safety valve for the Pakistani militants who could give infinite trouble if bottled up at home. It has given Pakistan's swollen military a permanent raison d'etre, and a permanent pretext for demanding ever larger budgets. By allowing American troops into Pakistan, by throwing his weight behind the war on terrorism, General Musharraf has made powerful enemies. Selling out Kashmir would be a betrayal too far.

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (42749)	5/27/2002 8:24:25 PM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50167

Musharraf: there will be no more sacrifices Financial Times \| May 27, 2002 \| Edward Luce and Farhan Bokhar General Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan's military ruler, said on Monday that Pakistan would not make any further sacrifices of the country's "honour and dignity" as the price of avoiding war with India. India, which has hundreds of thousands of troops on high alert along the Line of Control, the international border that divides the disputed province of Kashmir, has strongly hinted that it will launch military strikes on its nuclear-armed neighbour unless Pakistan ceases its alleged sponsorship of terrorism. But in a one-hour interview with the Financial Times, Gen Musharraf flatly denied that there was any cross-border terrorist infiltration of India's portion of Kashmir. Gen Musharraf, who earlier gave a 25-minute broadcast to the nation, also ruled out any possibility of handing over 20 alleged terrorists - India's other key demand. "India cannot be both the accusers and judges," said Gen Musharraf. "We have made it very clear that there is no activity along the Line of Control." He added: "I am a military man. And while I do not want war, I am not scared of war. However the avoidance of war cannot come at the cost of compromising our honour and dignity." In a strong hint that Pakistan would retaliate heavily to any Indian military action, Gen Musharraf said that Pakistan was neither a "walk-over" nor weak. Pakistan is to test a third nuclear-capable missile on Tuesday, following two tests at the weekend. "We have good military deterrence," he said. "We not only have a good defensive capability but a good offensive defensive capability. It would not be responsible for a head of state to discuss our nuclear deterrent. But the level of conventional forces that we maintain is more than adequate to implement our strategy of deterrence." Gen Musharraf's message in unlikely to assuage India, which maintains that infiltration has continued across the LOC at the same rate or higher than previous years. Hopes had also been raised in New Delhi that Pakistan would hand over at least the 10 Indian passport holders on the list of 20 alleged terrorists that reside in Pakistan. But Gen Musharraf told the FT that some of the names that India submitted were "ridiculous", including those of people who had allegedly committed crimes in 1980. "We can give India a list of names who committed crimes in 1947 [when India was partitioned]," he said. On cross-border infiltration, Gen Musharraf said that he was considering "unilaterally" stepping up the presence of United Nations observers on Pakistan's side of the LOC to verify the absence of "infiltration activity". India says that Pakistan-based groups were responsible for the assassination last week of Abdul Gani Lone, a leading Kashmiri separatist, in Srinagar and for the massacre the previous week of 34 Indian soldiers and their families in Jammu.

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (42749)	5/27/2002 8:25:14 PM
From: greenspirit	Respond to of 50167

India, Pakistan Trade Fire After Musharraf Speech Reuters via Yahoo! \| Mon May 27, 6:22 PM ET \| By Simon Denyer and Myra MacDonald ISLAMABAD/NEW DELHI (Reuters) - India and Pakistan traded fire in disputed Kashmir (news - web sites) late Monday after Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf said Islamabad was ready to respond with full force if attacked. Tough comments by the Pakistani leader in a national television address risked aggravating tensions with India in a face-off between the nuclear armed foes over Kashmir. "Pakistan does not want war. Pakistan will not be the one to initiate war," Musharraf said. But he added that "if war is thrust upon us we would respond with full might." An Indian defense official said Indian and Pakistani troops traded moderate to heavy artillery, mortar and machinegun fire at various points along the tense 1,010 km (630-mile) Line of Control separating the two sides in the Kashmir region. "Due to Pakistani firing, three civilians including a woman were injured," the official said. The official said the two sides also traded intermittent small arms fire along the 140-mile international border dividing the Himalayan state of Jammu and Kashmir from the Pakistani province of Punjab. In Pakistan, local residents and officials said six Pakistanis were killed when Indian troops fired mortars at villages across the border into Punjab province. In his live television address, Musharraf repeated his condemnation of what he called "terrorist attacks" on India's parliament and an Indian army base in mostly Muslim Kashmir, which New Delhi blames on infiltrators from Pakistan. But he also expressed support for the "liberation movement" in the Indian-ruled part of Kashmir and condemned Indian "tyranny and repression." Pakistan's military president insisted there was no infiltration across the line which divides Kashmir. He also said he would not let Pakistan be used as a base for terrorism. INTERNATIONAL PRESSURE GROWS With international pressure growing on Musharraf to act on Indian demands to stop the militant attacks, Musharraf's speech contained no new initiatives. An Indian foreign ministry spokeswoman said New Delhi would give a considered response on Tuesday but said with Pakistan "what you see is not what you get." British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said on Monday there was an urgent need to resolve tensions between India and Pakistan to avoid a nuclear conflict which would wreck the subcontinent for years. "It's a very dangerous moment," Straw said in an interview with Reuters at the British embassy in Berlin. Straw was in Berlin to brief his German counterpart Joschka Fischer on Kashmir and was due to fly to Islamabad and New Delhi later to try to broker a solution, although he said it was difficult for third parties to mediate in the bilateral row. "There are clear limits to external diplomacy, so I am under no illusions about what I may or may not be able to do. "But we in the United States and the European Union (news - web sites) plainly have a duty to do everything we can to assist the parties to reduce the scale of military preparedness and offer them routes to resolve this problem by bilateral dialogue," he said. British Prime Minister Tony Blair (news - web sites) phoned both Musharraf and Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee (news - web sites) on Monday. India and Pakistan have fought three wars, two of them over Kashmir, since independence from Britain in 1947. The two nations have mobilized close to a million men on the border since a guerrilla attack on India's parliament in December. The risk of war heightened after an attack on May 14 on an Indian army camp in Jammu and Kashmir state. India says Kashmir is an integral part of the country, while Pakistan says Kashmiris should vote on their future.

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (42749)	5/27/2002 8:26:40 PM
From: greenspirit	Respond to of 50167

Musharraf speech 'very provocative': BJP hinduonnet.com New Delhi, May 27 (PTI): The BJP tonight described Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf's address to the nation as ``very provocative'' challenging India to whatever action it wants to take. ``He (Musharraf) justified ISI-sponsored terrorism and again declared that Pakistan would continue to support the terrorist activities in the valley in the name of freedom struggle,'' party spokesman V K Malhotra said here. He said it is time the Government took strong action to end cross-border terrorism once and for all rather than expect any move from Pakistan in this direction. Malhotra took strong exception to the ``civilisational war'' the Pakistan President spoke of and said this was an attempt to divide the communities in India. He said Musharraf should know there are 120 million Muslims in this country and many of them are holding top positions in various walks of life with top scientist being Prof A P J Abdul Kalam who was bestowed the country's highest civilian honour of Bharat Ratna.

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (42749)	5/27/2002 8:33:17 PM
From: greenspirit	Respond to of 50167

Highlights of Musharraf's Speech. - Source - Dawn dawn.com Bismillah. My dear Pakistani brothers and sisters. Salam. Pakistan is passing through a very sensitive situation. We stand at historic cross-roads. Today's decisions will have a long range impact. I believe in consultation. I have met with politicians, the journalists, and the leaders of Kashmir. I am grateful to all those who came and met me. But there were some politicians who chose not to meet me. This is sad since this is the time to be united for Pakistan. I invite those politicians again to come and meet me. I would also like to remove all doubts about the elections that some people have. I want to assure you that we will hold elections from 7th to 11th October this year. These will be free and fair and foreign observers will be invited to witness it. I would also like to talk about the recent referrendum. There was no coercion in this exercise. This was also why I did not deploy the army at the polling booths, so that there is no impression of anyone influencing the outcome. I was supported by all sectors of society... by labor, women, minorities, and those in the rural areas. But I got unofficial reports that there was some unnecessary enthusiasm shown and there were irregularities. I am sorry and sad if this happened. Now I want to address external matters. As you know the enemy is at our borders. Our forces are now facing them. Our people are behind our forces. We will not let an inch of Pakistan be damaged. The situation is grave. Let us look at how this happened. There was a terrorist attack on the Indian Parliament building, which we condemned. But the Indian leadership used this to accuse us and brought their forces to our borders. Then as the situation was starting to get better there was an attack on May 14 in Occupied Kashmir where there was a loss of life of civilians. We condemned this attack also. These attacks are also meant to destabilize Pakistan. We ourselves are victims of terrorism. There was the recent attack on a church in Islamabad, and soon after the suicide attack in Karachi. We did not blame India for these. Then when recently there was the assassination of Abdul Ghani Lone Sahib. The killers have not been caught, but again the blame is being put on Pakistan and the ISI. All this results in the increase in the war hysteria that is being created. We on the other hand have shown accommodation and restraint. But this should not be viewed as weakness. We have prepared our defenses. I had said in my speech in January that Pakistani soil will not be used for terrorist activity. I will repeat this and assure people outside Pakistan that there is no infiltration across the Line of Control. We cannot be blamed for every incident that occurs in Occupied Kashmir. I would like to assure the international community that we are not allowing any infiltration across the LOC. We have taken very bold initiatives in this regard since 12th of January. But we have not seen any response from India. We would like to normalize relations with India. We would like to see withdrawal of troops from the border. And we would like to urge the world to take note of the atrocities being committed by Hindu extremists and terrorists against Muslims in Kashmir and Gujrat, and against Christians and Sikhs and members of Hindu scheduled castes. A message to our Kashmiri brothers and sisters. We will always stand with you and you will always have our support. And finally... We want peace but if war is imposed on us we will fight. As muslims we will say Allah-o-Akbar and fight if we have to. Such is the situation now. We are ready, the whole nation is ready. You have always trusted me. With the help of Allah I will Inshallah come up to your expectations in this time of crisis. Pakistani Military Zindabad, the Pakistani nation Paindabad.

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (42749)	5/27/2002 11:16:36 PM
From: 2MAR$	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50167

From Taipei Times :The US is piggy in the middle between Pakistan and India taipeitimes.com " Perhaps the world should be more worried about Muslim-Hindu violence than it is Muslim-Christian violence, especially since there are nuclear weapons involved" By Jonathan Power After the publication this week of two important reports -- one by the ambassadors of the EU to India and the other by Human Rights Watch-confirming that what took place in the Indian state of Gujarat was nothing less than a state government-planned massacre, when Hindu mobs ran amok through Muslim neighborhoods, we should start to worry less about a supposed Muslim-Christian clash of civilizations and worry more about the actual Muslim-Hindu divide of civilizations, especially so when the two sides have nuclear wea-pons pointing at each other. Why any Indian government should now expect to solve the Kashmir problem in its favor is beyond comprehension. If 180 million Muslims can no longer feel safe and secure inside India, des-pite the Herculean efforts of the country's founding fathers to make the world's largest secular democracy function without religious rancor, there is no chance that the Muslim dominated state of Kashmir will ever feel comfortable inside the Indian union. Yet Mus-lim agitation in Pakistan over Kashmir has jangled on Indian nationalistic nerves for so long it was only a matter of time before Indian angst spilled out in this appalling way. Not for nothing did the Hindu mobs taunt their victims in Gujarat with cries of "dirty Pakis." Until very recently both the US and the EU have preferred to stay on the sidelines of Hindu-Muslim disputes. But so deep have they been drawn into the affairs of the sub-continent by the Afghan war they no longer can sidestep the issue. On the one hand, the US has embraced Pakistan with such fervor that not much these days gets decided in Pakistan without US input. On the other, the US, understandably, has taken advantage of India's euphoria in seeing Paki-stan's ally, the Taliban, get its comeuppance. India has rushed to do what it never has done before, welcome a foreign power with open arms to use its airbases, military facilities and anything else that the US needs to wage its war on terrorism. The US, to put it bluntly, has become pig in the middle. On the Pakistani side, President Pervez Musharraf has been courting Washington's favor as a useful prop to his own regime. With US largesse pouring into what was before Sept. 11th a near bankrupt country, he has been able to face the electorate this week in his bid to be an elected dictator without fear of significant opposition. Yet he(Musharraf) has paid an enormous price for running with the US. Pakistan's northern ally in the war of attrition with India is now out of the picture. The anti-Western militants who moved in and out of service to the Taliban and al-Qaeda to help in harassing India from Pakistani Kashmir have had their wings clipped. Thus the undermining of India's grip on Kashmir is for now effectively stalled. Not least, the US has put under their custodial protection Pakistan's stock of nuclear weapons. Everyone now knows should either the Pakistan government move to deploy them for action against India or should militants make a move to topple Musharraf and grab them, the US special forces would move in to secure them before you could say Kashmir. On the Indian side matters are no less serious if perhaps a little more complex, partly because if Pakistan was bankrupt enough and small enough to be pushed around, India is too large, too economically independent and too democratic to be dealt with in quite so blunt a manner. On the one hand, Washington has realized that the US and India are victims of the same forces and that its own earlier mistakes have contributed mightily to the situation. Washington has accepted that it was the US and Saudi funnelling of arms to the anti-Soviet guerrillas in Afghanistan through Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency that led to the Afghani war veterans coming to haunt first the security of India and then later that of the US itself. Thus the US and India are truly brothers in arms. Moreover, the US does not have to watch its back in India as it does in Pakistan. On the other hand the US can only see disaster ahead if Hindu-Muslim violence gets out of hand as it did in Gujarat and if the central government seeks to excuse it and tolerates senior members of its political camp perpetuating it. One suspects that Washington is no longer going to allow India such an easy ride on Kashmir, however much India wants to dress the dispute up as a war on terrorism. Fifty-three years ago the UN mediated an agreement to a four-part sequence -- a ceasefire in Kashmir, followed by the withdrawal of Pakistan's forces from all occupied territories, the thinning of India's military presence and a plebiscite to ascertain to which country the people of Kashmir wished to belong. Only the first two and a half steps were taken. These steps look uncannily right for today's situation. Pakistan has already been forced to do some of its somersaults. India will have to do its in due course. Never since the parting of the ways between India and Pakistan has the opportunity for a peaceful settlement looked more necessary -- or more propitious."