Narendra Modi Pushes India To Up The Ante In Fighting With Pakistan

[prasad1]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

To judge from the shrill outrage of India's TV news channels, the past week's bloody clashes along the border dividing Kashmir are all Pakistan's fault: one network has been plugging the Twitter hashtag #PakBorderDare.


However, military officers in both countries and officials in New Delhi say the violence that has killed nearly 20 civilians escalated because of a more assertive Indian posture under the new government of nationalist Prime Minister Narendra Modi. "The message we have been given from the prime minister's office is very clear and precise," said a senior Indian Home Ministry official. "The prime minister's office has instructed us to ensure that Pakistan suffers deep and heavy losses."
Modi's robust approach towards Pakistan, supporters say, is aimed at emphasizing India's superior strength and making Pakistan's military think twice before firing across the border. It is a strategy he also used to stand up to India's larger neighbor, China, during a border standoff between several hundred Indian and Chinese troops on the Tibetan plateau that coincided with President Xi Jinping's visit to New Delhi last month. But the new stance risks more violence in the Himalayan region of Kashmir, already one of the world's most volatile fault lines, and has eroded a border truce that has largely held between India and Pakistan since 2003.

Since Modi's election victory in May, military commanders have been encouraged to step up border patrols and retaliate with more force if they come under attack. New Delhi has insisted there can be no talks with Pakistan unless it ends shootings and pushing militants into the Indian side of Kashmir.


"This is what we feared would happen if Modi came to power," said Ikram Sehgal, a former Pakistani military officer and chairman of one of the country's largest security companies. "This could easily escalate into something that won't be good for Pakistan or India."
At a time when the Pakistan army is combating militants in the tribal areas in its northwest they do not want the distraction of battling India on its eastern flank, they said."India is deliberately putting pressure on Pakistani security forces by opening this new front," said a senior Pakistani military official posted on the border. "The message from India is clear: 'We will teach you a lesson.'"Indians in the border areas of Kashmir, who have lived through decades of cross-border firing, said they themselves had noticed a change in tactics by the Indian forces. "Pakistan fires one, our boys fire six back," said Atma Ram, 71, who was standing about 300 meters (yards) from the electrified fence that separates the two countries in the Suchetgarh area near Jammu. "They are giving a response we should have given before."http://www.ibtimes.com/narendra-modi-pushes-india-ante-fighting-pakistan-1703478


What is the truth? Do we really know how we arrived at this point, since election? Is the cost of this lesson justified?

 

[Jaykay767]

The genesis of this fight goes back to the terms of the partition, when Kashmir was disputed by both the countries. It was agreed, to hold a UN led plebiscite so that the Kashmiri people can decide the future.

The reason why this was disputed by India despite being a Muslim majority is because of Nehru. Since it was his homeland, he instigated everyone within the country to oppose the transfer of Kashmir leading to this problem.

And from there, the fight started between the 2 countries & fuelled hatred by the subsequent leaders on both sides leading to the many wars, etc..

Current conflict is in part due to a very aggressive govt approach which came on the premise of responding to Pakistan with equal force.

So here we are, starting from Saarc diplomacy, exchanging shawls with each other’s mother to potential nuclear war!

It will require huge statesmanship to extend the hand of friendship across the border & bring peace between the 2 neighbors!!

Frankly my opinion is in a democracy, the people need to decide their future, so it is in everyone’s interest to hold a UN sponsored plebiscite & secede Kashmir to Pakistan if the vote goes the otherway. Certainly a small piece of land is not worth the lakhs of people’s lives lost in the last 60+ yrs & continuing !!

 

[krish44]

what is getting interesting is this type of engagement with heavy response from india and maintaining that it is bilateral issue is driving the neighbour to desperation.

todays news is pakisthan is again approaching the UN to internationalise the issue.

somewhere , the new indian approach will ring alarm bells if some western interests and chinese interests converge.

india can flex its muscles effectively and only where these interests are not unduly hurt.

this
heavy shoot out and eye ball to eyeball confrontation in military terms and quick diffusing thru diplomatic moves is a new approach by india.

we are trying hard to fill the vaccuum left in south asia after exit of the US.

our small neighbours will find it difficult to accept the political realities of a stronger india flexing its muscles.

 

[sarang]

The understanding was pakistan army to vacate occupied area, hand over control to indian authorities and conduct a plebiscite under UN supervision. Pak did not honour it, the resolution was not ratified by voting in UN, and now UN's stand is it is a bilateral issue to be sorted out by the two governments. Plebiscite is not possible because pak inspired terrorists have forcefully changed the demography of the state and driven out hindus. There was no need to take the issue to UN then and even now. Nehru did the mistake despite opposition from Patel and other leaders.

Wike art:

United Nations Security Council Resolution47, adopted on April 21, 1948, after hearing arguments from both India and Pakistan the Council increased the size of the Commission established by United Nations Security Council Resolution 39 to five members, instructed the Commission to go to the subcontinent and help the governments of India and Pakistan restore peace and order to the region and prepare for a plebiscite to decide the fate of Kashmir. The resolution was passed by United Nations Security Council under chapter VI of UN Charter.[SUP][1][/SUP]Resolutions passed under Chapter VI of UN charter are considered non binding and have no mandatory enforceability as opposed to the resolutions passed under Chapter VII.[SUP][2][/SUP][SUP][3][/SUP][SUP][4][/SUP]
The resolution recommended that in order to ensure the impartiality of the plebiscite Pakistan withdraw all tribesmen and nationals who entered the region for the purpose of fighting and that India leave only the minimum number of troops needed to keep civil order. The Commission was also to send as many observers into the region as it deemed necessary to ensure the provisions of the resolution were enacted. Pakistan ignored the UN mandate, did not withdraw its troops and claimed the withdrawal of Indian forces was a prerequisite as per this resolution.[SUP][5][/SUP] Indian claim is that Subsequently Pakistan refused to implement the plebiscite until India accedes to it and continued holding on to the portion of Kashmir under its control.[SUP][6][/SUP] [SUP][7][/SUP]
The resolution was adopted paragraph by paragraph; no vote on the resolution as a whole was taken.

 

[krish44]

The genesis of this fight goes back to the terms of the partition, when Kashmir was disputed by both the countries. It was agreed, to hold a UN led plebiscite so that the Kashmiri people can decide the future.

The reason why this was disputed by India despite being a Muslim majority is because of Nehru. Since it was his homeland, he instigated everyone within the country to oppose the transfer of Kashmir leading to this problem.

And from there, the fight started between the 2 countries & fuelled hatred by the subsequent leaders on both sides leading to the many wars, etc..

Current conflict is in part due to a very aggressive govt approach which came on the premise of responding to Pakistan with equal force.

So here we are, starting from Saarc diplomacy, exchanging shawls with each other’s mother to potential nuclear war!

It will require huge statesmanship to extend the hand of friendship across the border & bring peace between the 2 neighbors!!

Frankly my opinion is in a democracy, the people need to decide their future, so it is in everyone’s interest to hold a UN sponsored plebiscite & secede Kashmir to Pakistan if the vote goes the otherway. Certainly a small piece of land is not worth the lakhs of people’s lives lost in the last 60+ yrs & continuing !!

I beg to disagree.

one can hardly turn the clock back

Religion can hardly be the basis for transfer of land from one country to another.

democratic rights do not provide for separation on the basis of religion.

the basic issue is economic deprivation in a border state.

similar are the issues in north east .

even tamilnadu aspired for separation fearing domination of hindi speaking states as tamil was their language.

when there is economic prosperity and inter dependance between states , such issues will have a natural death.

after dravidian parties tasted power , they all forgot secession. they have seen what perosperity can do.

 

[sarang]

Is there a single instance wherein a country's borders have been fixed, altered as per UN resolution, which is recommendation or that of security council, which is mandatory. It is better to keep UN out of this and find a new solution. The first thing the new govt did was to close the UN monitoring office which has been occupying a rent free property for sixty years without doing any work.

Now borders can be altered only by forceful occupation or by give and take negotiations. In fact the issue must be called pak occupied jammu and kashmir and not just POK. This will into limelight the areas and population usurped by pakistan and the damage done.

 

[Jaykay767]

Krish,

In this case, the entire partition happened based on religion, where the muslim leaders raised the issue of not getting equal rights under a Hindu dominated country.

Again it is not an issue of whether the separation is based on religion; it should be based on the aspirations of the people of Kashmir. For all you know, they might vote to stay with India.

Which ever way one looks at it, it is not worth the lives of lakhs of people !!

Cheers,

 

[Jaykay767]

Nations & people should be ruled by Integrity & walking the talk not by clever politics of bypassing UN after having agreed to the resolution!!

 

[prasad1]

In an ideal world "world peace" is possible, justice and integrity can prevail.
We do not live in that world. To a great extent this is might is tight.
Jiski lati uski bhaise.
Secondly Pakistan is not a country to be dealt with honor as they have none.
I do not disagree with the post # 8, but Pakistan is an exception, and Kashmir is integral part of India.

 

[sarang]

There was no voting; so it is not a valid resolution; this is India's stand. UN has been doing it everyday, passing resolutions with voting, vetoed consistently by A or B or C; UN is propped up by USA by meeting its expenses. If USA stops paying, UN will collapse.

Nations & people should be ruled by Integrity & walking the talk not by clever politics of bypassing UN after having agreed to the resolution!!

 

[Jaykay767]

People have been fed with doctored one sided news for 60+yrs that Indians are gods, can do no wrong & Pakistanis are evil & can do no right.

Why should Pakistan be not dealt with honor?. Are Pakistanis bad people?

if people can get past the national level saffron glasses (it is politically incorrect to hate indian muslims, but good to hate Pakistani muslims), they will see good in Pakistan & then we may have a chance for peace !

 

[sarang]

When one party blatantly violates any contract from day one it is futile to expect any status quo. Ambedkar was right in insisting 100% exchange but not heeded by nehru. Exchange is one way since then.

Nations & people should be ruled by Integrity & walking the talk not by clever politics of bypassing UN after having agreed to the resolution!!

 

[Jaykay767]

3+ months back, there was a outpouring of love affair between India & Pakistan when shawls were exchanged & the media went bersek on how people are all so good. so what happened ?. that they are now evil ?. I didn't know people can be gods & evils alternatively in a few weeks ?? LOL !

 

[Iyyarooraan]

When one party blatantly violates any contract from day one it is futile to expect any status quo. Ambedkar was right in insisting 100% exchange but not heeded by nehru. Exchange is one way since then.

Shri Ambedkar, had he been alive, would be seen in a different light. Our anger is against Pakistan's clandestine actions and also against people who support including the US. Muslims have problems because of bad teachings and it is for all to see they are amenable to reason.

 

[Jaykay767]

In all communist/socialist states, people are fed doctored one sided news !!. so if you go to cuba, they will tell you, Americans are under the influence of Satan LOL !!!

 

[sarang]

Any example? One has to study and analyze what is happening in UK and europe, the cradle of free society populated by humanists. In UK many school management has been usurped by the clerics, and special education to train the mind is a reality.

Which country has succeeded in making problem nations 'amenable to reason'? Even the Nobel committee has sunk to the low level.

Muslims have problems because of bad teachings and it is for all to see they are amenable to reason.

 

[Jaykay767]

Lets please avoid playing god here!!

If muslims are so bad, why is it that Indians build a temple in every city in USA/UK? Have you asked the whites, what do they think of it?

In a multi-cultural society, there will be influence from each community, & that should not be seen negatively.

Now, do some radical jihadist elements take it to the extreme, the answer is yes (similarly some Indians, some Hispanics do.. etc..), but that is by no means a reason for spreading hatred across an entire community of people !!

 

[Jaykay767]

Whenone party blatantly violates any contract from day one it is futile to expectany status quo. Ambedkar was right in insisting 100% exchange but not heeded bynehru. Exchange is one way since then.

Can you pl elaborate this?. India agreed for a UN sponsored plebiscite, & later reneged. To me, it is clearly our fault in the first place.

Just because we are Indians, does not mean we support our country’s actions like zombies. In this, we definitely need to learn from the USA, where there is a very robust opposition that questions each & every decision by the Govt.

 

[Iyyarooraan]

Let us not talk politics. There are Muslims in the US, UK, in more than half of Europe. I agree to the common belief that all Muslims are not terrorists but all terrorists are Muslims. The larger community of the world can deal with minuscule community of terrorists. Nehru will be alive till his baiters are alive.

 

[sarang]

Perhaps a better picture will emerge and better understanding may dawn, if a detailed list of building temples and mosques, riots and torching, slavery and murder are listed country wise, and just looked at. Gods are not playing, they are running for cover.

Unless majority of the community raise their voice and take punitive action, things will go out of control as in middle east. India is highly vulnerable and has historically suffered.

I agree, instead of a general protest, every event must be publicized, discussed, stoutly resisted and protested, instead of hiding it from public scrutiny, in the name of secularism.

Lets please avoid playing god here!!

If muslims are so bad, why is it that Indians build a temple in every city in USA/UK? Have you asked the whites, what do they think of it?

In a multi-cultural society, there will be influence from each community, & that should not be seen negatively.

Now, do some radical jihadist elements take it to the extreme, the answer is yes (similarly some Indians, some Hispanics do.. etc..), but that is by no means a reason for spreading hatred across an entire community of people !!

 

[Jaykay767]

Pl analyze history logically without any bias.. Nehru is the genesis of all the major problems we have in this country.

He created this fight with muslims by warring with Jinnah, later with Pakistan by disputing Kashmir, he made the states fight with each other, Maharashtra with Karnataka, Andhra vs Tamil Nadu, Tamil Nadu vs Kerala, Karnataka vs Tamil Nadu, Tamils vs Ceylon/Sri Lanka, etc...

Please read about every issue, you will see its origins in his Govt actions & you can decide for yourself !!

so he was the sutradhari of divide & rule politics, of course he blamed the British for this. You know how the tamil vs Ceylon fight spiralled out of control in time.

Hopefully if you read both sides of the coins, you will realize, we are not gods, Pakistanis are not evil.

By the way, when I travel abroad, I see many close friendship between Indians & Pakistanis.

 

[sangom]

To judge from the shrill outrage of India's TV news channels, the past week's bloody clashes along the border dividing Kashmir are all Pakistan's fault: one network has been plugging the Twitter hashtag #PakBorderDare.


However, military officers in both countries and officials in New Delhi say the violence that has killed nearly 20 civilians escalated because of a more assertive Indian posture under the new government of nationalist Prime Minister Narendra Modi. "The message we have been given from the prime minister's office is very clear and precise," said a senior Indian Home Ministry official. "The prime minister's office has instructed us to ensure that Pakistan suffers deep and heavy losses."
Modi's robust approach towards Pakistan, supporters say, is aimed at emphasizing India's superior strength and making Pakistan's military think twice before firing across the border. It is a strategy he also used to stand up to India's larger neighbor, China, during a border standoff between several hundred Indian and Chinese troops on the Tibetan plateau that coincided with President Xi Jinping's visit to New Delhi last month. But the new stance risks more violence in the Himalayan region of Kashmir, already one of the world's most volatile fault lines, and has eroded a border truce that has largely held between India and Pakistan since 2003.

Since Modi's election victory in May, military commanders have been encouraged to step up border patrols and retaliate with more force if they come under attack. New Delhi has insisted there can be no talks with Pakistan unless it ends shootings and pushing militants into the Indian side of Kashmir.


"This is what we feared would happen if Modi came to power," said Ikram Sehgal, a former Pakistani military officer and chairman of one of the country's largest security companies. "This could easily escalate into something that won't be good for Pakistan or India."
At a time when the Pakistan army is combating militants in the tribal areas in its northwest they do not want the distraction of battling India on its eastern flank, they said."India is deliberately putting pressure on Pakistani security forces by opening this new front," said a senior Pakistani military official posted on the border. "The message from India is clear: 'We will teach you a lesson.'"Indians in the border areas of Kashmir, who have lived through decades of cross-border firing, said they themselves had noticed a change in tactics by the Indian forces. "Pakistan fires one, our boys fire six back," said Atma Ram, 71, who was standing about 300 meters (yards) from the electrified fence that separates the two countries in the Suchetgarh area near Jammu. "They are giving a response we should have given before."http://www.ibtimes.com/narendra-modi-pushes-india-ante-fighting-pakistan-1703478


What is the truth? Do we really know how we arrived at this point, since election? Is the cost of this lesson justified?

The political realities today are that the US still considers Pakistan to be its handyman and ally for keeping China at bay; it is not yet clear whether India has succeeded in grabbing this job from Pak. China also, most likely sees Pakistan as a useful and servile party to keep India (and, if possible US too) under some check. This being the reality of today's politics, we have to consider Pakistan not ats true strength but with the backing of US and China if a situation arises. Hence, chest-thumping (banking on 56" chest etc.) is not going to yield any favourable results to India, imo.

The UPA's approach was, perhaps, more mature. The only tangible result we will get is likely to be a good excuse for sky-rocketing prices, especially when the international oil prices go up after some time.

 

[vgane]

For me the best think would be annex Pakistan Occupied Kashmir from where the terror originates & the root cause of all problems...We should settle Indians of all hues in Kashmir...We cannot do that unilaterally..If the neighbor barks, we can bark with equal ferocity..But if starts biting no body can stop us from going for the kill..We will not start a war but if neighbor is intent on one where is the choice?

 

[sarang]

First remove art 370, scrap special status, allow all Indians to buy property and settle in Kashmir, deal strongly with separatists.
The other day hooded youth hoisted Isis flag and indulged in stone throwing. No one in the right mind will preach love to them. Parents' tacit support cannot be ruled out.

For me the best think would be annex Pakistan Occupied Kashmir from where the terror originates & the root cause of all problems...We should settle Indians of all hues in Kashmir...We cannot do that unilaterally..If the neighbor barks, we can bark with equal ferocity..But if starts biting no body can stop us from going for the kill..We will not start a war but if neighbor is intent on one where is the choice?

 

[sangom]

For me the best think would be annex Pakistan Occupied Kashmir from where the terror originates & the root cause of all problems...We should settle Indians of all hues in Kashmir...We cannot do that unilaterally..If the neighbor barks, we can bark with equal ferocity..But if starts biting no body can stop us from going for the kill..We will not start a war but if neighbor is intent on one where is the choice?

Shri gane,

What you write will be very right if Pakistan and India were the only people concerned. But the reality seems to me to be that both China and the US have some vested interest in Pakistan and when we talk of fighting with Pakistan, we should not overlook the possibility of aid - both military and financial - pouring in from somewhere, covertly to Pakistan so as to make it fight and "tire" us ultimately. Nobody can stop us from going for the kill, but there are enough indicators to tell us that there are many who would be able to prevent us from "the kill". Remember that on every occasion in the past, India had to retreat, without any kill (like coitus interruptus!)? Further, how was Pakistan enabled to become (by US, UK, etc.) a nuclear power so soon after our Pokhran II blast? Worth pondering!