Sachinism Posted May 11, 2010 Posted May 11, 2010 The foreign ministers of India and Pakistan are to meet in July as part of efforts to resume formal peace talks following the 2008 Mumbai attacks. India's foreign minister, SM Krishna, said the invitation had come from Pakistan. He hoped his visit to Islamabad would help build trust Contacts have been limited since India put talks on hold in 2008. Last week an Indian court sentenced the only Pakistani gunman captured alive to death for carrying out the attacks. The neighbours have a history of mistrust and have fought three wars. 'No quick fixes' Mr Krishna said he had accepted the invitiation to visit Islamabad on 15 July during a telephone conversation with his Pakistani counterpart Shah Mehmood Qureshi. "I am looking forward to these talks. Let's hope that these efforts will be fruitful," Mr Krishna said. Mr Qureshi said the two sides would discuss "all issues of concern" and he planned to visit Delhi at a mutually convenient date for further discussions. But Mr Qureshi added that the talks were "not going to be easy... there are no quick fixes, but the sincerity is there". In February, Pakistan and India held their first formal talks since the 2008 attacks and agreed to "remain in touch". The two sides, however, made no substantial progress. Since then the prime ministers of both countries have met twice on the sidelines of other summits. India has regularly rebuffed Pakistani calls to resume substantive dialogue, saying Islamabad has not done enough to tackle militants or bring the Mumbai (Bombay) attacks organisers to justice. Correspondents say many observers believe the United States has gently persuaded both countries to ease tensions. India blamed the attacks on the Pakistan-based militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba. After initial denials Pakistan admitted the attacks had been partly planned on its soil. The attacks left 174 people dead, nine of them gunmen. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/8674231.stm Why do we keep up with this stupid game. They're not going to co-operate for sh!t. It'll just be all denial, total waste of time
gs Posted May 12, 2010 Posted May 12, 2010 Why do they want to keep up this farce? Why meet? What is going to come out of this meeting that hasnt in the previous ones?!?
Clarke Posted May 12, 2010 Posted May 12, 2010 Why do they want to keep up this farce? Why meet? What is going to come out of this meeting that hasnt in the previous ones?!? Diplomacy must be an option, even with ur worst enemies. As per some sources, Musharraf & Manmohan were very close to a solution to the Kashmir issue. Basically, the only possible solution is have the Kashmir area as an autonomous region with some oversight from Indo-Pak joint mechanism with Jammu and most/all of Ladakh (Hindu/Buddhist majority areas) being an integral part of India. If one's brought up with the "Kashmir is an integral part of India/Pakistan" diet, this will hurt.
gs Posted May 13, 2010 Posted May 13, 2010 Diplomacy must be an option, even with ur worst enemies. As per some sources, Musharraf & Manmohan were very close to a solution to the Kashmir issue. Basically, the only possible solution is have the Kashmir area as an autonomous region with some oversight from Indo-Pak joint mechanism with Jammu and most/all of Ladakh (Hindu/Buddhist majority areas) being an integral part of India. If one's brought up with the "Kashmir is an integral part of India/Pakistan" diet, this will hurt. Do you seriously believe that even if the Kashmir problem was resolved in a mutually agreeable way, the issues between India and Pak would disappear? I dont think the hostility between 2 nations will end until Pak implodes or India falls apart. Didnt the same Musharaff plan and implement Kargil fiasco? What did MMS offer him that the previous PMs didnt?!?
Jadoo Posted May 14, 2010 Posted May 14, 2010 Do you seriously believe that even if the Kashmir problem was resolved in a mutually agreeable way, the issues between India and Pak would disappear? I dont think the hostility between 2 nations will end until Pak implodes or India falls apart. Didnt the same Musharaff plan and implement Kargil fiasco? What did MMS offer him that the previous PMs didnt?!? +++ I think we have given up enough of India, no more deals with a state that has sponsored terrorism against India for so long.
Clarke Posted May 14, 2010 Posted May 14, 2010 Do you seriously believe that even if the Kashmir problem was resolved in a mutually agreeable way, the issues between India and Pak would disappear? I dont think the hostility between 2 nations will end until Pak implodes or India falls apart. Believe ? Not sure actually. Hope ? Definitely. The point here being that the Pakistan Armed Forces would be a part of the Kashmir solution since both Armies can cooperate on Kashmir and its security which would not necessitate a need for supporting militancy. Of course, this is speculation. The idea of Pakistan (or for that matter India) falling apart could spell disaster for the other and should be fully avoided, i'm sure the leaders who are not extremists/lunatics understand that. Didnt the same Musharaff plan and implement Kargil fiasco? What did MMS offer him that the previous PMs didnt?!? MMS might have understood that no matter how many armed forces and aid we throw in Kashmir, the indigenous religiously motivated buffoons cannot live with India and the overall deal we've managed so far is just not worth it for the common man. Hence, a compromise solution where both sides get to keep Kashmir on their map might work well. That's my guess. The much bigger change was on the Pakistani side. The smart ones like Musharraf finally understood that India will not give up and bow to the terrorists and a military solution cannot work for them (after decades of failed attempts). India's growing economic clout and military strength must worry them, they cannot sustain this slow proxy war of attrition.
Recommended Posts