| Submit your comments on this article |
| India-Pakistan |
| India halts Kashmir troop withdrawal |
| 2010-03-26 |
| India has stopped a small but symbolic pullout of soldiers from the beleaguered state of Jammu and Kashmir, after the number of militants crossing into the Indian-controlled territory from Pakistan increased in recent months. The Paks sent more bad turbans in even as the Indians started withdrawing? Wotta surprise. Who'da ever thunkit? A year ago, militant-related violence in Kashmir fell to its lowest level in two decades and India announced it would begin to withdraw troops. Since then, some 36,000 troops -- or about 5 per cent of the estimated 600,000 security personnel in Kashmir -- have been transferred out of the state. But further withdrawals have been cancelled out of concern more militants will lead to more violence in Kashmir, a picturesque region of pine forests, clear lakes and mountain ranges which has become one of the most complex conflict zones in the world. Recent Indian intelligence reports suggest militants already in Kashmir are under pressure to step up attacks, the Hindustan Times newspaper reported Thursday. Some 114 terrorists infiltrated the state in 2009, up from 58 the previous year. Since violence flared in 1987, a generation has grown up in a virtual conflict zone. India's decision against withdrawing soldiers comes as Pakistani officials continue talks with U.S. leaders. It's anticipated they will ask the U.S. to press India to negotiate a settlement on Kashmir. Since 1947, no fewer than 46 peace proposals regarding Kashmir have been made and many have involved the U.S. These days, the U.S. would like the controversy settled so Pakistan can concentrate its efforts on its western border region with Afghanistan, where Taliban forces for years have regrouped and planned attacks on NATO forces. "The U.S. role in the Kashmir conflict has to be as subliminal as possible," said Thomas Pickering, a former U.S. ambassador to India. Despite speculation that U.S. President Barack Obama considered sending former president Bill Clinton as a special envoy on Kashmir, Pickering said appointing a U.S. mediator wouldn't work. India, he said, "has special genes to resist `made by the U.S.' solutions." Then-Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf was close to reaching a deal with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh before being ousted. "Singh is probably kicking himself for not having taken a deal with Musharraf," said Bruce Reidel, a former U.S. Central Intelligence Agency agent who led Obama's review of the administration's Afghanistan and Pakistan strategy. "India wants to emerge in the 21st century as a leading state, but that cannot happen if it's next to a failed state or a state run by jihadists, with the world's fastest growing nuclear arsenal to boot." Former Jammu and Kashmir governor Lt.-Gen. L.K. Sinha said Singh could easily see his public support plummet if he gives away too much on Kashmir. "For the sake of secularism, even if today the majority of Kashmiris want (independence), we will not allow them to go," Sinha said, adding that allowing independence to Kashmir's 5 million Muslims could have drastic consequences for India's 100 million other Muslims. "The 900 million Hindus in this country would say secularism is bogus and we could see another round of riots like in 1947 where the Muslims are thrown out." |
| Posted by:ryuge |
| #2 A clerification: by "disassembled", in the case of the ISI I mean liquidated, to a man - every one of them dead. The rest just chop into manageable (politically isolated and bombable) tribal chunks. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2010-03-26 10:51 |
| #1 Pakistan need to be disassembled, starting with the ISI. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2010-03-26 10:49 |