Pakistan’s Stupid Demand To Involve A Third Party In Kashmir Dialogue

During the recent Foreign Secretary level talk between India and Pakistan, the latter again raised the apparently justified but actually baseless demand to involve Kashmiris as a third party in dialogues over the Kashmir problem.

It is a demand that has been raised for quite a number of times by both Pakistan and Hurriyat Conference. And, as I said, though the demand appears to be a justified one, in reality it is simply a stupid demand that does not even worth any consideration.

But why is it so? Simple. Even if India and Pakistan try to involve the common Kashmiris in the dialogue process, how can they go for the same? They cannot literally invite the mass of that region to participate in the dialogue process, right? Rather, the mass has to be represented by an appropriate entity.

Fine. Now Pakistan might say that it and India can find that representative of common Kashmiris in Hurriyat Conference. In fact, Pakistan actually refers to Hurriyat Conference every time it talks about involving the common Kashmiris as a third party.

Now comes the crucial question. How can India accept that Hurriyat Conference is indeed the true representative of common Kashmiris? Where is the proof? Neither the leaders of Hurriyat Conference have ever contested (and won) any election in Kashmir nor they enjoy any other kind of recognition that qualifies them as the true representatives of common Kashmiris. An organization cannot be accepted as the true representative of the wishes and aspirations of a community simply because it claims itself to be the same.

Secondly, even if it is taken for granted that Hurriyat Conference leaders do have some influence and acceptability among the Muslim Kashmiris, it is well known that they have absolutely no acceptability among the Hindu and Buddhist Kashmiris. I hope that Pakistan has the basic courtesy to accept that Muslim Kashmiris are not the only representatives of the common people of that region. The Hindu and Buddhist Kashmiris are also to be counted, right? And in that case Hurriyat Conference cannot claim itself to be a true representative of the common people of Kashmir, as its acceptability is confined only within a certain section of the Kashmiris.

So, at the end of the day we find that there is no organization that can claim itself to enjoy acceptability among all sections of Kashmiris irrespective of religious background. So even if India and Pakistan try to involve a third party as the representative of “wishes” and “aspirations” of the common people of Kashmir, they cannot be successful in that “noble mission”. Because no such organization or entity exists in the first place. It is high time all relevant stakeholders accepted this “harsh fact” with a “broken heart”.

ULFA Peace Talks – A Significant Step Towards Stability In Assam

The Indian government’s peace talks with the leaders (of the Arabinda Rajkhow faction) of ULFA (United Liberation Front Of Asom), to be held on 10th February 2011, is going to be a key step forward towards restoring peace and stability in the picturesque north-east India in general and Assam in particular.

ULFA has been a frontline outfit in the terrorist and insurgent activities in Assam, and one of the most dreaded outfits in the north-east as a whole. And it is undoubtedly a significant, if not historic, development that today it is going to have unconditional peace talks with the Indian government. That the outfit is genuinely sincere about the dialogue that can be understood from the fact that it has dropped its sovereignty demand as a pre-condition for any talks. In fact, when ULFA dropped this pre-requisite for talks, that was a highly notable development in itself.

It is more-or-less obvious that the Paresh Baruah faction of ULFA will try to create problems for the talks. ULFA’s Central Executive Committee has threatened to take disciplinary action against him if he defies the outfit’s decision to hold talks with the Indian government. But honestly speaking that does not seem to deter him if he wants to create problems. However, even if he tries to create problems, hopefully that will fail to get the talks derailed as a whole. After all, the majority of ULFA cadres have realized the futility of walking the road of violence and bloodshed. By walking that path throughout the life, today they find that they have achieved only one thing – keeping themselves deprived of a normal life. So now they also desperately want to come back to a normal life. And therefore they will undoubtedly work hard for making the peace talks a success.

A bagful of good wishes to both the parties (The Indian government and ULFA) from each and every Indian citizen.

Plain Hypocrites: That Is All That Can Be Said About The People Of Jammu & Kashmir

Whenever there is any reported or alleged killing of any innocent civilian by the Indian security personnel in Kashmir, the people of the Valley immediately swing into “protests”. They take out processions, do squatting in front of government offices, clash with police and security personnel wherein they hurl stones at the former, and so on. (And naturally all these get so enthusiastically covered by the Pakistani media). On the other hand the separatist leaders start giving their reactions to the media, especially electronic media, expressing their “shock” and “anguish” over the “appalling” actions of the Indian security personnel.

Nobody is supporting the killings of innocent civilians in Kashmir by Indian security personnel. Such incidents are undoubtedly despicable. But what is very strange is that while the people of Jammu & Kashmir are so enthusiastic about expressing their anger over the alleged killings of innocent civilians by the Indian security personnel, they never utter a single word when such killings are conducted by terrorists. On such occasions not a single voice is heard, neither from the separatist leaders nor from the common people of Jammu & Kashmir.

Just take the latest example of two sisters being killed by terrorists at Sopore. Terrorists dragged the two girls out of their home in broad daylight, and gunned them down mercilessly. But there has been absolutely no reaction (like protests, etc.) on the part of the people. Not many months back a toddler fell victim to irresponsible stone pelting by a bunch of so-called protesters, when the baby was being taken to a doctor by his parents and their car came across those protesters (read hooligans). But even then there was no voice of objection from any quarter, neither the separatist leaders nor the common people.

The selective reaction of the separatist leaders can be understood, as we all know that they are just pet dogs of Pakistan, and their loyalty to that country’s government prevents them from criticizing heinous activities of those terrorists who are sponsored by that very government.

But how come the common people of Jammu & Kashmir are so selective in expressing their protest? Why do they remain completely silent on such occasions, while they are so smart in protesting against such (alleged) activities by the Indian security personnel? Shall we conclude that they do not find the killings of their fellow Kashmiris that painful if those killings take place at the hands of terrorists?

Shame on the common people of Jammu & Kashmir for their naked hypocrisy and double standard.

The Posco Clearance By The UPA Government – Why Are You Now Silent, Ms. Mamata Banerjee?

The Union Ministry of Environment & Forest’s conditional clearance for the controversial POSCO project has brought the hapless minister Mr. Jairam Ramesh into an eye of storm. He is being severely criticized from various quarters, including environment activists. And, apart from being criticized, he is also being accused of being a hypocrite. The reason? Well, critics are saying that the initial sternness shown by Mr. Ramesh over this issue was just an eye-wash, and the ultimate softness shown to the said project was pre-planned.

However, personally I feel that if the POSCO project has really brought into the “limelight” the hypocrisy of a person, then that person is nobody else but Ms. Mamata Banerjee.

Just recall the way this “fire brand” leader and aspiring West Bengal Chief Minister spoiled the proposed “Nano” project in West Bengal, a project that could have brought such a significant boost for the ailing economy of the state by creating a plethora of jobs. And what were Ms. Banerjee’s complaints against the project? Well, she had mainly two complaints. No. 1 – the project was about to use fertile agricultural land. No. 2 – it was going to displace local people from their ancestral lands.

Now let us have a look at the POSCO project. It is going to use (read exploit) around 75% of forest land. And it is going to displace (read uproot) a huge number of indigenous people from their ancestral lands.

So how can you now accept your government’s approval for POSCO project, Ms. Banerjee, when you opposed the “Nano” project for virtually similar reasons? Why do not you now go to the proposed site of POSCO project, and mobilize the local tribal people in the way you mobilized villagers at Singur against the proposed Nano project? And if you cannot do that, then at least you should resign from your ministerial position and pull your party out of the UPA coalition.

Come up with any of these two actions, and prove that you are not a hypocrite. It is an open challenge to you.

The Three Types of Friends/Relatives In Terms Of How They Treat Us

From what I have experienced in my life, I feel we can broadly classify our friends/relatives into three types in terms of how they treat us.


Some friends/relatives treat us like a staple food. They genuinely love us and keep touch with us all the time, even when there is no need to do the same.

Some friends/relatives treat us like an essential commodity. They might not love us that much, but still keep touch with us as they feel they might need us anytime for their own interest.

And then there r some friends/relatives who treat us like a medicine. They will look for us only when they need us, and will never bother to keep touch when they have no need to do the same.

The “Mass Movement” Chain Reaction Unleashed By Tunisia’s Jasmine Revolution

It seems that now famous “Jasmine Revolution” of Tunisia has unleashed a chain reaction of pro-democracy mass movements, which is gradually spreading its sphere across the Arab world.

Barely a few days had passed after the Revolution dethroned Tunisia’s once all-powerful President Zine Al-Abedine Ben Ali, when the global media came up with the startling news of Egypt’s “heir apparent” Gamal Mubarak’s fleeing to the U.K. The reason – a massive mass uprising in Egypt against his extra-constitutional influence in the country’s governance.

And then, just today (28th January 2011) I read about a mass protest that has erupted in Yemen, demanding the ouster of the country’s President for 30 years, Ali Abdullah Saleh. (Saleh had become the President of the then North Yemen in 1978, and became the first President of reunified Yemen in 1990, the office that he holds till date).

It is really interesting to note how an apparently internal matter of a country can eventually have international political ramifications, thus significantly affecting the political scenarios of other countries. Such incidents always enjoy special attention from current affairs enthusiasts in general, and life long students of Political Science in particular.

“Hi, Nice Meeting You” – Height Of Social Anomaly

I am genuinely sorry if I do not sound to be appreciative of social pleasantries. I may even sound to be a bit harsh and rude, somebody who does not have any idea about the value and significance of social decorum.

But I just cannot help saying that I feel odd about a way people now-a-days greet one another after getting introduced – “Hi, nice meeting you!”

There was a time when people used to say “Hello” and “Hi”. There was also the custom of saying “How do you do”, apart from some other forms of greetings.

Then, around 12-13 years back (if I am right) came this style of saying “Nice meeting you”. And now it has become the most common way of greeting one another after getting introduced for the first time.

So exactly what is the problem that I have with it?

Well, I find it to be a bit weird, and I will try to explain why it is so.

Let me ask you something. Suppose you have been given an apple (or any other fruit, or food, or beverage, etc.). Now, first you will consume it, and only then you will say “Wow, it was nice having it!” Right? Certainly you will not say anything like that before having it. Because you cannot appreciate a food item before even consuming it. It is common sense.

Similarly, isn’t it so that you should say “Nice meeting you” to somebody only after interacting with him at least for some time? How can you say something like that immediately after being introduced to him? How can you appreciate an experience (in this case the experience of interacting with that person) before even having that experience?

So this is my problem with this expression/way of greeting.

Could I make myself clear, dude?