Tuesday, July 17, 2018
02:49 AM (GMT +5)

Go Back   CSS Forums > General > Discussion

Discussion Discuss current affairs and issues helpful in CSS only.

Reply Share Thread: Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook     Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter     Submit Thread to Google+ Google+    
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old Wednesday, March 01, 2006
Babban Miyan Ding Dong's Avatar
Senior Member
Best Moderator Award: Awarded for censoring all swearing and keeping posts in order. - Issue reason: Best ModMedal of Appreciation: Awarded to appreciate member's contribution on forum. (Academic and professional achievements do not make you eligible for this medal) - Issue reason:
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Road Pe
Posts: 406
Thanks: 4
Thanked 133 Times in 18 Posts
Babban Miyan Ding Dong is on a distinguished road
Default Implications of Bush's Visit...

Assalam Alaikum,

__________________________________________________ _____


Implications of Bush visit


By Tariq Fatemi
SOON we will have the US president in Islamabad. What message will the world’s most powerful leader bring us and what advantages can accrue to the country from this event? Pakistan’s current relations with the United States are close and cooperative. The government claims that the ties have never been as better as now. But similar claims had been made in the past as well. It is, therefore, not the Bush administration’s public pronouncements of Pakistan’s relevance in regional and global affairs that matter. Such declarations need to be transformed into substantive political and economic advantages.

The US must accept that it has a stake in Pakistan’s economic well-being and national security, specially in view of our status as a nuclear power, our contribution to the global war on terror, our efforts to normalize relations with India and our role as a major Islamic country. This is particularly important because US-Pakistan ties are being forged in an uncertain global environment.

Notwithstanding the close cooperation between the two countries in the pursuit of important objectives, especially as regards the global war on terror, this has not resulted in the relationship acquiring a strategic dimension so far. In particular, the people here see US cooperation with Pakistan as tactical and, therefore, a transient engagement. Many Pakistanis, like those in other Muslim countries, view the US with deep misgivings.

America is seen as engaged in schemes to humiliate Islam, occupy some Muslim states, threaten others and extend a carte blanche to Israel to perpetuate its repressive policies against the Palestinians. The US will, therefore, be judged by the way in which it treats issues that are close to Muslims such as Palestine, Kashmir, and not by mere statements of intent.

President Bush’s address at the Asia Society on February 23, followed by extensive interviews to the media have, however, facilitated the task of the analysts. Bush made it clear that his visit to Delhi represents a very important element in his quest to turn the relationship with India into a strategic vision for his country for the 21st century. He spoke out strongly in favour of making the civilian nuclear cooperation deal the centre piece of his India visit, for it would not only cement their friendship, but also raise the level of their ties to a much higher plane. Administration officials have reiterated that the US has de-hyphenated the India-Pakistan relationship. “What it does with one, will not be mirrored with the other”. US under-secretary of state Nicholas Burns claimed that the administration has reaffirmed “the central importance of Pakistan to the US, as a strategic partner for us in the war on terrorism”, while India is “one of our most important partners worldwide.” He has, however, emphasized that it would not be realistic to compare Pakistan with India, which the US is committed “to help become a major power in the 21st century”. The agenda with Pakistan is more limited .

Bush’s remarks confirmed that America’s primary interest in Pakistan remains this country’s role and contribution to the war on terror. On this issue, there was very close coordination between the intelligence and security agencies of the US and Pakistan and this was true even in the case of the Bajaur incident. This may explain the administration’s refusal to express any remorse over the loss of civilian lives in this tragedy. More revealing was the remark that “in the war against terror, we are allies and we coordinate.”

On terrorism, the Pakistani leadership is determined to remain a credible US partner . Nevertheless, there are aspects which need careful analysis. Will Al Qaeda gradually disappear or will the growing hostility of the West to Islam provide further impetus to terrorists and help them recruit new members and widen the scope and area of their operations? Afghanistan and Iraq have already become breeding grounds for extremists, but now, with growing hostility against the West, even in the traditionally moderate Muslim countries, Al Qaeda is likely to remain a major threat not only to the West, but to the establishments in the East, as well.

While it is true that Pakistan is no longer preoccupied with India as it was for more than 50 years, it would be naive to presume that India no longer constitutes a threat to Pakistan’s national interests. The American president reiterated that he was very pleased with the current normalization process between Pakistan and India that had permitted the US to build good relations with both. As regards the issue of Kashmir, he confirmed that it would figure in his talks in both New Delhi and Islamabad, but that he would not play any role in the resolution of this problem, confining himself to speaking about it and encouraging the leadership of the two countries to remain committed to dialogue and negotiations. But he underlined that any solution of the Kashmir problem should be in accordance with the wishes of Pakistan, India and the “citizens” of Kashmir.

Pakistanis will, nevertheless, be encouraged by Bush’s remark that “for too long, Kashmir has been a source of violence and distrust between these two countries.” This does not mean, however, that the Bush administration is prepared to use its new found influence in New Delhi to urge India to either reduce its military presence in the occupied territory, or to enter into a serious and result-oriented dialogue with Pakistan. The US agrees with India that resistance to Indian occupation in Kashmir amounts to terrorism and, therefore, accepts the need for the massive Indian military presence there. In fact, American academicians have suggested that formalization of the current status quo in Kashmir may be the only acceptable way out.

This should not, however, discourage us from forcefully urging upon Bush that unless his administration takes a more active role in the peace process, it may soon run out of steam. After all, the US has, on many occasions, played a critical role in reducing tension and encouraging dialogue between India and Pakistan. Now that the US is forging ties with India and has declared Pakistan a non-Nato ally , it is incumbent on it make a determined pitch for durable peace in the region which would not be possible without a resolution of the Kashmir dispute.

As regards US plans to provide highly sophisticated arms to India, this is not something which we can protest against, especially as the US is now providing Pakistan some weapons systems as well. But we can point out that any massive accretion to India’s offensive ability will neither help the normalization process nor add to stability in the region. The Bush administration needs to appreciate that deterioration in the conventional balance will only enhance Pakistan’s dependence on non-conventional weapons.

In this context, we must also take up forcefully the issue of US assistance to India in the nuclear field that would confer on Delhi the status of a near-acknowledged nuclear power. We should point out that we now have strict institutional and legal mechanisms to ensure total compliance with global non-proliferation requirements. Apart from our own acute need for energy, any move to discriminate between the nuclear status of the two South Asian neighbours would have a negative fallout on the region.

Nevertheless, the American president is likely to make new and more onerous demands on Pakistan, especially with regard to the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan, the brewing crisis in Iran, and the evolving situation in the Middle East. As regards Afghanistan, it is quite clear that the Karzai government, even with Nato and ISAF (International Security Assistance Force) presence, will find it difficult to crush the Taliban. The warlords remain a major headache for Kabul. Bush is, therefore, likely to ask for our acquiescence to US-led operations in the border areas, and this could give rise to fresh tensions in Pakistan.

Iran is likely to be discussed as well. Administration officials have refused to rule out an armed attack on Iran. Israeli leaders, too, have been urging upon the US not to waste time in negotiations, but to opt for a policy of ultimatums followed by armed action if required. Pakistan must point out that this would be a grave folly not only for the region, but even for American interests. We should affirm that we can have no role in any American schemes against Iran.

The Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline project would surely figure in both New Delhi and Islamabad, as evident from Bush’s first ever comments on the subject, when he called upon India, Pakistan and the US to “send a united message to Iran that development of nuclear weapons is unacceptable. Iran must get a unified message from all of us.” This was as a clear warning that, notwithstanding the energy needs of India and Pakistan, the US would not countenance a “member of the axis of evil”, gaining such an important advantage in the region.

I believe that after the Bush visit, we will see both countries cool their enthusiasm for the IPI project and opt for projects such as the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan gas pipeline or the Qatar-Pakistan-India project. This would be regrettable since the IPI is considered as technically the most feasible and financially the most attractive.

Trade is an important, even critical issue, between the two countries. Interestingly enough, the Bush administration is quite happy to dole out nearly seven hundred million dollars annually to Pakistan, but appears unwilling to provide greater market access to Pakistani products. Our pleas that increasing the volume of Pakistan’s exports would generate jobs and enhance economic activity that could best combat the spread of extremism have not fallen on receptive ears, so far. It was, therefore, gratifying to hear Bush acknowledge that greater market access for Pakistani products is a legitimate concern. The investment agreement that is to be signed during the visit is also likely to encourage American investors to look at Pakistan more favourably.

Pakistan’s relations with the US remains one-dimensional, based as it is on a single item agenda — cooperation in the war on terror; even though Bush claimed in an interview that “it is much bigger than just the war on terror”. This is reminiscent of the ‘60s when we were part of the western alliance in the Cold War and therefore, favoured with arms and economic assistance. Again, the political adulation and massive assistance extended in the ‘80s was a payment for our role in American-led efforts to oust the Soviet forces from Afghanistan.

Even if we are to presume that the war on terror is not likely to subside for decades, basing our relations with the world’s only superpower on this single issue is fraught with risks. Notwithstanding our efforts, influential elements in the US Congress and media even now question our role in the war on terror, alleging that the president “has been an intermittent collaborator in the fight against terrorism, rather than a fully committed ally.” As Ashley Tellis, the influential strategic analyst wrote in early 2005, “Pakistan today is clearly both part of the problem as well as part of the solution”, a sentiment shared by others.

We have to prove these people wrong, by our policies both at home and abroad. The US is unlike any other democracy. The executive has to share authority and influence with other centres of power. Institutions matter much more than individuals. These need to be cultivated assiduously, over the years. In this effort, Pakistani-Americans can also play a helpful role. But the real challenge is at home. Only a democratic polity, strengthened by a tolerant and liberal society, can enhance our credentials and make us genuine partners of the West. And the West, too, must recognize that if the global campaign against terrorism is a war “for the soul of Islam” as it claims, then it is incumbent for it to assist those that represent the moderate stream in Islam.

The writer is a former ambassador
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old Thursday, March 02, 2006
Muskan Ghuman's Avatar
Senior Member
Medal of Appreciation: Awarded to appreciate member's contribution on forum. (Academic and professional achievements do not make you eligible for this medal) - Issue reason: Medal of AppreciationQualifier: Awarded to those Members who cleared css written examination - Issue reason:
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pakistan
Posts: 869
Thanks: 141
Thanked 203 Times in 109 Posts
Muskan Ghuman has a spectacular aura aboutMuskan Ghuman has a spectacular aura aboutMuskan Ghuman has a spectacular aura about
Default

Bush’s crucial visit




By Ghayoor Ahmed


GEOPOLITICAL realism demands that the United States, being the sole superpower of our times adopt a policy of even-handedness towards Pakistan and India. It should strengthen its strategic ties with both of them. Regrettably, however, the United States, desirous of India playing a dominant role in Asia, has entered into an alliance with it last year and has thus thrown its weight behind it for that purpose.

It seems that in order to fulfil its strategic objectives in Asia, the United States has sought to strengthen India militarily and has apparently lost sight of the adverse implications it will have for Pakistan. Political observers are completely baffled by the strange behaviour of the US, which describes Pakistan as its most allied ally in Asia. However, Mathew P Dale, who was a senior adviser on South Asia in the State Department, some years ago, has provided the answer.

In his candid statement, Mathew has stated that in the past there were attempts to impose intellectual constraints such as balance or evenhandedness in American policy towards Pakistan and India. Those days are over, if indeed they ever existed. At any given moment or on any given topic the United States might appear to be evenhanded that would be an incidental outcome of a policy, not the objective of the policy — meaning thereby that America tents to be partial to India.

The existing US policy towards Pakistan reflected, as enunciated by Mathew, is one of expediency. Regrettably, our policy-makers have once again failed to see which way the wind is blowing in the corridors of power in Washington. They remain content with the heap of praise showered by the US leaders and its media on Pakistan for its role in the fight against terrorism.

If Pakistan wants to avoid a bitter disillusionment, it should evolve a clear-sighted policy that would protect its long-term strategic interests in the region and beyond. It should not, however, be interpreted as meaning that a change in Pakistan’s policy should underestimate its strategic ties with the US which are rightly seen to be of great importance to the country.

During his forthcoming visit to Pakistan, President George W Bush need to be convinced that the US-India strategic partnership will not promote any discernible American interest in South Asia where India’s continuous desire for political and military hegemony has already created serious concern to this country. America’s partisan attitude in favour of India is bound to create awkward problems for it.

The US policy-makers are probably convinced that Pakistan will continue to play the role of a toady in consideration of the financial assistance it receives from the United States. Given the favourable attitude of America to its ruling elites, there would be no opposition by it to the proposed US-India strategic partnership. To some extent, it is true as, for many years, the policy-makers in Pakistan have kept silent over the emerging “new relationship” between Washington and New Delhi that poses a real threat to Pakistan’s security interests in the region. The US-India Strategic Alliance is now a fait accompli.

During the last five years or so, Pakistan’s relationship with the United Stated has undergone a significant change. Pakistan is an important partner of the United States in its global war against terrorism. Pakistan is therefore, thinking in terms of the US as the main source of support for strengthening its defence capabilities to address its security concerns in the region. Regrettably the United States strategic partnership with India has largely falsified this hope.

Pakistan’s annoyance with the United States on this account is fully justified. The Bush administration was by no means unaware of the adverse implications of the US-India agreement for Pakistan. But it made no effort to allay Islamabad’s concerns on this score and has tended to pay greater attention to India’s interests. Needless to say, a weak Pakistan which occupies one of the most strategic areas in the world would not be in the United States’ global interest and it should therefore rectify the situation without undue delay.

Our media, both official and private, is trying to make the people of Pakistan believe that President Bush would take personal interest in getting the Kashmir problem resolved. President Bush’s address at the Asia Society’s meeting and the interviews he gave to some of the Pakistani media men on the eve of his trip to South Asia may have created this impression. However, some political observers in Pakistan believe that Bush’s emphasis on the need for an early resolution of the Kashmir dispute was an empty rhetoric. Their argument is that President Bush’s predecessors had also made a similar plea but nothing came out of all because of India’s inflexibility and obduracy.

It remains, however, to be seen if the strategic partnership between Washington and New Delhi makes any difference to India-Pakistan relations and that President Bush would indeed be able to play a meaningful role on Kashmir during his visit to the subcontinent. The US policy-makers should, however, realize that a South Asia at peace with itself is in the US interest and, therefore they must strive hard to resolve the Kashmir problem which is not only a perennial source of tension between Pakistan and India, but can also be a destabilizing factor in the region.

The writer is a former ambassador.
__________________
My ALLAH it is enough for my respect that I m "Your" person & it is enough for my pride that "You" are my GOD."You" are exactly the way I desire.Thus please mould me the way "You" desire.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old Friday, March 03, 2006
THE 1's Avatar
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: My Place!
Posts: 313
Thanks: 0
Thanked 29 Times in 2 Posts
THE 1 will become famous soon enough
Arrow Thx @ Babban nd Muskan

i wuz searchin for this sorta stuff. Will comment on the articles later, but thx for sharing.


Regards,

THE 1
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old Friday, March 03, 2006
Yasir Hayat Khan's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Nowshera, KPK
Posts: 180
Thanks: 0
Thanked 23 Times in 18 Posts
Yasir Hayat Khan is on a distinguished road
Arrow

that would be helpfull......
__________________
Life is a kaleidoscope of flaws, desires, emotions and mishaps__ YHK
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old Friday, March 03, 2006
Babban Miyan Ding Dong's Avatar
Senior Member
Best Moderator Award: Awarded for censoring all swearing and keeping posts in order. - Issue reason: Best ModMedal of Appreciation: Awarded to appreciate member's contribution on forum. (Academic and professional achievements do not make you eligible for this medal) - Issue reason:
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Road Pe
Posts: 406
Thanks: 4
Thanked 133 Times in 18 Posts
Babban Miyan Ding Dong is on a distinguished road
Default Good Article!!

Assalam Alaikum,
_______________________


US human rights record


By Ali Dayan Hasan

ISLAMABAD will be sealed off so that President Musharraf can welcome US President George Bush to his capital. Bush is making the journey to compliment and compensate Musharraf on services rendered in the ‘war on terror’.


Musharraf is hosting Bush to bask in the glory of a renewed alliance with the United States and to strengthen his faltering grip on power. Nowhere is human rights on the agenda.


In the run up to the trip, Bush has praised general Musharraf’s “vision for a democratic Pakistan” and his commitment to “free and open elections” Unless Bush knows something that Pakistanis do not, it appears that the continued disregard and undermining of the Pakistani Constitution, the marginalization of mainstream political parties, and the failure to hold a credible election is an odd formula for a democratic Pakistan and the Bush administration’s broader commitment to “fostering democracy in the Muslim world.”


The skewed view of President Musharraf held by Bush is certainly based on shared values. But rather than the shared value of democracy that Bush likes to speak about, what Musharraf and Bush have in common is a shared commitment to the priority, above all else, of the ‘war on terror.’ Bush has been gushing about Musharraf’s role therein, appreciating his “commitment to joining the world in dealing with Islamic radicals who will murder innocent people to achieve an objective.”


Given the conduct of the Bush administration in this context, the US president’s appreciation of the Musharraf government is hardly surprising. International human rights law contains no more basic prohibition than the absolute, unconditional ban on torture and “cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment.” To date, the Bush administration’s understanding of the term “torture” remains unclear. As Human Rights Watch has noted: In March 2005, Porter Goss, the CIA director, justified water-boarding, a sanitized term for an age-old, terrifying torture technique in which the victim is made to believe that he is about to drown.


In testimony before the US Senate in August 2005, the former deputy White House counsel, Timothy Flanigan, would not even rule out using mock executions. Lt. Gen. Michael V. Hayden, the deputy director of national intelligence and one of those who oversees the CIA, explained to human rights groups in August 2005 that US interrogators have a duty to use all available authority to fight terrorism. “We’re pretty aggressive within the law,” he explained. “We’re going to live on the edge.”


As Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, and Bagram have shown, the US has not lived on the edge of legality, it has clearly and frequently crossed it into territory previously thought to have been the preserve of rogue governments. In December last year, Human Rights Watch listed 26 documented persons being held as “ghost detainees” at undisclosed locations outside the United States. They are being held indefinitely and incommunicado, without legal rights or access to counsel. Most of them were arrested in Pakistan and some may still be detained here. The US used to denounce “disappearances”. It now appears to be engaging in them.


In January 2005, the Bush administration began claiming the power to use cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment so long as the victim was a non-American held outside the United States. In December last year, under political pressure, President Bush was forced to withdraw his opposition to legislation sponsored by Republican Senator John McCain banning cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of terrorist suspects. However, the US is the only government in the world known to have claimed this power openly, as a matter of official policy, and to pretend that it is lawful

In Pakistan, the US has also found a willing partner to employ what the FBI describes as “locally acceptable forms of interrogation.” The routine use of torture in Pakistan by both civilian law enforcement and military agencies is well documented. What is surprising is the use of torture by the Pakistani security and intelligence services to interrogate both US and other foreign citizen suspects in the country.


For example, during eight months of illegal detention in Pakistan, Zain and Kashan Afzal, US citizens of Pakistani descent, were repeatedly tortured, allegedly by Pakistani authorities. During this period, FBI agents questioned the brothers on at least six occasions without intervening to end the torture. Instead, they threatened the men with being sent to Guantanamo Bay if they did not confess to involvement in terrorism. They were released in April 2005 only after Human Rights Watch intervened in their case.

Instead of publicly condemning this behaviour President Bush is coming to Islamabad to grant legitimacy to the “democratic” vision of his Pakistani counterpart and award him a Bilateral Investment Treaty. The promotion of trade and commerce between the United States and Pakistan is commendable. But Bush’s silence on human rights and the US government’s outsourcing of torture will bring nothing but a poverty of dignity to both.


The writer is a South Asia researcher for the New York-based Human Rights Watch.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old Friday, March 03, 2006
Muskan Ghuman's Avatar
Senior Member
Medal of Appreciation: Awarded to appreciate member's contribution on forum. (Academic and professional achievements do not make you eligible for this medal) - Issue reason: Medal of AppreciationQualifier: Awarded to those Members who cleared css written examination - Issue reason:
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pakistan
Posts: 869
Thanks: 141
Thanked 203 Times in 109 Posts
Muskan Ghuman has a spectacular aura aboutMuskan Ghuman has a spectacular aura aboutMuskan Ghuman has a spectacular aura about
Default

Salam to all,

Bush’s agenda for his visit

By Talat Masood


THE forthcoming visit of President Bush to India and Pakistan is a milestone in the on-going engagement and increasing interest of the United States in this part of the world. Several factors have contributed towards making South Asia an attractive destination for significant US presence.

The emergence of democratic India as an economic and military power, Pakistan’s central role in the war on terror, nuclearization of South Asia, Pakistan’s geo-strategic location and its influence in the Islamic world are contributing factors drawing America to this region.

Fallout from the US invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, the looming nuclear crisis facing Iran, the growing unrest in the energy-rich Muslim world and the rise of China as an economic and military powerhouse in Asia are additional factors for the importance of this region. The visit to Pakistan is also meant to be a strong endorsement by President Bush of the policies being pursued by President Musharraf, especially as related to fighting terrorism and extremism.

It goes to the credit of the United States that it enjoys at the official level very good relations with India, Pakistan and Afghanistan despite the mutual differences and on-going tensions that exist between these countries. The US deals with India and Pakistan separately, at different levels, based on mutuality of interests and at times even solely advancing its own unilateral agenda.

The United States considers India as the largest democracy in the world and a strategic partner. Indian liberalization of the economy since the early 1990s is attracting US investments, and American corporations consider India a huge potential market for their goods and services. The support for growth of India is across the political spectrum. Republicans and Democrats alike perceive India to develop into a countervailing force to China, for this they are willing to encourage India to be a capable nuclear power. The requirement of India and the United States to cooperate in nuclear energy and secure future sources of energy is the centrepiece of their current relationship.

The most extraordinary feature of this partnership is the level of confidence that US reposes in a nuclear-armed India and how it has come full circle since sanctions were imposed in May 1998 after the nuclear detonations. India’s interest, on the other hand, lies in seeking critical technologies — nuclear, space and defence — sophisticated arms and equipment, and infra-structural development from the US.

India gives high priority to acquisition of technology and assistance in human resource development. Today the highest number of foreign students in the US universities and institutions are from India followed by China.

Whereas Washington repeatedly assures Islamabad that its relationship with India is not a zero-sum game and it wants to develop a de-hyphenated, but a strong relationship with Pakistan, based on mutuality of interests. Nonetheless, Pakistan and some other Asian countries fear that India’s strategic partnership with the lone superpower will give fillip to India’s aspirations of becoming a regional hegemon.

Moreover, a common feeling prevails among Pakistanis that their relationship with the US is not intrinsic but based on expediency and currently driven by its pivotal position in the war on terror. Firstly, it has to be realized that there is no permanence in relationship between nations and it is only the mutuality of interests that provide continuity.

Without doubt, fighting the war on terror would remain America’s top global priority for years. Combating terrorism as the world has learnt the hard way, requires a comprehensive approach, and the military dimension is only one element of it. If Washington shies away prematurely from Pakistan (and Afghanistan) there is every possibility that the same forces would reorganize themselves and once again pose a serious threat not only to the United States but also to the rest of the world.

Building capacities of countries of the region to counter terrorism is one of Washington’s major priorities, and being a long-drawn process, would need to be sustained for years. As a part of the same policy the US is providing economic assistance to Pakistan on a long-term basis and it is expected that during President Bush’s visit the two countries would sign the bilateral investment Treaty to create a legal and operational framework for enhancement of trade and investment. Washington is promoting educational programmes for Pakistani students on a high priority basis both to sustain economic development and also for developing a cadre of future leadership, which is not only US friendly but also has a more comprehensive world view.

Pakistan’s geostrategic position and the United States’ deep strategic interests in the Muslim world will also keep Washington engaged and provide durability to our relationship. It is unlikely that the US will agree to a similar deal on civil nuclear energy for Pakistan, but may consider some form of arrangement in the future, provided the nuclear supplier group can be taken on board.

President Musharraf should ask President Bush to review their objections to the Iranian gas pipeline, which is so vital for meeting our energy needs, especially when the US is keeping us out of the nuclear deal. Washington is willing to sell F-16s to Pakistan, but Islamabad is now more inclined to buy a mix of new as well as refurbished fighter aircraft at reduced prices.

America’s unilateralist policies, its invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, unstinted support to Israel, selective application of democratic principles and international treaties has given rise to a powerful anti-American sentiment globally but more so in the Muslim world, including Pakistan. American policies toward Muslim countries are the subject of criticism but there is no ill-will against American people. Indeed, there is wide respect for Jeffersonian ideals and entrepreneurial spirit of its people. To win back the support of the people, the such administration ought to apply international norms more uniformly and also address the root cause of conflicts.

During his forthcoming visit to South Asia, President Bush will address the complex problem of Kashmir. The US is already engaged in quiet diplomacy but the president is likely to use this opportunity to urge both countries to move toward a resolution, as was apparent from his recent interviews to the media. President Musharraf’s proposal for self-governance and demilitarization strikes a responsive chord in US circles.

Americans are also promoting the idea of building close economic and trade links between the two parts of Kashmir. These include developing of infrastructure facilities like roads, airports etc, and creating additional employment opportunities by initiating joint projects with the assistance of foreign donors. On the question of any territorial adjustment of Jammu and Kashmir the US position is fundamentally not different from that India which favours the freezing of the status quo.

The Indians of course will harp on the jihadi problem, despite Pakistan’s assurances that they are doing their best to prevent cross-border infiltration. In any case, elaborate fencing along the LoC, installation of sophisticated electronic and other sensors and heavy presence of Indian military makes infiltration by non-state elements almost impossible.

As for promoting democracy in Pakistan, the US will continue to follow the existing policy of sidelining it in favour of its immediate strategic imperative of fighting the war on terror. On balance, President Bush’s visit, apart from being symbolic, is likely to invigorate our mutual relationship and give a new depth and dimension to it, notwithstanding, that it will be characterized by some elements of expediency.

The writer is a retired lieutenant-general.


with regards,
Muskan
__________________
My ALLAH it is enough for my respect that I m "Your" person & it is enough for my pride that "You" are my GOD."You" are exactly the way I desire.Thus please mould me the way "You" desire.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old Friday, March 03, 2006
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 5
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
cooolideal is on a distinguished road
Default bush mean push

bush mean push so kindly push him and stop about the discussion of stupid bush
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old Saturday, March 04, 2006
Yasir Hayat Khan's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Nowshera, KPK
Posts: 180
Thanks: 0
Thanked 23 Times in 18 Posts
Yasir Hayat Khan is on a distinguished road
Arrow Bush arrives in Pakistan......

Amid speculations and apprehensions of general Pakistani people, all day I have been hearing the same things repeatedly.......
I just want to tell all my Pakistani friends that things are not so bad,
yes we are facing the fallout of war on terror, we are facing internal disturbances,
the sacrilegious caricatures have given an opportunity to the opposition; of agitation and strengthened the anti-government sentiments........
but despite all this let's believe in our able President, he has tackled many challenges prudently...... we are not Botswana or Rawanda....... we are an able nuclear country.... we know what we are facing and we know our options well....
we are not dependent on USA, we have backdoor channels.... China is there, we are an important country of the ummah, we have lived with US sanctions before..... and certainly we can face it much better now, if the need arose......

So Let's be confident with what we are, and forget all the pessimistic thoughts... this is my humble request to all of you.
__________________
Life is a kaleidoscope of flaws, desires, emotions and mishaps__ YHK
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old Saturday, March 04, 2006
KhalidBinWaleed's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In the hearts of all BRAVE men.
Posts: 11
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
KhalidBinWaleed is on a distinguished road
Angry Y can't Paksitanis EVER think optimisitically?

Salam,
Exactly, we don't need to be pessimistic, brothers...
All we need to do is, get a few more (Muslim) ppl killed in WANA and Balochistan, let some more (shameless) TV channels in, put those uneducated Mullahs in jails, let lose those GREAT ppl who are creating such a wonderful state of law n order in our beloved country, get some more patriotic politicians in our politics (Sugar Mill owners, i mean...) and grab a bit of honour in our hands by stopping those mad ppl who're protesting againts the cartoons...
Comon, My fellow countrymen! u need to get some brains in ur self!

Those ppl in Wana and balochistan, THEY're TERRORISTS! If we don't kill them, they'll kill us! They don't have to be put in jails and given a trial! Besides, don't u see they've been bombing our cities for the past 50 years! Atleast killing a few of 'em has made our cities safer and there r no more BOMBINGs (taking 100s of innocent lives!)

Huh?! TV? U mullahs r always against TVs! I don't get it! The WHOLE world is into this thing now, we can't be left behind! Its our culture now! Whats wrong in it? When every body's sisters r going out with their boyfriends, y should we be so conservative?

And ofcourse, those unlettered ppl, when they're rebelling against the government, they must be JAILED. They don't know how the matters of the state are decided. They should know that we're a NUCLEAR state! we have to defend our Nuclear facilities at ALL costs! They're the ones who leaked the prolieferation secrets, even though ISI and the whole miltiary was trying their best to conceal the so called proliferation thingy! Anywayz, no sweat , the fool scientist agreed to become the scapegoat, and well "let's believe in our able President, he has tackled many challenges prudently ... ... ... we know our options well...."

And those HIDDEN HANDS, I really hate them ! They always manage to do some violence and get away with it! But dont worry fellows, we've got the FBI here now !!!

I don't think there's anything left to say about hte protests, a lot has been sed bout 'em on the forum...


Regards.


BTW, brother YHK, I don't mean anything personal against u... I just wanted to organize my thots bout musharaf's Virtues, so i organized them by writing.. Hope u wouldn't take it personally...
__________________
[FONT="Arial Narrow"]"Nothing sharpens sight like [COLOR="Red"]envy" [/COLOR] - Thomas Fuller[/FONT]
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old Saturday, March 04, 2006
Muskan Ghuman's Avatar
Senior Member
Medal of Appreciation: Awarded to appreciate member's contribution on forum. (Academic and professional achievements do not make you eligible for this medal) - Issue reason: Medal of AppreciationQualifier: Awarded to those Members who cleared css written examination - Issue reason:
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pakistan
Posts: 869
Thanks: 141
Thanked 203 Times in 109 Posts
Muskan Ghuman has a spectacular aura aboutMuskan Ghuman has a spectacular aura aboutMuskan Ghuman has a spectacular aura about
Default

Salam to all,

@ Coolideal,

Dear fellow...reality is reality whether we talk about it r not...USA is ruling the whole world this thing will remain as it is whether we bother about it r not....to bring change discussion is necessary…We cant resist the danger by just closing our eyes..
So its better to discuss about Bush’s Visit..becoz its imp issue….
Thanks

@ Khalidbinwalid,

U r right in satirizing the policies of President…I m not favoring his policies but just want to say that some time circumstances r such that “to beguile the time u hv to look like the time…”so what President Musharf is doing is need of the hour…..
As far as arresting of Al.Quiada member is concerned its totally wrong they r not terrorists…..Usa is using Pakistan just for its own sake…
But we cant blame President only…. look at the attitude of Opposition they politicized each & every issue…& look at the behavior of people of this country…we celebrate Valentine’s day v happily…& now we will waste our money on Basant….at 1 side there r protests against the caricatures & on the other side with full volume music on floors we participate in basant…not more than 5 months r passed that our nation has seen the biggest tragedy in the form of Earthquake …but we have forgotten it & instead of giving money to that shelter less people ..Wasting on such frivolous activities…
So just Government policies r not only worthy to be satirized…many other factors r also there which r contributing in all this situation…

@ Yasir

good attitude....optimisim is what we need in our youth....although the circumstances r not good but 1 should hope for the best....
if there is some water in the glass.... almost half of it.....an optimistic person will say the glass is half filled.... &.... an pessimistic will say half glass is empty

so better to see the brighter side its preaching of our religion also...

Inshallah that day is not so far when muslims will get rid of all the enemies but before this we hv to just get rid of our own misdeeds...

with regards,
Muskan
__________________
My ALLAH it is enough for my respect that I m "Your" person & it is enough for my pride that "You" are my GOD."You" are exactly the way I desire.Thus please mould me the way "You" desire.

Last edited by Muskan Ghuman; Saturday, March 04, 2006 at 11:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ahmadinejad's Historic Iraq Visit Zirwaan Khan News & Articles 0 Sunday, March 02, 2008 09:35 PM
indo-pak relations atifch Current Affairs 0 Monday, December 11, 2006 08:01 PM
China president’s U.S visit sardarzada11 Current Affairs 35 Sunday, April 30, 2006 10:22 PM
BUSH'S visit to Pakistan Babban Miyan Ding Dong Humorous, Inspirational and General Stuff 3 Tuesday, March 07, 2006 08:24 PM


CSS Forum on Facebook Follow CSS Forum on Twitter

Disclaimer: All messages made available as part of this discussion group (including any bulletin boards and chat rooms) and any opinions, advice, statements or other information contained in any messages posted or transmitted by any third party are the responsibility of the author of that message and not of CSSForum.com.pk (unless CSSForum.com.pk is specifically identified as the author of the message). The fact that a particular message is posted on or transmitted using this web site does not mean that CSSForum has endorsed that message in any way or verified the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message. We encourage visitors to the forum to report any objectionable message in site feedback. This forum is not monitored 24/7.

Sponsors: ArgusVision   vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.