Sign In / Register
Make This My Home Page | Feedback |RSS
You are here: IE »   Story

Too much trust. No verification

  • Print
  • Mail This Article
  • Comments
  • Add to favorites
  • Many puzzling things have been said about our relations with Pakistan since the Sharm el-Sheikh engagement. Our Finance Minister told the Lok Sabha that India’s foreign policy “is embedded in our 5,000-year-old civilisation”. So mysterious is this remark that it defies analysis. Official Congress Party spokesmen are easier to understand. They have said petulantly on national television that any criticism of the joint statement amounts to violating the “62-year-old consensus on foreign policy”. Why should there be a consensus? And, why should something that was valid 62 years ago still be relevant? But, for me, the most puzzling remark of all came from the Prime Minister when he told the Lok Sabha that the choice was between dialogue and war. “Let me say that in the affairs of two neighbours we should recall what President Reagan once said—trust but verify. There is no other way unless we go to war.”

    What puzzles me is why he has not noticed that we are already at war. The attack on Mumbai was an act of war. The men who were guiding the operation from Pakistan make this absolutely clear. In the cell phone conversations between them and the ten jihadi killers in Mumbai they say two things that our intelligence agencies must have told the Prime Minister about. They order their men to “kill as many people as you can so that an atmosphere of fear lingers long afterwards”. And, they say “this is only a trailer, the film has yet to begin”. Did the Prime Minister ask Yousuf Raza Gilani what this means? Did he ask him if the controllers who guided the attack on Mumbai included a ‘General Sahib’? Ajmal Kasab has spoken of meeting such a person. Did he ask him if it were not true that the reason why Hafiz Mohammed Sayeed could not be arrested was because as the founder of the Lashkar-e-Toiba he would have been acting on the instructions of the Pakistani army when he put together his appalling army? On the day that the Prime Minister defended engagement with Pakistan, did he notice that the Pakistani ambassador to the United Nations described Sayeed as ‘an humanitarian’.

    ... contd.

    Next123
    Trust a Muslim? Never,says Guru Gobind SinghBy: Anil Gupta | 08-Aug-2009 Reply | Forward Sir, The trust and verify formula of Reagan quoted by Tavleen Singh is not applicable here because the adversary here is totally untrustworthy Muslim terrorists/ attackers who attacked Indian Parliament, Akshardham, Ayodhya, Varanasi and lastly Mumbai. Only 16 soldiers who stormed the palace of unsuspecting Pal rulers of Bengal and captured the whole of Bengal when Pal rulers fled the palace after sudden attack by Bakhtiar Khiljee and his small band of soldiers. Guru Gobind Singh Maharaj has said that never trust a Muslim even if he vows countless times. What type of aollower of Guru maharaj Is Dr. Manmohan Singh who forgot this very crucial lesson of Guru Maharaj?
    Trust ...but ...verify....PakistanBy: Prakash kanungo | 07-Aug-2009 Reply | Forward Basic premisis on which Ronal Reagon acted was:Russia is an Evil Empire...Can UPA or is PM willing to declare Pakistan as an "Evil Nation" if not an Empire....War is no option,yes indeed but Man mohan ji..Pakistan is at war with India since 1948 on daily basis now with currancy war,so please recognize that "war" is on for so long,Wake up please.ORSeek a fresh mandate from people of India on a single point.Aam admi will give his "solution" to Pakistan Problems.You get busy with what you are best at: ECONOMY. We need tuar kee daal/ Sugar/ Vegetables/wheat/ Rice at affordable prices and no populist measurers.You are good at it,just handle Economy.Hand Over Pakistan problems to Narendra Modi...as Indira handed over once to Atal Bihari ji to face Pakistan at Geneva.She knew,no congressman worth his/her salt can manage,and hence it was in National interest that a leader from Jan Sangh was sent by her....So You also step aside and Narendra Modi handle Pakistan.
    Complete Transfer of population neededBy: saurav | 05-Aug-2009 Reply | Forward Just one more point, Would the PM have been bold enough to take such a step if India was a completely Hindu country. The blame lies not with our PM but our forefathers who did not do a complete transfer of populace after partition.
    5000 Years of policy disaster.By: Ashutosh Kaul | 05-Aug-2009 Reply | Forward The day Indian policy makers understand that they are "at War". They will know how to conduct peace. I am really worried if our 5000 year history is the foreign policy guide for this government. If it is ;we are doomed. Our history is littered with examples after examples when we were so inward looking that we allowed force after force to diminish our civilisation. We never projected our power even when we were powerful. We allowed small inconsequential brigands to win over the country. Today's problems with pakistan are products of that sad day when Muhamad bin kasim was allowed a foothold in sindh. This is what gives islamic terrorists hope that if their ancestors could win then and their fathers could win half of the country in 47 ; they can win the rest today.Please let no one be fool enough to talk about 5000 year old foreign policy. It is a recipe for modern disaster.
    Trust but verify according to PM.By: saurav | 04-Aug-2009 Reply | Forward Ms. Tavleen Singh when the PM himself said that he caters for the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and also people from the same community within the borders, Then where does the question of confusion lie?.Hope you got my point?.
    Post a Comment
    Name:
    Email:
    Title:
    Maximum characters allowed     
    Comment:
    TERMS OF USE:
    The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
    I agree to the terms of use.