Obama has to tread most carefully with its own media's vested interest agenda - By Ghulam Muhammed

Obama has to tread most carefully with its own media's vested interest agenda
CNN, heavily staffed by Islamophobes and Zionists, has tried its best to put Former Pakistani President on the spot over Pakistan's very genuine reaction to America's blatant rape of Pakistan, a UN member's sovereignty. It is all a planned conspiracy to bring Pakistan into the neo-con planned next targeted nation for the US armed forces to move in.

In this abbreviated report, CNN Wire Staff has not given the full details of the Piers Morgan's goading Musharraf into discussing the subject in the most insensitive direct Q&A interview.

Musharraf did stress that technically it is an act of war, but it is not a declared war by the US. Neither Pakistan is necessarily forced by its people, its military and its politicians to declare a 'war' on the US, for its act of wanton violation of a proud nation's self-respect and dignity.

America and the rest of the Western world are fully aware that Pakistan is an 'epicenter' of terrorism. Obama cannot go far by so arrogantly racking up the same rage from Muslim and Arab lands, that he is at least trying to posture as going an extra mile to damp down.

Obama should beware of the adviser in his own team, who are closet Zionists and find all logic to justify another war front for America to open up.

Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai
----------------------------------

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/05/27/pakistan.musharraf.obama/?hpt=T2

Musharraf: Obama is arrogant

By the CNN Wire Staff

May 27, 2011 -- Updated 0957 GMT (1757 HKT)

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• A Navy SEAL team kills Osama bin Laden during a raid in Pakistan on May 2
• Musharraf says the raid violated Pakistan's sovereignty and was an "act of war"
• The former prime minister calls bin Laden's death "absolutely illegal"
• Pakistani intelligence commits a "terrible failure" in not knowing where bin Laden was

(CNN) -- U.S. President Barack Obama is showing "arrogance" in the aftermath of a mission that killed terror leader Osama bin Laden, said former Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf in an interview that aired on CNN Thursday night.

Musharraf further called the May raid an "act of war."

"Certainly no country has a right to intrude into any other country," Musharraf told Piers Morgan. "If technically or legally you see it, it's an act of war."

The American president said this week in an interview on British television that, if the opportunity arose, he would do the same thing again to take out al Qaeda terrorists.

"I think such arrogance should not be shown publicly to the world," Musharraf said. "I think it is arrogance that: 'We don't care. We don't care for your national opinion. We don't care for your people. We will come in and do the same thing.' This is arrogance."

Musharraf conceded that it was a "terrible mishap, a terrible failure" that Pakistani intelligence didn't seem to know more about bin Laden's whereabouts, saying they should have know he was living in a compound in Abbottabad, a short distance from a Pakistan military academy.

A Navy SEAL team killed the al Qaeda leader during a 40-minute assault on the compound in the early morning hours of May 2.

Musharraf called bin Laden's death "absolutely illegal."

Asked by Morgan if it was an unlawful assassination, he responded: "I don't want to get involved in these legalities of the issue," but "technically, theoretically, I'll agree."
 

CNN's Ed Payne contributed to this report

BOLLYWOOD'S OWN CONTRIBUTION TO THE WORLD TERRORISM DEBATE

BOLLYWOOD'S OWN CONTRIBUTION TO THE WORLD TERRORISM DEBATE:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYK4j0u4Ah8&feature=player_embedded

Netanyahu relegated himself to the footnotes history By Gideon Levy - HAARETZ

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/netanyahu-relegated-himself-to-the-footnotes-history-1.364110



Thu, May 26, 2011 Iyyar 22, 5771

• Published 02:51 26.05.11
• Latest update 02:51 26.05.11

Netanyahu relegated himself to the footnotes history

Now it is certain: Netanyahu will go down in the history of Israel and of the world as a forgotten footnote.

By Gideon Levy

The "speech of his life" must now quickly become the speech of Prime MInister Benjamin Netanyahu's political demise. The hour is pressing, there is no time and nothing is going to come of Netanyahu any more. Even the snake oil peddlers who proffered masses of expectations in advance of the speech, who told us that Netanyahu 2 is different from Netanyahu 1, that the man had "matured," "internalized," "grown wiser" and "become more moderate," that he has learned the lessons of his previous term in office and that we can expect "sensational surprises" from him - they, too, must now admit the bitter truth. 

The Israeli Leonid Brezhnev is occupying the Prime Minister's Bureau. A man of yesterday, frozen and rigid, uncompromising, deaf to the sounds of his surroundings and blind to the changing times. His term in office, heaven forbid, must not drag on for nearly 20 years, the way Brezhnev's did.

In the coming days, he might still be able bask in the warmth of the American legislators' hollow ovations. But once this foam on the surface of the water disperses, the question will arise in full force: What now? Then it will become clear that this prime minister has got us in trouble. Big trouble. We lost the Palestinians a long time ago, and now also the White House's America. Once the speech ended, the chances ended. Before it, we didn't know (ostensibly ) where the prime minister was heading. After it, we know the crystal clear answer: nowhere. To some more gained time after which there is nothing, except for increasing dangers and a chance missed once again.

To Netanyahu's credit it must be said he is not the first. Quite a number of his predecessors wallowed in the belief that empty and lost time will heal all ills. For way too much time here, the belief in time has been the only belief. But the times they are a-changing, there's a battle outside and it's raging and Netanyahu isn't budging from the old road. No and no and no. No to the 1967 borders, no to Jerusalem for two nations, no to the right of return, no to the Palestinians' justified demand to be free, like all peoples.

Now it is certain: Netanyahu will go down in the history of Israel and of the world as a forgotten footnote. What did he do? What did he coin? That we live in "the land of our forefathers" and the settlers are not occupiers. Good job, Bibi. That he is prepared to be "generous," without understanding that we are the occupiers and occupiers, just like robbers, can never be "generous."

Rather, what we have to be is just. We are not "giving up" anything; we can only restore what we have stolen to its rightful owners and restore justice. Who is going to buy the tiny crumbs he has thrown to the Palestinians and to the world? At one time, perhaps, there were buyers in the world for this stale merchandise. No more. There is a new world around us, and Netanyahu refuses to acknowledge its existence. What is he going to tell this world now, a world of popular uprisings, struggles for freedoms and human rights? That he is in favor of freedom for the Arab peoples, just not in our backyard?

What is he going to tell the demonstrators at the fence before September and those who will raise their hands in favor of a Palestinian state in September? That this is the land of our forefathers, exclusively our forefathers? That Congress applauded him? At the end of this oratory season, the Israelis, too, will have to ask themselves: What next? Blind and deaf, will we continue to follow this Brezhnev of ours? And how will we confront the storm raging around us? And what will we do with U.S. President Barack Obama, who at long last will have to act and not just talk?

Netanyahu could have been a successful businessman. He could have been flying around in private planes to his heart's desire, without anyone asking where they came from; he could have been hobnobbing in the palatial abodes of the world's zillionaires, enjoying life's pleasures and having fun with his wife as much as he liked, without anyone asking anything. The most fateful mistake of his life was going into politics. Why did he need this for, all the Mimounas and the primaries, the deals and the spins, the Danny Danons and the Hotovelys, if this is what he's planning to leave behind? Why did he have to run a first time and a second time, if all he's going to leave behind is such emptiness and disaster? Why does he deserve this and, above all, why have we deserved this?

Lessons From Tahrir Sq. By Thomas L. Friedman - The New York Times

"May I suggest a Tahrir Square alternative? Announce that every Friday from today forward will be “Peace Day,” and have thousands of West Bank Palestinians march nonviolently to Jerusalem, carrying two things — an olive branch in one hand and a sign in Hebrew and Arabic in the other. The sign should say: “Two states for two peoples. We, the Palestinian people, offer the Jewish people a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders — with mutually agreed adjustments — including Jerusalem, where the Arabs will control their neighborhoods and the Jews theirs.”

If Palestinians peacefully march to Jerusalem by the thousands every Friday with a clear peace message, it would become a global news event. Every network in the world would be there. Trust me, it would stimulate a real peace debate within Israel — especially if Palestinians invited youth delegations from around the Arab world to join the marches, carrying the Saudi peace initiative in Hebrew and Arabic. Israeli Jews and Arabs should be invited to march as well. Together, the marchers could draw up their own peace maps and upload them onto YouTube as a way of telling their leaders what Egyptian youth said to President Hosni Mubarak: “We’re not going to let you waste another day of our lives with your tired mantras and maneuvering.”

THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

--------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/25/opinion/25friedman.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha212

Op-Ed Columnist

Lessons From Tahrir Sq.

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

Published: May 24, 2011

Cairo

Josh Haner/The New York Times

Thomas L. Friedman

 

Being back in Cairo reminds me that there are two parties in this region that have been untouched by the Arab Spring: the Israelis and the Palestinians. Too bad, because when it comes to ossified, unimaginative, oxygen-deprived governments, the Israelis and Palestinians are right up there with pre-revolutionary Egypt and Tunisia. I mean, is there anything less relevant than the prime minister of Israel going to the U.S. Congress for applause and the leader of the Palestinians going to the U.N. — instead of to each other?

Both could actually learn something from Tahrir Square. To the Palestinians I would say: You believe the Israelis are stiffing you because they think they have you in box. If you resort to violence, they will brand you terrorists. And if you don’t resort to violence, the Israelis will just pocket the peace and quiet and build more settlements. Your dilemma is how to move Israel in a way that won’t blow up in your face or require total surrender.

You have to start with the iron law of Israeli-Arab peace: whichever party has the Israeli silent majority on its side wins. Anwar Sadat brought the Israeli majority over to his side when he went to Israel, and he got everything he wanted. Yasir Arafat momentarily did the same with the Oslo peace accords. How could Palestinians do that again today? I can tell you how not to do it. Having the U.N. General Assembly pass a resolution recognizing an independent Palestinian state will only rally Israelis around Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu, giving him another excuse not to talk.

 

May I suggest a Tahrir Square alternative? Announce that every Friday from today forward will be “Peace Day,” and have thousands of West Bank Palestinians march nonviolently to Jerusalem, carrying two things — an olive branch in one hand and a sign in Hebrew and Arabic in the other. The sign should say: “Two states for two peoples. We, the Palestinian people, offer the Jewish people a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders — with mutually agreed adjustments — including Jerusalem, where the Arabs will control their neighborhoods and the Jews theirs.”

If Palestinians peacefully march to Jerusalem by the thousands every Friday with a clear peace message, it would become a global news event. Every network in the world would be there. Trust me, it would stimulate a real peace debate within Israel — especially if Palestinians invited youth delegations from around the Arab world to join the marches, carrying the Saudi peace initiative in Hebrew and Arabic. Israeli Jews and Arabs should be invited to march as well. Together, the marchers could draw up their own peace maps and upload them onto YouTube as a way of telling their leaders what Egyptian youth said to President Hosni Mubarak: “We’re not going to let you waste another day of our lives with your tired mantras and maneuvering.”

 

Crazy, I know. Bibi is reading this and laughing: “The Palestinians will never do that. They could never get Hamas to adopt nonviolence. It’s not who the Palestinians are.”

That is exactly what Mubarak said about the Egyptian people: “They are not capable of being anything but what they are: docile and willing to eat whatever low expectations I feed them.” But then Egyptians surprised him. How about you, Palestinians, especially Hamas? Do you have any surprise in you? Is Bibi right about you, or not?

As for Bibi, his Tahrir lesson is obvious: Sir, you are well on your way to becoming the Hosni Mubarak of the peace process. The time to make big decisions in life is when you have all the leverage on your side. For 30 years, Mubarak had all the leverage on his side to gradually move Egypt toward democracy — and he never used it. Then, when Mubarak’s people rose up, he tried to do it all in six days. But it was too late. No one believed him. So his tenure ended in ruin.

Israel today still has enormous leverage. It is vastly superior militarily and economically to the Palestinians, and it has the U.S. on its side. If Netanyahu actually put a credible, specific two-state peace map on the table — not just the same old vague promises about “painful compromises” — he could get the Americans and Europeans to toss in anything Israel wanted, including the newest weapons, NATO membership, maybe even European Union membership. It could be a security windfall for Israel. Does Bibi have any surprise in him or do the Palestinians have him right: a big faker, hiding a nationalist-religious agenda under a cloak of security?

It may be that Israeli and Palestinian leaders are incapable of surprising anyone anymore, in which case the logic on the ground will prevail: Israel will gradually absorb the whole West Bank, so, together with Israel proper, a Jewish minority will be ruling over an Arab majority. Israel’s enemies will refer to it as “the Jewish apartheid state.” America, Israel’s only true friend, will find itself having to defend an Israel whose policies it does not believe in and whose leaders it does not respect — and the tensions between the U.S. and Israel displayed in Washington last week will seem quaint by comparison.

Pak nuke security in focus again after naval base attack By Chidanand Rajghatta | Comments by Ghulam Muhammed

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/usrmailcomment.cms?msid=8538305&usrmail=ghulammuhammed3@gmail.com&mailon_commented=1

Comments posted on The Times of India website article - Pak nuke security in focus again after naval base attack By Chidanand Rajghatta:

YOUR COMMENT

Ghulam Muhammed (Mumbai) 11 mins ago (11:42 AM)

Brahmins of India, must now own up their most selfish motives that forced them to discriminate and ostracize Indian Muslims and to agree for partition, in the fond hope that they can rule India, for themselves. It is time that now they should realize how dangerous that policy of 'Muslim cleansing' turned out in the short historical span of just 60 years. And in 64 years, Brahmin India has yet to find its place in the sun. Now the threat of extremists, with their convenient Muslim identities is knocking on our doors. The Brahmins must realize the seriousness of the unfolding events and should not indulge in any 'motivated' actions that will bring the day of reckoning, much closer. They must have a holistic view of entire subcontinent and study the flaws in their limited vision of India, before taking drastic redressing measures to undo the injustices of partition. We cannot fight fire with fire. We have to give diplomacy a chance and let us be more sincere about it. Let not Chanakya be our guide. This is the time for nation building in an altogether a different world where freedom and justice has become common currency available to each and every individual.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/Pak-nuke-security-in-focus-again-after-naval-base-attack/articleshow/8538305.cms

Pak nuke security in focus again after naval base attack

Chidanand Rajghatta, TNN | May 23, 2011, 09.32pm IST

WASHINGTON: It's a subject Americans can't stop discussing and one Pakistan hates talking about. The terrorist attack on the Pakistani military facility in Karachi has once again focused world (and Washington's) attention on the security of the country's fast-growing nuclear arsenal.

The Obama administration on Monday did not publicly go beyond "strongly" condemning the attack on Pakistan Naval Station (PNS) Mehran and appreciating the "service and sacrifices of their brave Armed Forces," but the incident has re-ignited the simmering debate about vulnerability of its nuclear weapons. US analysts noted that Mehran is only 15 miles away from the Masroor Air Base, where Pakistan is believed have a large depot for nuclear weapons that can be delivered from the air.

While Pakistan insists that its "crown jewels" are under foolproof security, at the heart of the debate is worry that they are vulnerable to internal pilferage or attack by a "jihadized" military, judging by multiple attacks on military facilities by terrorists who seemingly have the inside track on security, including in the Mehran strike. A recent Wikileaks cable citing Pakistani military officials admitting sabotage of F-16s by "Islamists amongst the enlisted ranks" has added to the concern.

Pakistani militant attacks over the last five years include strikes against three nuclear facilities, in Wah, Sargodha, and Kamra, according to Prof Shaun Gregory, a security specialist at Bradford University. But each time, the Pakistan military establishment, which has itself suffered attacks at its General Headquarters and training and recruitment centers, insists that there was no danger to its nuclear assets.

But Gregory says the attacks illustrate "a clear set of weaknesses and vulnerabilities" in Pakistan's nuclear security regime, a danger brought home by the ease with which militants are now penetrating military installations. Concern is growing in the west about the internal dynamics in a military that was once thought to be "westernized and professional."

Washington is leery of expressing its views openly, but New Delhi, which has more proximate reasons to be troubled by a nuclear heist, isn't holding back. "We are concerned with the safety of Pakistan's nuclear installations," senior officials traveling with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in Africa were quoted as saying on Monday. "The real risk is internal – who guards the guardians."

The US has forked out over $ 100 million to improve Pakistan's nuclear security but Washington now admits it has no idea how the money was spent. There is consternation in Washington about the speed with which Pakistan is ramping up its nuclear arsenal with some analysts predicting that it could soon have the world's fourth largest nuclear arsenal, behind US, Russia, and China, and ahead of France and UK.

Like Singh, President Obama is also currently out of the country on a six-day, four-country tour of Europe. But Pakistan is never far from his mind; he has held at least half-a-dozen White House Situation Room meetings with key principals where the sole topic of discussion has been the deteriorating situation in Pakistan.

Washington is thick with speculation about American contingency plans in the event of a nuclear heist in Pakistan, notwithstanding assurances (most notably by Senator John Kerry) that the US has no designs on Pakistani nukes. But every U.S statement is dissected in Pakistan for hidden meanings amid fears that Washington is planning to neutralize its nuclear arsenal.

On Monday, in the aftermath of the naval base attack, the Obama administration merely said it is "committed to working with Pakistan in our joint effort to combat violent extremism and bring to justice those behind this attack." The pledge came after Wikileaks cables revealed that US special forces have been embedded with Pakistani troops in joint operations since September 2009.

Obama's Surrender at AIPAC - God Save America from Israel - by Feroze Mithiborwala (23-05-2011)

World was witness to a bold Obama being applauded again and again by the Zionist Americans of AIPAC meeting.

However, it could not see Obama's tail deeply embedded within his legs.

The orator gave a point by point explanation of his otherwise presumed public ultimatum to Israel to move fast on peace negotiation, based 1967 borders, with mutual swaps negotiations to accommodate each others concerns.

His stress was clearly on 1967 border in his first speech. When Netanyahu roared, Obama capitulated and switched the emphasis to 'mutually agreed swap', as the key element that he was holding out to Israel.

Obama's ill-planned media exercise to sooth Arab and Muslim nerves with his fake 'even-handed' approach to Israel-Palestine imbroglio, after a wave of indignation over the  US assassination of Osama gripped the Muslim world, failed miserably.

With Pak Taliban attacking Karachi Naval base, a signal has gone out that the Muslim world is still as divided as ever, over America's sanctimonious posturing as the peace maker of the world.

Much that US warmongers are now trying their best to pull out from their fool-hardy forays in Muslim world by the use their enormous fire power, there is no sign they and their interest in and around world will be protected with their duplicitous media management.   

US is now realizing, it may be easy to win war, and Bush kept winning a single war so many times over; it is difficult to win peace. And without peace neither America nor its allies, both declared bankrupts, will ever have their paramountcy back.

Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai






http://www.facebook.com/notes/feroze-mithiborwala/obamas-surrender-at-aipac-god-save-america-from-israel-by-feroze-mithiborwala-23/10150189243006144


Obama's Surrender at AIPAC - God Save America from Israel

by Feroze Mithiborwala (23-05-2011)

For all those Israeli's who believed that Obama had introduced a new element into the rather stagnant peace process by mentioning the forbidden words "The 1967 Borders", were well placated by Obama, who in sentence after sentence received rapturous applause from an audience braying for Palestinian blood.

Obama challenged every UN resolution & International law, that actually provide a basis for the solution of the Palestine-Israel conflict. He clearly restated Netanyahu's position that "the changes that have taken place over the last 44 years, including the new demographic realities on the ground" need to be taken into account. He clearly stated that the two sides will negotiate a border "that is different from the one that existed on June 4, 1967."

These is the precise position & words that Netanyahu has been scripting. Thus Obama has accepted the fact that the illegal Settlements that house 500,000 armed fanatical settlers, that continue to be built on the Palestinian lands of 1967 & are to be part of a future Jewish state of Israel.

Thus we have Obama negating UN Resolution 242, which calls upon Israel to withdraw from the Occupied territories of the war of 1967 & for a resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict so that a durable & just peace is ensured for all.

This is true to his recent form at the UN, where the US vetoed the resolution condemning the Israeli Settlements as illegal This is also in direct contravention of UN resolution 446 adopted on March 22, 1979 that stated "that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East".

There is a method to Obama's seeming madness, where we see how he has undermined the UN & International Law to launch his very own war on Libya & the expansion of the conflict in Pakistan.

Obama went into his ramble on Israel's security & the total commitment of America, who despite a financial crunch have raised support & that the US will guarantee that Israel maintain the military edge with the latest weaponry ensured.

The next round of applause was guaranteed when Obama vilified Iran & said that the sanctions regime on Iran ensured it's international isolation & the matter that Iran would be prevented from acquiring nuclear weapons. Then came the demonization of Hamas & the Hezbollah & the crowd was on its feet.

Not once did Obama have the humanity (or is that too big a word for him) to even mention the 1.5 million Palestinians under siege in a Nazi-prison-cum-concentration camp called Gaza. Not once did he mention how US made, Israeli war planes & tanks killed thousands civilians (in a ratio of 1000:1), when he mentioned the Hamas rockets that killed Israeli civilians. He demanded that Gilad Shalit be freed, but never once though it right to mention the 11,000 Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails be freed as well. He mentioned how the Jews had a longing for their homeland, but never once mentioned that similarly, there are more than 7 million Palestinian refugees, who were ethnically cleansed from their country in 1948 & who under UN resolution 194, have both the moral & the legal "Right of Return" to their homes & hearths.

Obama than shamelessly went though his AIPAC report card & said that his administration have gone to all lengths to defend Israel within the international arena. He proudly stated as to why he boycotted the Durban Conference against racism, then as to how he vetoed both the Goldstone Report (that dealt with the Israeli genocidal war on Gaza) & also how he recently vetoed the UN resolution on the Settlements & said that "Israel's legitimacy is not up for debate". Here Obama seems blissfully unaware & oblivious of the increasing levels of the pariah status that Israel is viewed upon by the overwhelming nations of the world.

Not once while he tried to speak eloquently about the Two-States living side-by-side, did he mention the core issue of Jerusalem, not once. Nor did he mention the issue of the Refugees, or the fact that the monstrous Apartheid Wall should be demolished, or that the 550 Check-points should be dismantled, or that the control of the water resources should not be used as an instrument of coercion, or that the Olive trees should not be uprooted & farms destroyed, or that the assassination & torture should end. That due to Obama's own record in Guantanamo & Abu Gharaib, as well as the daily murder of civilians by the killer drones, we well understand.

He ended with two ominous warnings.

The first was that he rejected the participation of Hamas in the dialogue process & called upon Fatah to end the unity with Hamas. Here Obama is basically again trying to drive a wedge between the unity arrived at, so as to weaken the resistance movement, as well as the unity of the masses at the grass-roots & we have seen the disastrous consequences of that since 2007.

He never once mentioned that Hamas is willing to negotiate a 10 year truce with Israel if it withdraws to the borders of 1967, as well as its acceptance on the "Right of Return". This offer was made by Khalid Mishal the political leader of Hamas to Jimmy Carter in a meeting in Damascus. Thus every peaceful overture by Hamas has been rejected by the Israeli's.

The second was when he stated that "No vote at the UN will create an Independent Palestinian state", which is scheduled for September. Here he once again reiterated Netanyahu's position by stating that "only direct negotiations" can achieve the same.

President Mahmud Abbas is confident that "We have more than 130 nations set to recognize the Palestinian state within the 1967 borders and even if we make no further efforts, that number could be increased to 140 or 150" Both Obama & Netanyahu have clearly threatened President Mahmud Abbas with dire consequences, from following this path.

It is utterly futile to believe that the US is an honest broker. It is utterly futile to believe that independence can be won by only negotiations. And it is good that the chimera of Obama stands shattered for ever.

But the Arab Revolution presents new possibilities & the epic 94 year old struggle of the Palestinian people, a proud & ancient nation, which has inspired the world for generations, will finally see a new awakening & with it, a new hope, a new Intifada, the Third Intifada!!

It is only the resistance on the ground, within Palestine, across the Palestine diaspora, across the Arab nations & then across the entire world, will we finally witness the rebirth of a nation. The people across the world are on the march. The millions at the Tahrir Square have inspired humanity to march again. And the teeming millions of Palestinians are on their way to the borders of the Holy Land & we will be marching with them, shoulder to shoulder, holding their hands to Jerusalem.

Freedom is nigh.

Comments posted on Economic Times website article: Sino-Pakistan ties a serious concern for India

Saturday, May 21, 2011

Comments posted on Economic Times website article: Sino-Pakistan ties a serious concern for India

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/sino-pakistan-ties-a-serious-concern-for-india/articleshow/8486128.cms

More than China, India should study the genesis of the breaking of relations between Pakistan and US. US as a common friend of both India and Pakistan, even though rightly described as 'fair weather friend' to both of them, had been never the less a buffer between the two nation's fundamental differences, that not even war can solve. With that cover gone, India may be dragged into a series of challenges, right from Pakistan, Afghanistan and China, for which it might have to mortgage its freedom of action to the US. India must avoid such a trap at all costs and come out with enlightened diplomacy to put out fires in its neighborhood, without getting into knee-jerk reactions that may snowball into avoidable conflict situations.

Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai

ghulammuhammed3@gmail.com

http://ghulammuhammed.blogspot.com   

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/sino-pakistan-ties-a-serious-concern-for-india/articleshow/8486128.cms

Politics/Nation

21 May, 2011, 01.34PM IST,AFP

Sino-Pakistan ties a 'serious concern' for India

NEW DELHI: India views with "serious concern" growing defence ties between China and Pakistan and says it will have to bolster its own military capabilities to meet the challenge.

"It is a matter of serious concern for us. The main thing is we have to increase our capability -- that is the only answer," Defence Minister A.K. Antony told reporters in New Delhi late on Friday.

The comments followed reports China plans to accelerate supply of 50 new JF-17 Thunder multi-role combat jets to Pakistan under a co-production pact.

Antony added safe havens for militants in Pakistan is another "main concern" for New Delhi and told Islamabad to "disband and destroy" all guerrilla outfits if it "sincerely" wants to improve relations with India.

The killing by US commandos of Osama bin Laden who was hiding out near the Pakistani capital Islamabad has "internationally stamped the nation's position as the core of terrorist activities in the South Asian region," he said.

India has long accused Pakistan of providing shelter and support to militant groups planning attacks on Indian soil and has pushed the global community -- the United States in particular -- to censure Pakistan.

Nuclear-armed India and Pakistan have fought three wars since attaining independence in 1947, two of them over the disputed territory of Kashmir.

Antony declined to comment on remarks by senior Indian military leaders that India has the capability to launch a strike like the one the US carried out in Pakistan to kill bin Laden.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has said India would not undertake such a strike.

But a leaked diplomatic cable published earlier in the week quoted India's home minister as saying in 2009 that India would have to respond to another attack on its soil by Pakistan-based militants.

Discussing the prospect of another raid after the Mumbai 2008 assault which killed 166 people, home minister P. Chidambaram said, "The people of India will expect us to respond," according to the WikiLeaks whistleblowing website.

Antony added that India may sign a contract to buy 126 fighter jets for its air force by the end of March 2012.

"This fiscal (year) ends on March 31, 2012. The deal can happen before that," Antony said.

Last month, India shortlisted France's Dassault Aviation SA and European consortium Eurofighter GmbH for the contract. The deal, estimated at $10 billion, is considered the biggest of its kind globally in the past 15 years.

India has allocated 1.64 trillion rupees ($3.6 trillion) for the defence sector in the fiscal year through March 2012, up from 1.47 trillion last year. The budget is nearly double the 890 billion rupees in the 2006-07 year.