The Double Game - An article from New Yorker

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/05/16/110516fa_fact_wright

nice summary of what everyone knows..

Peanuts.. LOL..such a desi way to say

This article gives a good summary of the folly of American Aid and gives interesting new ideas on how American Aid could be civilian focused. All good points.However the article advocates secession for Kashmir, and gives a incredibly naive and childish reason that, Pakistan will stop being a mischief monger after this.
The relevant offending paragraphs of the article reproduced below.

India would no doubt welcome a reduction in military aid to Pakistan, and the U.S. could use this as leverage to pressure India to allow the Kashmiris to vote on their future, which would very likely be a vote for independence. These two actions might do far more to enhance Pakistan’s stability, and to insure its friendship, than the billions of dollars that America now pays like a ransom.


High level summary

The idea is wrong due to the following points
a) The author does not understand the underlying reason of Pakistan coveting territory (it is based on politcal Islam and it does not stop with Kashmir)
b) Almost 50% of Kashmiris do not want to secede from India.
c) Given the Pakistan engineered, Wahabi doctrine now pervading the Kashmir valley, Kashmiri independence will only create a new Pakistan/Afghanistan, and give new troubles for the world at large.
d) Pakistan should not be allowed to give invasion of territory in Afghanistan, and coveting territory of Kashmir as a reason for its nefarious deeds. The world should put Pakistan on notice for such bad behaviour


Details for those interested
1) It looks like the author has no understanding of the history of India, the extent of treachery and genocide perpetrated by Political Islam, actively followed by Pakistan in the 20th century (in Bangladesh (using Islamists as proxies) and Pakistan itself ). If Kashmir alone was the problem, why did Pakistan perpetrate the genocide in post independence and pre-independence Bangladesh, with active local support ? It looks like the author did not even bother to find, why Hindu Kush is even called so. In addition, New yorker seems to set a bad precedent. According to the author , all you have to do, is to turn a mischief monger , interfere with neighboring countries, and then the world will grant your illegitimate demands.


Supposedly Kashmir's independence will enhance Pakistan's stability and insure its friendship. The author clearly has no understanding of Islamic terrorism and doctrine of political islam, which is not confined to one territory. In addition, Pakistani establishment themselves want Kashmir to be completely annexed by hook and crook, using proxy war etc.., and certainly do not want Kashmiri independence. If Pakistan is happy about Kashmir independence, has the author even bothered to find out how Pakistan has controlled Pakistan Occupied Kashmir? Demographic invasion there has reduced indigenous Kashmiris to a minority. Their idea is Mughalisthan (google it, and domination of Political Islam) and eventual take over of the entire North India and now Kerala in South India for the Muslim Ummah, again by Hook and crook and they tried that desperately in Bangladesh, which resulted in genocide of millions of Hindus,, Sikhs and other minorities.

The author is living in fools paradise , if he/she thinks, that Kashmiri independence is going to solve things. In fact, it has the potential to turn into another Afghanistan/Pakistan, given the rapid Wahabi indoctrination of Kashmiri Sunni Muslims, and given Pakistan's direct role in encouraging this . Does the US want another Afghanistan/Pakistan in the neighborhood, that is going to support and preach extremist political Islam ? Doesn't the US already spend enough money and manpower and resources, to put the genie of Islamic terrorism unleashed in Afghanistan, back in its bottle ? It looks like the Author did not do his groundwork, OR at the least talk to the various think thanks in US, before advocating such ludicrous proposals. It is quite clear that today the only thing that is preventing Kashmir from turning into another Pakistan is India (its democracy), and the US does not pay a dime for this.

2) In Kashmir , more than 50% of the population, Gujjars, Ladakhi Buddists, Kashmiri Hindus (displaced now), Sikhs (partially displaced), Shias , Business minded Sunnis, and Sufi oriented Sunnis, just want better opportunities and security & do not want independence, given the history of genocide they faced and the security issues they are facing today with terrorists (both foreign and local) controlled from Pakistan. What does the author plan to do with them ?

3) It is a clearly a failure of Indian foreign policy that Pakistan gets around to strut the partially failed invasion of Kashmir as a reason for every one of their nefarious activities for the past 50 years.
It is even worse, that again, they are openly allowed to create, support, arm Taliban and now shelter Taliban and other monsters they created, because they need "strategic depth" in Afghanistan? If it is Ok for neighbors to ask for direct control of a country., why Pakistan alone ? What about Iran, Tajikistan, Turkeminstan, Uzbekistan, China, India etc.. ? Don't Afghan people mean anything to the Newyorker , that it is willing to have them completely subjugated by Pakistan ? Doesn't the Newyorker know that the Northern part of Afghanistan, hate Pakistan for intruding into their country

4) Afghanistan is a sovereign country. Nobody asked, why Pakistan even created Taliban and mysteriously funded them with Airplanes and Tanks and Embedded Pakistani Military advisers,, all in the name of ensuring law and order and preventing refugees from reaching Pakistan. Infact all these only created more issues. Pakistan should be held to account, for violating UN charter for interfering with Afghanistan and wrecking the country and its people.

It is a shame that nobody asks Pakistan why they do not build Hospitals, modern schools in Afghanistan, and allow transit rights for business to flourish between Afghanistan and India, rather than shelter terrorists and foot soldiers of political Islam, and provide material support for them to bomb Indian consulates and kill diplomats and ordinary folks in Afghanistan.

All excellent points. The author's POV combines the usual myopia that has informed american foreign policy all along vis-a-vis pakistan and throwing india under the bus. All the more reason for india to chart its own course and form alliances only to the extent necessary. The lack of understanding of political islam will keep coming back to haunt this country and yet, this seems to pervade american thinking.