Apropos Outlook’s cover story, Are we going to war (June 12), both India and Pakistan have spent crores in protecting their borders and yet there is no sign of peace. Pakistan is known around the world as having a big terrorism problem. I don’t know whether the two nations will go to war but we certainly need to ensure that we declare a war on terrorism and take Pakistan along with us. But up to what extent is it possible? On the one hand we talk about ‘Aman ki Asha’ and on the other hand they never cease hostilities on the border or killing soldiers. While Modi has often made it clear that the Indian government cares about maintaining a dialogue with Pakistan, the incidents at the border tell a different tale—both sides regularly exchange fire and remain perpetually in a war-like mood. If those who infiltrate Indian territory are not from Pakistan, as the rogue state claims again and again, where else do they come from? We need to start thinking about sealing the entire border with Pakistan so that no one can sneak in and attack our soldiers. We need to get the talks moving fast to ensure that this hostility is stopped and only then can a genuine peace dialogue begin with Pakistan. Everyone in the world needs to assist Pakistan in getting rid of terrorism.
Kamal Anil Kapadia, Mumbai
It’s indeed good news that both India and Pakistan have now become members of the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organisation). This is a positive step which has been appreciated by all. Almost all the renowned English newspapers in Pakistan have highlighted this in a positive way. Kazakhstan President Nazarbayev’s statement, that it is an important moment to have India and Pakistan as SCO members, is also proof that everyone’s interests converge on this. Sometime ago, the Tamil weekly, Ananda Vikatan, had published an interesting article on Pakistan’s cities. The weekly also came forward to reprint some Pakistani articles that read India-Pakistan ties in a more sane and productive way. This long-term vision is what we need. Not the frozen rancour that ensures that the potential for economic ties between India and Pakistan remain perpetually unfulfilled. I often wonder: what really holds back the leaders on both sides from evolving a mutually beneficial relationship? Pakistan will always be our neighbour; it is of immense importance that we have robust ties on all fronts, with a focus on people’s welfare.
P. Senthil Saravana Durai, On E-Mail
The subject matter of Manoj Joshi’s article New Blitzkrieg Or No War (June 12) is seventy-years-old wine, meant to keep people on both sides of the border intoxicated with hatred against each other. Real issues that affect millions—poor health-care, the pathetic state of education and rule of law are out of focus. The noise of jingoism from both sides seems to have drowned all other sane voices. People who, blinded by their ultra-nationalism, call for war from within the comfort of their homes or news studios, will not fight in the battlefield.
Even if we do go to war, we do not have long-range missile weaponry for precision warfare. The release of video clips of regular violence from the border on social media helps only in keeping the Kashmir issue burning. What are our priorities? War or development? The two do not go together. Hope sanity prevails and all those calling for war realise its real cost. War-like conditions for decades have made us anaemic. A dialogue with a purpose and with the attitude of give and take with all the stakeholders is a must. Either convince others or get convinced.
M.N. Bhartiya, Goa
India lacks the capacity for precision long-range strike to knock out the Pakistani military in a short war; it lacks self-propelled artillery for any armoured thrust into Pakistan; its mobile air defence systems are seriously outdated. The key lesson of the many wars of history is that it is easy to start them, but very hard to figure out how they will end. That is the point the author is trying to make—war is no option for India. No one wants war between India and Pakistan except the Pakistan army. It is no secret that the real power in Pakistan rests with the army. History tells us that wars were always thrust on India by Pakistan and if it thrusts another war, should India give Pakistan a walkover? Wise men say that we should try for the best but be prepared for the worst.
M.C. Joshi, Lucknow
I would like to comment that since both the nuclear-armed countries are standing on the threshold of an all-out war, they should at least introspect the affordability of a prolonged war vis-a-vis the economics of it. In fact, presently both countries can ill afford even a limited war. And if they do plunge into one, it will be at the cost of the countries’ development and well-being. A war will also attract many international players who are in the fray primarily to prove their supremacy in the region and also to seek business for their war merchandise. The main sufferer, on both sides of the border, will be the general public. Both the countries should take a lesson from their past skirmishes and desist from encouraging any possibility of war.
Lt Col (retd) Ranjit Sinha, New Delhi
This government can think of war with Pak only when all fails for them; that’s not happening.
Vijay Kumar, On E-Mail
This refers to your leader comment Peacock and Bull (June 12). The tiger is our national animal, but we are behaving as if the holy cow has taken its place. If the cow were indeed anointed our national animal, we would behave the way Mahatma Gandhi wanted the nation to behave. That would have been alright until India became independent, but not a moment thereafter. Let the tiger remain our national animal, but let it be Bal Thackeray’s tiger, in all its ferocity. Had this tiger been our animal, perhaps Pakistan would not have been tormenting us for so long. As for the judge’s revelation that 33 crore gods and goddesses dwell in a cow’s body, I wonder why she doesn’t explode!
K.P. Rajan, Mumbai
This refers to The Bull Is Over The Moon (Jun 12). While it’s true that the Sensex and Nifty are on a bull run, many people invest blindly in the markets. Often shares of companies with no prior background but good financials can outdo those of blue-chip companies. People bet on listing day gains and also when all public companies come out with follow-up IPOs. Investors want to cash in on the listing gains and blindly invest in firms on mere hearsay. When the stockmarket goes north, greedy investors and newcomers are easily lured.
K.K., On-Email
This refers to your edit, Of Human Shields (June 5). In 1949, I was a 19-year-old sepoy store-keeper in the ordnance depot located in Badamibagh, the army cantonment in Srinagar, at the foot of the Shankarachrya hill. One Sunday, I crossed the hill to Dal lake and decided to have a shikara ride. My boatman was a Kashmiri teenager. I asked him his story. He belonged to a village in Baramulla and had fled to Srinagar when the Pak raiders attacked his village and burnt it, raped and killed his near ones. I asked him what he wanted to become when he grew up and he said he wanted to become a soldier of the Indian army. Why? Because he wanted to take revenge on Pakistanis for what they had done to his people.
He might or might not have become a soldier of the Indian army, but his grandsons might be throwing stones at the Indian armymen on patrol in the streets of Srinagar. What caused the change of attitude among Kashmiris? The successive state and central governments are to a great extent responsible.
What would have been the fate of Kashmiris if they were to become part of Pakistan at the time of Parition? Kashmiriyat would have possibly been wiped out with the influx of the Pathans and the Punjabis.
Or, on the other hand, Kashmiris could have fought Pak occupation like Bangladeshis to become independent. That chance is remote because Kashmiris are a submissive people by nature and the state is geographically more accessible to Pakistan than India. For India to support a Kashmiri freedom struggle would have been difficult.
But all this is no excuse for the Indian bungling. Today, the army chief is saying that he would have been happier if the Kashmiris had taken up arms instead of resorting to stone-throwing. It simply means he wants to adopt the strategy of General Niazi of the Pak army in trying to subdue the people of East Bengal in 1971. Not a pleasant thought.
Kunju Nambrathil, New Delhi
Speculations have been intense over Rajnikanth’s foray into politics (Crowds Will Go Crazy, June 12).What tilts the scales to the superstar’s advantage is his cordial relation with Narendra Modi. The prime minister’s BJP being on his side will make it easy for the sexagenarian to negotiate politics. Rajni should be knowing how treacherous its corridors are, demanding a certain astuteness that screen idols are often found lacking in. He needs to look no further than Amitabh Bachchan who gave up a lucrative career in Bollywood in the mid-1980s, only to burn his fingers in the Bofors controversy. If Rajni succeeds in realising his dream, it will be a triumph for an outsider who made a Dravidian state his home. A Maharashtrian born and brought up in Karnataka, Shivaji Rao Gaikwad aka Rajni would be a fine example of people’s love outweighing the son-of-the-soil cliché in Tamil Nadu politics.
J. Akshobhya, Mysore
A clean man like Rajni finally making up his mind to plunge into politics is welcome at a time when the field is only getting uglier. Already, we have a surfeit of political parties that have made little impact on the electorate and quite a few have paled into insignificance within a short period. Rajni’s entry looks like a calculated risk; one hopes he would emerge as a successful actor-turned-politician—like his predecessors M.G. Ramachandran, J. Jayalalitha and N.T. Rama Rao.
K.R. Srinivasan, Secunderabad
Rajni’s meet-and-greet sessions with his fans evoke cynicism and déjà vu in equal measure. The star has a history of raising hopes in people, who eventually sense those as ways to promote his films at the box office. Stung by the success of Baahubali, Rajni seems desperate to replicate it in his upcoming flicks. The actor now asks his fans to be ready for an impending battle! Will Rajni, who relies more on God than on himself to enter politics, dare to take the next step? It is amusing to read the wide speculation in the media about how he will make his debut in politics, as his jubilant fans want him to fill the vacuum created by Jayalalitha’s demise and DMK patriarch M. Karunanidhi’s inability to take part in the political process.
Kangayam R. Narasimhan, Chennai
So low is the credibility of the central government on matters even remotely related to religion that only those already “saffronised” would accept the new regulations on the sale of cattle, which are killing the buffalo meat industry. (Cow Soldiers Ride Buff Bazaar, June 12). Worse, it shows the Centre has little regard for the principles of federalism that underpin the democratic setup in India, enabling very diverse communities and regions to function as a nation. Had the ruling party been conscious of this reality, it wouldn’t have gone ahead on its anti-cow-slaughter agenda without taking each and every state into confidence. The economic implications for the already distressed farm sector, the leather trade and industry, and some suggest even the dairy sector has been overlooked in the exercise to force consumers of bovine meat to “join the mainstream”. Parliament too has been bypassed using administrative means. The government seems a bit intoxicated by electoral successes. There is also an element of immoral cowardice to the move: the government did not prohibit the eating of bovine meat, but is making it impossible to eat it.
K.S. Jayatheertha, Bangalore
Naseer Ganai’s Morals and the Major (June 5), is thought-provoking. I also agree with J&K MLA Engineer Rashid, “how a government which moves the International Court of Justice to make Pakistan uphold human rights in the Kulbhushan Jadhav case can reward an officer responsible for a grave violation of human rights in Kashmir.” That’s why thousands of Indians disagreed with army chief General Bipin Rawat when he defended Major Leetul Gogoi for tying Farooq Ahmad Dar on the bonnet of an army jeep, calling it an “innovation” in the “dirty war” in Kashmir. Rawat’s remarks not only were against the Indian army’s traditions, but also amounted to influencing the army’s probe into the use of a human shield by the major. Imagine if the stone-pelters did not care for human life and had continued to pelt stones at the army jeep even with Dar tied to it! What if Dar had died on the jeep? Would the major have deserved an award even then? If not, why reward the major for the stone-pelters’ humanity, which saved Dar that day?
Bidyut Kumar Chatterjee, On E-Mail
The story about BCCI old-timers resisting changes laid out by the Lodha panel was revealing (Neither One To Blink First, Jun 12). Indeed, controversy is the middle name of the BCCI. All this doesn’t augur well for Indian cricket. Whether the coaching controversy happened because Kumble voiced concerns about the pay, we may never come to know. But we can’t deny the legend’s wealth of experience has produced amazing results so far. If Kohli, as some reports suggest, doesn’t like Kumble’s ‘overbearing’ manner, they can sit across the table with the CoA members and sort the matter out.
Bal Govind, Noida
This refers to the Deep Throat item titled Emotional Infection (Jun 12) on Sushma Swaraj welcoming Uzma Ahmed on her return from Pakistan. Swaraj should have heeded the advice of her doctors, who had told her to refrain from any bodily contact after her kidney transplant surgery, but she had an ‘emotional’ meeting with Uzma and could not help but embrace her. Uzma had gone to Pakistan after marrying a Pakistani national and was being harrassed and tortured there by his family. Swaraj, as foreign minister, helped the troubled girl make her way home.
Mona Singh, On E-Mail
