The Pakistan Dilema

The issue at Pakistan is a little complex. Difficult to say who is running the country. You have a democratically elected govt. today. However, you have a legacy of army rule. Both, the forces and ISI have really controlled and possibly still are.

So, whether the President or Prime Minister of Pakistan succumbs to the pressures of the Indian Govt. or that of UK or US or any other country, implementation on the ground will still be done by the ISI and the Forces. Or should I say non-implementation and white washing.

We see silly statements made by the democratically elected govt. in Pakistan. All statements they have made till now are haunting them back when facts come to light. To start with, "Kasav is not a Pakistani", we heard the president say it on Larry King's program. Some media outfit from UK, found his parents' name on voter's lists. One Pakistani TV channel did two sets of interviews, one, under cover and another openly. We heard two distinctly different voices coming out of the same people. Very sad. Unfortunately, Pakistan still wants proof after taking away his parents from their house and sealing it. And the latest statement on invasion on their airspace. Huh!!! I think the Indian Air Force, would have not returned before destroying the target, if they went into Pakistan airspace.

Actually more sad than this would be the state of President and Prime Minister of Pakistan. They are actually trying to (possibly, let's give them the credit) do something good for the country and been elected, do not want to show that they are not as strong as the military govt. of Musharaf. They are also being held hostage to the army and the ISI who gives them the sound bites and the updates on the ground. I frankly pity them.

This is the time, I believe the world should come together and help the Pakistani PM and the Prez, to bring out the truth within Pakistan and drive the unwanted elements out of the region.

But is there someone who gains from the current scenario in Pak? Think you guys know Parvez Musharaf? If there is any instability in Pak, he is the only one to gain.

Is war with Pakistan an option?

Post the attack on Bombay, I have been hearing multiple known and unknown citizens talking of hitting out at Pakistan with military firepower. The biggest example given is that of US. “No one has ever dared to touch US after 9/11 as US immediately attacked Afghanistan and then Iraq”.

This may be the consensus that we see amongst many Indians today. Go ahead and attack Pakistan and give them a strong message that they cannot mess with us.

In terms of sequences they speak of US is correct. There was the disastrous 9/11, and then US attacked Afghanistan, could not catch Osama and then changed their focus to Iraq to find weapons of mass destruction… found nothing. They still lose almost a couple of trillion dollars a year, lose many army personnel, and it has cost Bush his government – clearly told by citizens, that it was a wrong choice.

The real story however is that this offence by US was not the reason why they do not have any attacks on US grounds. Key to US’s success against terrorists is the fact that they developed a strong homeland security system coupled with strong intelligence system. It is the processes that they have developed that helps them squash all threats at a planning stage. Interestingly, if you listen to Ms. Rice of US, you will hear her say that even today they are getting clear threats to their land always. But they are being able to neutralize them from occurring as they have a strong intelligence system.

What we need in India is a strong intelligence system and a willingness to take intelligence seriously. Not fight a war with Pakistan.

With a war, both countries will have more martyrs, will take our intolerance with one another for another 60 years, will kill both the economies and will play into the hands of the terrorists’ thoughts and ideas.

Now, do you think, 'is war with Pakistan an option'?

Do we need a CM for Bombay?

In the most critical times for Bombay, post the unprecedented attacks that shook the city, we have political games being played for the chair of the Chief Minister. It has taken more than six days to get a consensus.

Hence the question, “do we need a CM?” This is not a question for citizens to answer but I think the politicians should think about it.

Worst still, one of the politicians creates a scene in front of media as he was not given the position. I am told he was one of those who created this delay. He looked like a fool. I could see a terrorist in his eyes.

Dirty politics in tough times.

But yes, do we really need a CM for Bombay (am not talking of the state)?

Humanity is hit again

Police, elected officials and common people (including women and children)… are some of the people killed or wounded in the high intensity blast in Peshawar. Having gone through the Bombay blasts and the wounds still fresh, my heart goes out to the families of the dead and injured.

Is there a difference between the blood that was let out in Bombay and Peshawar?

Whether these are stateless terrorists or those sponsored by members of a country, it’s the simple and common citizens that pay with their lives.

This could be the terrorists’ a way of saying, that if you look at touching us with your international pressure, we can disturb Pakistan exactly the way we did in Bombay.

It is time, Pakistan combed – am sure India will be more than happy to help – the country of any such terrorists. Its time citizens and media of Pakistan demand the same from the government. Let’s save lives and give a better life to the future of the two countries.

Why were the attacks on Bombay timed for now?

Looking back, there are four reasons why the attacks were done on Bombay (or should I say, India) at this scale.

01. Peace process between India and Pakistan is seeing unprecedented success

02. Pakistan has a newly elected (elected is the key word) government, the dictatorship loyalists are certainly not too happy with

03. The US has been taking help of the Pak government to hit targets in the Northern border of Pakistan

04. The US and India are seen as friends for the first time, like never before

In this situation, the terrorist organizations that were part of the Pak government during the dictatorship want to divert attention of the world including India and Pakistan to LOC between the two neighbours.

So how do these, so called ‘terrorist organizations’ gain?

With a large scale attack on India, they can fire emotions between the two neighbours. Leading to reduction in forces in the Northern border of Pakistan. With the economies at and all time low, both India and Pakistan will only crash their economies further. US will focus on the tension between India and Pakistan and will lose a certain amount of focus in Afghanistan, particularly when they won’t have Pak support in the Afghan border. This gives the terrorists time to build their fire power in Afghanistan and regain their lost world. Further, Pak may be seen losing the war, helping military led government to come back to Pakistan.

Hope the Indian and Pakistani governments are listening. Do not play into the hands of the terrorists.

Anger in the wake of terror attacks

Yes, we are angry. Yes, one feels cheated. Cheated by the very establishment, that we believe works for us. Every one is rightfully raising their voice. At every gathering, at every meeting, you see people venting their anger, against the system, against democracy, against politicians and finally against Pakistan.

Media channels have fuelled the anger without channelizing them in the right way. Today, I heard a BJP person quoted on TV and saying, “enough it enough, there is a need to take steps to avenge the attacks on our people and democracy…” Obviously he was pointing at Pak.

I am not sure if this is what we should be focussing on. We need to get our energies diverted towards building India rather than trying to hit out at Pakistan. Incidentally, this may be one of the key objectives of the terrorist organizations.

Governors or governance – which change is priority

Post the attacks on Bombay, we are seeing heads rolling. One of the politicians actually spoke that the whole ruling party should resign.

How different would the next ruling party be? Frankly not much. I strongly believe so. For example, there were fingers pointed towards the existing govt. as the sea routes were not guarded properly and hence the attack on Bombay happened? The same politicians who are pointing fingers now, were in power after the ‘93 blasts in Bombay. The ammunition then, came from the sea route. What had they done to protect the sea route? Nothing.

Hence, I do not think heads rolling or changing govt. is a solution. This is an example of a badly run ship in the corporate world; you keep on changing the business head every year and get them to do the same things, expecting dramatic results.

I think the focus should change from the governors to governance. There are key governance issues that need to be addressed. Once these are addressed, then we should find competent leaders to implement.
There has to be stronger governance in education, healthcare, security, employment, infrastructure… the list goes on. I believe this is the time to channel our energies into developing strong governance principles rather than getting plain emotional.

Audacity of hope despite the dogs, lipsticks, powder and ties

We all heard the two politicians and read their minds today. Frankly, I am not surprised. That is how they are and how much they care. However, one thing Naqvi told was true. For him we are not the vote bank. We do not represent his audience. His vote bank is large and out there and possibly believe him as well. Possibly because, they do not know his real side. Question is how can we – the dogs, the lipstick wearer, powder puffed and tie wearers – influence his vote bank?

People like Naqvi and the Kerala CM still hope to win and possibly will still win. Unless you and I can stop them from standing for elections or getting their vote banks to vote against them. Kill their audacity of hope.

Please do feel free to give your thoughts and views.

Playing into terrorists hands – Politicians do not know politics

A few days after the terror strikes Bombay, we have again played into the hands of the terrorists. Any terror attack has two objectives apart from creating terror. One, create a platform to that can get media mileage. Two, creating instability in the political, governing and social systems of the country affected.

The terrorists have achieved the first objective and that is almost impossible to stop. Our politicians are helping the terrorists achieve the second objective. Every politician worth their salt or not worth it – mostly not worth it – wants changes at the government level. They want to create instability within the country and help the cause of the terrorists. Politician’s sole objective being, get resignations’. Encash this opportunity to gain political mileage. This is not to defend the inept politicians whose heads are rolling. Point is, this is not the time. If you knew they were not competent, then you should have removed them much before the terror strikes on India. Not at a time, when we need political stability in the country.

Further more, some politicians could not come to an all party meeting as they were campaigning. Sounds ridiculous. Why are you campaigning? You cannot even work as a group to find out ways of making this country safe – that too at this time of attacks.

For so much of talk on experience of our politicians, our politicians do not know what politics is. Forget serving people for a change. Clearly, playing into the hands of terrorists.

Politics of terror – face of terror in Bombay

There were 10 or more terrorists in Bombay that held the world by the neck. They killed at random, they took hostages, they devastated families, historical properties. The list goes on. At the same time, two political leaders of two opposition parties could not come together. Another comes from Gujarat to Mumbai to offer money to the family of a deceased cop – the same cop he and his party were slandering a day before. One politician comes to Nariman House to hog the limelight when the rescue operations were still underway. Another comes from Kerala to Bangalore to a slain commando's house to hog some limelight.

Bombay was burning and every newspaper in Delhi had political ads where politicians want to take political advantage of the terrorist attacks. Political parties cry foul of the ruling party and wants heads rolling. Heads roll. More to come.

Each one of them wants to do something for himself, even if it does not do anything good to the citizens. This is the real face of terror and we thought there were 10 terrorists in Bombay that had the world by the neck.

We don’t need martyrs – we need them alive

Within an hour of the attack on Bombay, we had over 10 police casualties. We say they gave up their lives for us – citizens. No, they did not give their lives for us. They lost their lives due to lack of information, lack of intelligence, lack of preparedness and lack of infrastructure.

We lost them to politicians. We lost them to our bureaucracy. We lost them due to outdated protection equipment.


“Martyr” this time is a term to hide ineffectiveness and callousness. A term that raises the dead in our eyes and hides the reasons and causes of their death.

We don’t need martyrs. We need the heroes alive and serving.

Right to information – used and mostly misused

Those who helped terror are equally responsible as the ones who committed it. We all saw Bombay burning - shot at, bombed, maimed. We did not think for a moment at pointing our fingers to our neighbouring country. Quick, fast and technically the source that helped the attacks.

But what was media doing? They were reporting. Reporting second by second every single step taken by the NSG - "Breaking news". "See as is happens". "Exclusive". We were shown every commando that walked into Taj, Trident and Oberoi and the Nariman House. One of the channels was reporting from four vantage points at the Taj. Was this for purpose of providing valuable information? Or was this for the TRPs of channels, showing exclusives, leading the pack of the news channels? Or was it really to help the terrorists?

Yes, you have helped terrorists and they did not need to keep guessing. You have helped them prolong the terror and perhaps endangered the lives of hostages. I think heads should roll here too. And some of the reporters and channels should be treated exactly the way you would treat the terrorists.