Kashmir issue leading Obama into first 'tar pit'

India and Pakistan was one country. When the British left in 1947 they granted independence. India was partitioned into the Islamic Republic of Pakistan for Muslims, and India for the rest of the folks including Hindus, Christians, Sikhs, Jews, Parsis (Persian (Zorashtrian) People who sought refuge in India to escape Islamists in an earlier era) Buddhists (including Dalai Lama), Jains and Muslims who opted to stay with india. A few years later East Pakistan, which could not take the Iron rule of Pakistan, Split to form Bangladesh. India and Pakistani people belong to the same ethnic stock. After partition the proportion of Hindus, Christians, Jews etc in Pakistan steadily went downhill wheras the number of muslims and other minorities in India has steadily increased, and now India has more muslims than all of Pakistan. During the period before 1500 AD India was one of the countries in the world with the highest GDP and well advanced in mathematics and science. In fact the decimal numbering systems we use today including zeros and ones, were invented by Hindus. Because of that, Columbus and others set out to find a new route to India bypassing the Middle East. Columbus did not set out to find the US but he did so by accident. After 1500 AD with foreign conquests, colonizations by European powers etc, India's fortunes steadily went downhill. When independence came in 1947 India sought to make up for lost time. India has no oil or natural resoures to speak of, only the grey matter in the heads of its people. India poured its treasure to educate its people and establish many institutes of advanced learning. Pakistan chose to invest in Madrassas. India would have done much more to educate its people, had it not been forced to fight three wars with Pakistan and divert its scarce resources on arms to keep up with its hostile neighbor. India has a big middle class, over 300 million. India has been sending the highest number of students of any country, for higher education to the US for many years. And these students dont come here to take take lessons to fly Boeings one way. Eventhough India has more Muslims than the whole of Pakistan, not one of them has participated in an act of terror againist the west. Whereas dirt poor India is admired in the west for its powers in Technology, Pakistan is regarded as the epicenter of Jihadist Terror. If Pakistan can claim the territory of another country beause of its muslim population, where does this stop. There are sizeable muslim populations in certain places in the US like Detroit or Lodi Calif. Would the US cede these areas to Pak. The people of Kashmir (the Indian Part) just elected a new govt to rule them and they want no part in teror. Kashmir itself became majority muslim because of ethnic cleansing of Hindus and Buddhists a few years ago. These ejected people are still living in refugee camps in India.

Myopic indeed as most of the Indians are, Jay seems to be suffering from the same. If at all Kashmiris wanted to elect the puppet government and stop thinking about freedom , then why on earth are they still celebrating the Day for Self Determination? If at all this was true why do we have UN offices in Srinagar, Indain Occupied Kashmir? Simple to understand for Kashmiris but hard nut to crack for Indians. The best cure, please read what happened between 1947 and 1954 with which the paradise on earth was made a hell.

Selig Harrison’s recommendation to President elect Obama has two parts. The first, and most important is the need for a comprehensive regional diplomatic initiative to seek resolution of the myriad problems and issues faced not only by India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, but also by the nations of Central Asia, China and Iran. To deal with our concerns with any one of these nations in isolation is to invite further deterioration and conflict in the region. This perspective is shared by Barnett Rubin and Ahmed Rashid in Foreign Affairs, David Packer and my response in The New Yorker, and many others who are knowledgeable and concerned about the peoples in this part of our world. The second part of his recommendation is that US diplomacy not get caught up and bogged down in the Kashmir issue between Pakistan and India. There was wide recognition in the world that US initiatives in South Asia in response to the Mumbai massacre on November 26, 2008, was not only encroachment on those nations’ sovereignty, but also ironic, given the Bush Administration’s totally inappropriate response to 9/11. The Kashmir issue is even more complex and long standing, and from the beginning an intolerable burden upon the people of Kashmir. But its resolution, as with many other conflicts in the world, lies in concerted efforts and investment toward human resource development rather than military buildups. We need more of the Greg Mortenson approach, with fewer Admirals and Generals involved. Many of us live in the awareness that President-elect Obama understands this difference, and in the hope that the many pressures and interests of his office will not prevent him from pursuing a more intelligent and sensitive approach to the many challenges which we face in our world today.

I myself being a south Asian citizen can not agree with Harrisons is misleading and biased views on the subject. I think Obama has correctly identified Kashmir conflict as number one international issue for his foreign policy agenda – being a 62 year old bone of contention between two nuclear powers. This is the only issue currently that can cause a nuclear war – a disastrous event for not only the region but for the whole world. Therefore Obama team should resolve the Kashmir issue as a win win solution for all the parties including India, Pakistan, and Kashmiris – being a neutral arbitrator for the sake of global peace. I think Carter or Clinton can be the right persons to handle the project. However last but not the least if Kashmir issue will not be resolved just fully on SOS basis then the global peace will constantly will remain in danger.

"By questioning Indian control of the Kashmir Valley, the United States would strengthen jihadi forces in both Islamabad and Srinagar, the capital of the state of Jammu and Kashmir. More importantly, it would undermine improving U.S.-India relations" Quite balanced and I completely concur with aforesaid statement of the author. The writer is precise that it’s like compromising with terrorists. They would ask Kashmir at the moment which does resembles like in Britain they're demanding for implementation of Islamic sharia law that clashes very much against the English constitution and democratic principles. Terrorists would ask more, given them any compromise whatsoever. Hence it should be the policy of the democratic governments and powers to safeguard civilized against these religious fanatics with utmost care, wherever they exist.