There are other simple reasons why Indians need to know about an enemy at the backyard and who was born on an anti India plank and tries to sustain on the same plank.We can see in Kashmir today what the separatists are up to if some of the present Indian generations would want to have a glimpse of a situation before the partition.Then it was the Indian Muslim league and now its the Pakistani Muslim league that is conspiring another partition of Kashmir.
A can full of sins that Pakistan is today and its over spilling.Sooner or later there will be total anarchy.The enemies of India in Pakistan and their counterparts here in India led the war against the state of India.We on the other hand are so lethargic an tied down by vote bank compulsions that some other country like America had to help us identify who were behind the 26/11 attacks in Mumbai.Looks like our secular politicians never made an honest attempt to nab the culprits.
Today the eyes of the entire world are focused on Pakistan but for wrong reasons.The mother of terror that its now well known or a jihadi factory to be precise is falling from its own weight of sins.Pakistan waged or forced upon us three wars and miserably failed.It always wanted to compete with India unnecessarily.Its a name sake democracy where its the Military's writ that runs.It was deprived of its commonwealth country membership twice for deliberately not restoring democracy and its poor human rights record.What is there to know further about Pakistan a country carved out of India by conspiring with the British and back stabbing the Indian freedom movement.Probably no country in the world has anything to learn from Pakistan.

FAREED AMEEN:

Hindus (all the sane ones) have an EXTREMELY miserable self-image. I say this as a Hindu. There is very good reason for it.

Why was India so easily overrun by foreigners so many times, Hindu temples smashed, its peoples slaughtered, raped and forcibly converted to Islam, etc?

Simply because the Hindus have been too poor fighters to defend their country - with the exceptions of the Sikhs, some Rajputs, the Mahrattas, the Vijayanagaris - exceptions that prove the rule.

Hindus are pacific, caste-bound and poorly nourished people, made weedy by their vegetarian oriented diet. They are generally darker, uglier, shorter, thinner than the Pakistanis. This can be seen with the naked eye.

Hindus are well aware of all this, feel their inferiority and are thus amazed when once in a while a Muslim army is defeated as in 1971 by their feeble selves.

What all this blunt truth shows is that Muslims have no reason to fear Hindus. Let them live in their poor and very dirty land and you all live in your wonderful truly Arab paradise.

OK?

I would encourage these fine members of the Sangh Parivar to read their comments before they post. For they continue to confirm their complexes over and over again. So, George, for example,... last name unknown says

QUOTE:
If there is no hostility,how would ujustify the pakistan army budget while civilians get peanuts. By 2010, pakistan economy will be 9 percent that of india. Fast forward another fifty years,it will decrease to less than five percent. And you will still be talkng of hostility. You might as well go back to your village in Pakistan.
UNQUOTE:

Aren't you wasting a lot of time and emotion for a relatively insignificant country next to your borders. Why all this bile for something decidedly miniscule and irrelevant?

Meanwhile, Jay says...
"This weak Hindu woman also had to create a country for 75 million Muslim East Pakistani's so that they can live in peace."

Again, the emphasis is on "weak". Why do you always consider yourselves less. You aren't. You are just as good as us. Now, now... I hope you fell better.

Finally, the erudie Mr. Shekhar states...
"Pakistani ideology is based on the archaic, obnoxious, idiotic notion of the martial, conquering, beef eating Moslem races, as distinct from the wimpy, effiminate, vegetarian non-martial, conquered Indian/Hindu peoples."

I am amazed at what a poor self image you have. I have myself never been there but am reliably informed that India and its inhabitants possess great charm, culture and style. And that Tendulkar isn't such a bad fellow...

Farid Amin,
For one thing where have you read this comment. I have looked up all of Indiara Gandhi's comments-nowhere has she said this.

Further, are you sober or hallucinating when you say that Indians feel inferior to Pakistanis-can any Pakistani with his hand on his heart even in his wildest imagination think this, forget about Indians thinking so.

In fact Pakistani hostility arises from the realisation that all their mean and negative actions to try and pull India down to their level have each time failed.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

Pakistani ideology is based on the archaic, obnoxious, idiotic notion of the martial, conquering, beef eating Moslem races, as distinct from the wimpy, effiminate, vegetarian non-martial, conquered Indian/Hindu peoples. This is their guiding, foundational ideology. People are right when they say there cannot be lasting peace between these two entities. Pakistan would have to become mature, intelligent and self-respecting, but when that happens, there will be no Pakistan. And that's the beauty of it.

Mrs. Gandhi never said "We have reversed thousand years of history". That was the product of Pakistani Propaganda specialists. What she actually said was "the two nation theory lies buried in the Bay of Bengal". It said that Muslim Pakistani's massacred millions of Muslim East Pakistanis, raped their women and the Islamic countries did not utter a word. It took a Hindu woman, to provide relief to 10 million Muslim refugees. This weak Hindu woman also had to create a country for 75 million Muslim East Pakistani's so that they can live in peace. I hope Pakistani's have learnt their lesson and will stop butchering the poor Muslim Pakhtoons and Baloch.

Pak-Indian hostility is assured.
Fareed Ameen
London, United Kingdom

If there is no hostility,how would ujustify the pakistan army budget while civilians get peanuts. By 2010, pakistan economy will be 9 percent that of india. Fast forward another fifty years,it will decrease to less than five percent. And you will still be talkng of hostility. You might as well go back to your village in Pakistan.

FAREED AMEEN:

Mr Ameen, how Hindus can say they are not inferior to the fiery fighters of fierce Pakistan?

They cannot because they are, to such warriors, quite inferior, realistically talking. So they must have that feeling you are seemingly here deploring....

What to do?

India and hindus are not the fight-fight-fight types. Always they feel they cannot compete like that.

It is then for the brave Mussalmans to be generous, no? It is for them only to say, with a big smile:

"Hindus, we know you are feeling bad! We know you cannot do this fight-fight-fight like we. So, do not feel so inferior. You are better in cooking. You are better in something else (tennis?) Try to relax."

So talkng like that only, Hindus will feel better.

"what they consider an inferior "Hindu" India,"

Unfortunately, Mr. Rao gives the game away with this sentence. I don't recall any mention of "inferior" Hindus in Mr. Hussain's article. But Mr. Rao, like many of his compatriots, continues to feel a strong sense of inferiority to Pakistanis. How else to expplain Mrs. Gandhi's boast "we have reversed a thousand years of history" upon defeating the Pakistan Army in Bangladesh.

Until and unless Indians are finally able to convince themselves they are not actually inferior, something in which Outlook, with its "superior" editorial and journalistic staff can assist, Pak-Indian hostility is assured.

I agree with Bapa Rao's comment that Pak does not seem to be showing the right degree of remorse for its genocide if its memories of 1971 are limited to just how their country was broken up. But Khurram Hussain's third point is also interesting.

Hussain says, loosely paraphrasing, that Pak people and establishment are not really religiously driven, but are carrying on asymmetric warfare against a much stronger neighbor. IMO, this point is debatable. At one time, during Ayub and Yayha Khan, the army dictatorship was indeed secular, though Islam was already being used as a justification for army rule (as being needed for protecting the Islamic land). But during Zia's time, there was a definite escalation in Islamism.

It's interesting to ask if Zia as an individual was really driven by religious zealotry or he used it in a calculated manner. But it's hard to separate illusion and fact after some time. Similarly, by encouraging Islamism in schools, government and the army, Zia and later dictators must have indeed drawn in some genuine ideological Islamists, as opposed to those using it as a tool to control the masses.

By supporting the Afghan Taliban, and taking sides in the Afghan warlord wars, Pak got even closer to genuine ideologues. Of course, once Afghan Taliban got into power, they created a space for Al Qadea, with their global Islamist ideology.

Fast forward to today's mess, with Punjabi Pakistani Talibans attacking the Pak state, and using jihadist language similar to that used in Iraq and other hotspots.

So what's happened is even if the army and aristocracy cynically intended to keep a facade of Islamism and still pursue secular realpolitik goals, the virus has refused to be contained, and some fraction, probably large, of the core Pakistan (namely Punjab) has genuinely Islamist supremacist ideas.

So to tie it all together, when Indians think that Pak establishment is not "normal", they're not carrying the Jinnah / partition history, but they're reacting correctly to current events.

I also agree DC, Anwaar should explain his standing on Bapa Rao's response. A comment like 'two peas in a pod' can be explained in many ways. I have found Mr. Rao's comments about '71 is well perceived and based on history and that's the truth. Mr. Hussain's one is shallow and tedious.

There are many narratives of grievances, many ways of experiencing history, of experiencing truths or truth. Once of the core concerns of Indian thought was,"How may we know what is true? And how can we know what we know is free from delusions?" Therefore, they tried to understand the reflexive quality of mind, vimarsha, consciousness scrutinizing itself: what parameters, self-checks etc.

In sharp contradistinction, the major Abrahamic faiths of Judaism, Christianity & Islam depend entirely on a type of a-priori revelation that is entirely different from SHRUTI, mis-translated also as "revelation" in the Indian context. In the Abrahamic context, the revelation is entirely unique and personal to that one recipient, and forever closed to the rest, insofar as the exact quality, magnitude, details, selectivity etc. are concerned, i.e. none else can penetrate or co-share that message to the same exact degree but perhaps as minor/junior partners.

For whatever reason, these two streams, the Abrahamic and the Indic, represent two aspects of the human consciousness that have entered into a conflict, with one determined to establish its dominance over the entire mass of humanity, whatever the external protestations to the contrary. In the very long run, they cannot co-exist in peace as they NOW are constituted.

This is directly relevant to the Kashmir issue, how RIGHT & WRONG is perceived among some of the protagonists. I would like to offer one view, and this is not necessarily the ONLY view. Note how much this immediately differs from a Wahhabi formulation that might declare that there is ONLY ONE RIGHT VIEW FOR ALL.

Kashmir, including Suvastu & Gilgit, has been one of the core homes of Vidya, which might be called the Agamic or gnostic elment within the Sanatana Dharma, including the Buddha Shasana. There are the 4 cores, GaudIya [Bengal] KeralIya, VilAsiya & KAshmIrIya or the VishnukrAntA, RathakrAntA, GajakrAntA & AshvakrAntA. These last four cores are not quite co-terminous with the first, but you get the general picture: Kashmir is a very significant cultural heartland for all Sanatana Dharma lineages. it has great religious significance, much as Muslims today ascribe to Mecca Or Jerusalem and claim such exclusive AND EXCLUSIONARY RIGHTS to those. For example, Jews have a single HOLY OF HOLIES in the entire UNIVERSE, yet, as on the Ram Janmabhumi, we find a mosque, AL-AQSA over it, and no understanding of the need or right of Jews to have their Temple Mount to themselves just as MECCA & MADINA is jealously kept free of ALL other faiths. This is not an issue to be settled by force or condemnation, but by an inner awakening within the entire ummah.

Anyway, in Kashmir, many conquerors had woven their sanguinary course, but all eventually had added themselves to the local culture except the Islamic : with the fugitive Rinchen, and Hamadani opening the innings, and the story since then has been generally punctuated by severe coercion and unchecked oppression, destruction of an entire civilization within the region. This has de-legitimized ANY claims of Islam or Muslims to Kashmir in the eyes of most Indians or Buddhists in the greater Himalayan region. So the Muslims have been relegated to "illegal immigrants" based on theie conduct, i.e. destroying those who originally offered them shelter from harm [Rinchen, Hamadani]:krtaghne nAsti niSkrti ;ghn here denotes killer, as opposed to akrtjna(ingrate): those who kill in repayment of gratitude must NOT BE SPARED. The Chak kings etc. etc., the list goes on and on, the history is horrendous.

During the Sikh rule, when the Pandits were given the opportunity to pull down the Hamadani moque, they refrained! The Hamadani mosque stands over the Kalishri Temple that gives Srinagar its name, from well before Islamic times.

The ValLey is the home to the Shaivite sidhhas, some of whom like Shri Shambhunath, guru of Abhinavagupta, were equally the root teachers of the Drukpa Kagyu Buddhists. Shambunath's visage may be found preserved in the Buddhist shrines of Leh & Ladakh as "Shamunath". The vast Mahamudra of these schools has no difference in sadhana or result with the great theistic Shakta & Shaiva schools of Kashmir or Bengal, other than semantics.

From Kashmir arose the springs that re-invigorated the entire religious landsape of India, right down to the South, and then from the South, people like Purnananda came back up to the Gangetic Plains, burning with the newly replenished paths.

So friends, try to imagine the relevance of Kashmir on the spiritual map of religious India. With every event, barring 2-3 Muslim epochs,the Pandits were mercilessly treated for no reason at all, but for being Sanatanis and Brahmins. The sadism and wickedness exhibited is beyond belief. There is no recognition by the Muslims that such acts were the norm. Saying things about Sufis is nonsense because MANY Sufis were part of the oppressors [read A.D.RAFIQUI: SUFISM IN KASHMIR]. Talking about Brahmins in Kerala is also irrelvant! Kashmir is the issue. here.

These accumulating injustices or grievances continued to "de-legitimize" Muslims in kahmir from any right to live there a they provedto be more ad more beyond the human pale. NOT ALL, by any means. MANY made extraordinary sacrifices on behalf of the RTA that which is purely righteous, nd on the behalf of their Sanatani friends. Their names & deeds are not forgotten, nor are their families, past & present. ALL SUCH, including those who have shed even a drop of blood for India, should enjoy the peace, ignity and highest honor possible, and nothing said here applies to them or their families. Their goodness has raised them above all considerations. Even if their children become violent, then too they should be treated with the greatest understanding and affection. They are fundamental citizens by right of their former records.

But to sum up, the real problem is that Indians & Sanatanis [including Buddists] cannot see most Muslims in Kashmir as having any legitimate claim on the land. Every epoch of violence, be it 19-47848, or 1989-preent, further de-legitimizes this already weak hold. The feeling is, why should few million people [4 million in the Vally of whom perhaps 60% are irreconciliable] hold the country to hostage? In East bengal andPunjab, so many millionswere uprooted, andIn Bengal, that bleeding has never stopped. No mention is ever made of the vigorous cruelty of Bangladesh or of Pakistan in the treatment of their minorities, the forced mass conversions and rapes documented by their own Human Rights Commissions each year.

The Indian Government chooses to ignore & mocjk the mounting rage within MANY Hindu communities within India. This has reached the point of super-saturation, where there is no need for an organizer or nucleating center. A brief shock of the right type will set crytallization in motion, self-catalysed across various regions in India. We are speaking of numbers larger than the maoists and spread through all tiers of society, say more than 200 million.

The GOI cannot control this movement, because it will be self-motivated, born of a shared set of hurts, threats to identity, shared enemies, shared goals. Each person will be able to carry on regardless of any other. The vast majority of the armed/paramilitary forces, retired and serving, retired and serving are also NOT the liberal, secular, HINDU-HATING IDEALOGUES that populate the UPPER CRUST. These men [& THE WOMEN THEY ARE INFLENCED BY] are closer to the soil, and NEW DELHI should heed the DISTANT LIGHTNING. The Shah of Iran & his omniscient SAVAK killed Ali Shariati yet were swwept away by the tide. Something to think about?

Thank you Praful Shah for reminding everyone of the refugee situation prior to the Bangladesh war. Millions of refugees were living in the camps on Jessore Road, Calcutta. (Allen Ginsberg wrote a touching poem on his experience of seeing those refugees.) Fundraisers were organized even in the US. (Recently on PBS channel I saw an old documentary of one of such shows where Ravi Shankar, George Harrison and Bob Dylan performed.)
Mrs Gandhi indeed toured USA seeking help from Nixon Administration. Cold War politics betrayed her. The war therefore became inevitable. Pakistan may have conveniently forgotten this part of their history.But then, manipulation of history has been with Pakistan since the very idea of a nation-state named Pakistan was conceived.

Suprised to read Anwar's post - since he typically writes very balanced response.
Like Bapa Rao I was equally shocked to read Khurram Hussain's explanation of equating Kashmir with East Pakistan by Pakistani educated class.
The genocide, rape and looting of their own people by the Pakistani military regime that led to a huge influx of refugees to India prompted Mrs Gandhi to be involved in the 1971 war. If it was solely an opportunistic move, India would have tried to annex Bangladesh instead of recognizing a government led by their leader Muzibur Rahman. Even the Shimla treaty signed thereafter only stressed on bilateral resolutions of disputes - India did not capture Pakistani territorries.
If Pakistani intelligentsia still likes to equate J&K with Bangladesh it will expose a loathsome mindset.

Viz a viz complacency of certain section fo Indians I am reminded of the words of V S naipaul in "India the wounded civilization". He mentions how a senior minister in congress government declared twho could have evil desing on india it's such a huge country to subjugate for anyone.

This despite the fact that 20 years back the country got independence from 1000 years of foreign rule.. This kind of illogical complacency must be kept at bay.
I