By Harshmeet Singh
Cold relations, strong allegations, dialogue initiation from the Indian side, a bold initiative by an Indian PM, followed by a terrorist attack on India, allegedly planned in Pakistan; the Indo-Pak relations have come a full circle in just a couple of month’s time.
The terrorist attack on the Pathankot Air force base has attracted sharp reactions from all parts of the country. A number of experts are urging the government to step back and call off the Indo-Pak talks in wake of these attacks. There is also no dearth of commentators who want the government to continue its initiative since they see talks as the only way forward.
NewsGram brings you some of the most well put arguments in both the cases to help you make up an informed stand.
The writer of “Pathankot attack: Should India go ahead with peace talks with Pakistan?” tried to put forward both the view points and presented arguments for either case. He says that peace talks must be stalled since “Pakistan is not interested to have a friendly relationship with India. In Pakistan, ISI is unofficially ruling the nation with PM Nawaz Sharif only a symbolic head.”
While putting forward the other side of the argument, he contests that “India will score brownie points by going ahead with peace talks and garner more international support for it.”
According to the author of “Stay the course after Pathankot”, India and Pakistan must work together to ensure that the talks aren’t impacted by these heinous acts. He supports his stand by putting forward the argument that, “A sustained dialogue is the only fitting answer to terrorist groups and to their handlers inside the Pakistan establishment who wish to destabilise the peace process.”
He further presents his views as, “Going forward, the talks process must be further insulated from the ‘veto’ of these forces. First, the foreign secretaries must move quickly to set up a timetable of meetings of all the secretaries in the two countries involved in the comprehensive dialogue.”
Stories such as “Pathankot attack: Shiv Sena questions peace talks” highlight Shiv Sena’s concerns that talks would be futile unless these acts aren’t stopped.
The articles quotes Shiv Sena leader and party’s Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Raut as saying, “We are not playing politics, but it’s a fact that the bilateral peace talks and terror attacks take place simultaneously… terror and peace talks can’t go together. Merely saying (that) the country will give a befitting reply to such attacks is not enough. When shall we give a befitting response to Pakistan?”
A write-up in Times of India, “Pathankot attack: BJP indicates peace process may get stalled if Pak’s role confirmed”, says that the Government is of the view that if Pakistan’s involvement in these attacks in confirmed, the peace process will be stalled.
The article says that “According to sources, whether to go ahead with the talks now hinges on how much the Nawaz Sharif government “cooperates” with the Indian authorities in the aftermath of the attack.”
All these allegations and diverging points of view would be put to rest once the dust settles down and the Government prepares to take its next step forward.