Prime Minister Manmohan Singh gives a deceptive appearance of being a man who loves his silence more than the usual verbosity of politicians. One will presume that such a taciturn person will weigh his words more carefully when he speaks on major issues of vital concern to the nation. On this account, Dr Singh's record is quite dismal, particularly when dealing with Pakistan and its leaders, irrespective of the fact whether they are military dictators or civilians. His thinking process seems to take a break, his tongue strangely loosens and he announces decisions that are not only incredibly bizarre, these take a sudden U-turn on established, consensual national policies.
This happened first time within a couple of years of Manmohan Singh's prime-ministership in 2004, when he atteneded the Non-aligned Summit in Havana,Cuba where the Pakistani dictator Gen. Pervez Musharraf was also present. In a joint statement with the Pakistani military ruler, Prime Minister Singh proclaimed that both India and Pakistan were equal victims of terrorism! He totally disregarded India's long-time charge against its neighbour, based on voluminous details, that Pakistan was the primary aider, abettor and perpetrator of cross-border terrorism against India, specially in J&K. And in a total flip-flop, the Indian PM, thoughtlessly put the victim of terrorism and its promoter and mastermind on the equal footing! This utterly senseless action stirred a huge uproar in the country which forced him to keep the Havana agreement to fight terrorism jointly at the backburner.
However, Prime Minister Singh's pro-Pakistan itch resurfaced at the Sharm El-Sheikh(Egypt) where the former met his Pakistani counterpart. Forgetting his strong rhetoric in the wake of 26/11 Mumbai massacre perpetrated by Pakistani terrorists under the guidance of the ISI, that no dialogue with Pakistan would take place until our unprincipled, untrustworthy, neighbour took action against the State and non-state criminals involved in the mayhem, Manmohan Singh agreed to delink bilateral talks with Pakistan-sponsored terrorism. Again, history repeated itself and in the face of tremendous furore in the country, Dr Singh reversed his position.
As if the pitcher of the Prime Minister's faux pas and stupidities in domestic and foreign affairs was not yet full, he, once again, indulged in his romantic view of Pakistan, the place of his birth, by giving an undeserved certificate to his counterpart Yusuf Raza Gilani as "a man of peace", at the Maldive SAARC summit recently. He even trusted the Pakistan Prime Minister's assurance that the Pakistan Army was on board with the civilian leadership on the issue of restoring friendship and normalcy between the two neighbours. But, again, following the pattern of national reaction against his indiscreet and needlessly sugary sentiments, the PM stepped back, qualifying his remarks that he has not abandoned his approach of "trust but verify" theory. No wonder, a senior, retired Indian diplomat, Satish Chandra, former Indian High Commissioner in Islamabad, and the National Deputy Security Adviser, in an article in a national daily, sharply attacked Dr Singh for "appeasing" Pakistan in the hope that it will lead to a "thaw" in bilateral relations and lend him the stature of a "statesman"! He accused him of offering Pakistan "far too many concessions" at the cost of India's "national interests".
This happened first time within a couple of years of Manmohan Singh's prime-ministership in 2004, when he atteneded the Non-aligned Summit in Havana,Cuba where the Pakistani dictator Gen. Pervez Musharraf was also present. In a joint statement with the Pakistani military ruler, Prime Minister Singh proclaimed that both India and Pakistan were equal victims of terrorism! He totally disregarded India's long-time charge against its neighbour, based on voluminous details, that Pakistan was the primary aider, abettor and perpetrator of cross-border terrorism against India, specially in J&K. And in a total flip-flop, the Indian PM, thoughtlessly put the victim of terrorism and its promoter and mastermind on the equal footing! This utterly senseless action stirred a huge uproar in the country which forced him to keep the Havana agreement to fight terrorism jointly at the backburner.
However, Prime Minister Singh's pro-Pakistan itch resurfaced at the Sharm El-Sheikh(Egypt) where the former met his Pakistani counterpart. Forgetting his strong rhetoric in the wake of 26/11 Mumbai massacre perpetrated by Pakistani terrorists under the guidance of the ISI, that no dialogue with Pakistan would take place until our unprincipled, untrustworthy, neighbour took action against the State and non-state criminals involved in the mayhem, Manmohan Singh agreed to delink bilateral talks with Pakistan-sponsored terrorism. Again, history repeated itself and in the face of tremendous furore in the country, Dr Singh reversed his position.
As if the pitcher of the Prime Minister's faux pas and stupidities in domestic and foreign affairs was not yet full, he, once again, indulged in his romantic view of Pakistan, the place of his birth, by giving an undeserved certificate to his counterpart Yusuf Raza Gilani as "a man of peace", at the Maldive SAARC summit recently. He even trusted the Pakistan Prime Minister's assurance that the Pakistan Army was on board with the civilian leadership on the issue of restoring friendship and normalcy between the two neighbours. But, again, following the pattern of national reaction against his indiscreet and needlessly sugary sentiments, the PM stepped back, qualifying his remarks that he has not abandoned his approach of "trust but verify" theory. No wonder, a senior, retired Indian diplomat, Satish Chandra, former Indian High Commissioner in Islamabad, and the National Deputy Security Adviser, in an article in a national daily, sharply attacked Dr Singh for "appeasing" Pakistan in the hope that it will lead to a "thaw" in bilateral relations and lend him the stature of a "statesman"! He accused him of offering Pakistan "far too many concessions" at the cost of India's "national interests".
No comments:
Post a Comment