2014 ndi 6ws-fitzmier, Lundberg, Abelkop Economy Disads Spending da
Download 0.74 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Indo/Pak war will not go nuclear—no one wants to strike first and fear of US involvement
- No war or escalation---MAD checks
Aff Impact—Indo Pak DIndia and Pakistan are increasing cooperation now – solves the impactRoche 12 (Elizabeth, correspondent for Live Mint, Live Mint , Jul 5 2012. “India, Pakistan agree to keep dialogue process on track” http://www.livemint.com/2012/07/05122602/India-Pakistan-agree-to-keep.html?h=A1) New Delhi: Despite the obvious differences on how to deal with terrorism and on the probe into the 2008 Mumbai terrorist attacks, India and Pakistan on Thursday agreed that progress had been made in their year-old dialogue—resumed after being halted by the November 2008 terrorist attacks in Mumbai that left 166 people dead. Both sides also agreed to keep their dialogue process on track with India’s foreign minister S.M. Krishna expected to travel to Pakistan in the first half of September for discussions with his Pakistani counterpart Hina Rabbani Khar. “While we might not agree on all issues, we do agree that relations between our two countries have to be normalized.” Indian foreign secretary Ranjan Mathai told reporters at the end of the two-day talks with his Pakistani counterpart Jalil Abbas Jilani. “There is a determination on both sides to take forward our dialogue with an open mind and a constructive spirit.” Though the way forward was not easy, “the very fact that both sides are determined to sit across the table and resolve all outstanding issues through a dialogue in a peaceful manner is a positive step in the right direction.” Mathai said. One of the key areas of divergence was terrorism. “I emphasized that terrorism is the biggest threat to peace and security in the region, and that bringing the guilty to justice in the Mumbai terror attacks would be the biggest confidence building measure of all,” Mathai said. He was referring to the three-day rampage by 10 Islamist militants belonging to the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba militant group who targeted some prominent Mumbai landmarks in the attack that started on the night of 26 November 2008. The Indian government believes that given the scale of the attacks, the militants had the support of some sections of the Pakistani establishment. India’s arguments have been strengthened by the revelations of Abu Jundal, an alleged handler of the Mumbai attackers, who was arrested last month. India has been pressing Pakistan for a speedy trial of the perpetrators of the Mumbai attacks, but Pakistan has repeatedly stated that India has not given adequate evidence to convict anyone. On Thursday, Mathai said he had discussed the information gleaned from Jundal and shared it with Jilani. Jilani, on his part, said he “strongly” rejected “any insinuation of any involvement of any state agency in acts of terrorism in India”. “We have over the years improved our level of cooperation. And in case there are certain gaps that need to be filled, I think we should fill those gaps in a spirit of cooperation,” Jilani said, adding that terrorism was a common threat facing both India and Pakistan. Mutual recriminations will be counterproductive, he said, adding that India should supply Pakistan with all the evidence it has on the Mumbai attacks and “we will investigate this matter. We will even be willing to offer joint investigation into the whole affair,” Jilani said. Both the foreign secretaries agreed that trade was an area where considerable progress had been made. “I think the forward movement on economic and commercial cooperation between India and Pakistan is really a welcome development. And we see it as a win-win proposition for both the sides. Enhanced economic cooperation contributes to economic growth and development in our two countries which is the primary objective on both sides,” Mathai said. Improved economic ties have been the driver of the current phase of the peace dialogue, with Pakistan announcing that it was looking at normalizing trade with India by expanding the list of items that can be imported from India by more than threefold. Both the countries also opened a new checkpost through which goods can be traded at the Wagah-Attari border crossing. The Pakistani foreign secretary said he and Mathai had also discussed improving contacts between the two regions of Kashmir that India and Pakistan administer. “We have agreed to convene a meeting of the joint working group on cross-line of control confidence building measures and to streamline and strengthen travel and trade arrangements,” he said. In 2008, India and Pakistan operationalized trade between the two regions of Kashmir. But reports say local Kashmiris are seeking a broadening of the trade list, besides demanding adequate banking and communications systems, in the absence of which trade is restricted to basic bartering. Kashmir was also discussed, a joint statement said. The exchange on Kashmir was comprehensive and both the sides agreed to carry on the dialogue to find a peaceful solution to the problem, it said. “I dont’ see both sides arriving at solutions to the issues that are deadlocked—Kashmir and terrorism," said Kalim Bahadur, former professor of South Asian Studies at Jawaharlal Nehru University. “But having a dialogue, keeping a dialogue on track is better than having war or tense relations.” Indo/Pak war will not go nuclear—no one wants to strike first and fear of US involvementEnders 2 (David, The Daily News editor, “Experts say nuclear war still unlikely,”, January 30th 2002, DA: 7/26/10, http://www.michigandaily.com/content/experts-say-nuclear-war-still-unlikely?page=0,0) University political science Prof. Ashutosh Varshney becomes animated when asked about the likelihood of nuclear war between India and Pakistan. "Odds are close to zero," Varshney said forcefully, standing up to pace a little bit in his office. "The assumption that India and Pakistan cannot manage their nuclear arsenals as well as the U.S.S.R. and U.S. or Russia and China concedes less to the intellect of leaders in both India and Pakistan than would be warranted.” The world"s two youngest nuclear powers first tested weapons in 1998, sparking fear of subcontinental nuclear war a fear Varshney finds ridiculous. "The decision makers are aware of what nuclear weapons are, even if the masses are not," he said. "Watching the evening news, CNN, I think they have vastly overstated the threat of nuclear war," political science Prof. Paul Huth said. Varshney added that there are numerous factors working against the possibility of nuclear war. "India is committed to a no-first-strike policy," Varshney said. "It is virtually impossible for Pakistan to go for a first strike, because the retaliation would be gravely dangerous." Political science Prof. Kenneth Lieberthal, a former special assistant to President Clinton at the National Security Council, agreed. "Usually a country that is in the position that Pakistan is in would not shift to a level that would ensure their total destruction," Lieberthal said, making note of India"s considerably larger nuclear arsenal. "American intervention is another reason not to expect nuclear war," Varshney said. "If anything has happened since September 11, it is that the command control system has strengthened. The trigger is in very safe hands." No war or escalation---MAD checksEconomic Times 11 (5/17/11, Economic Times, “No chance of Indo-Pak nuclear war despite 'sabre rattling': Pak nuclear scientist A Q Khan,” http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-05-17/news/29552014_1_nuclear-blackmail-nuclear-secrets-india-and-pakistan) NEW YORK: Pakistan's disgraced nuclear scientist A Q Khan has said that despite "sabre rattling" between Islamabad and New Delhi, there is no chance of a nuclear war between the two neighbours. Khan, who has been accused of selling nuclear secrets to Iran, Libya and Syria, wrote in Newsweek magazine that nuclear weapons in both countries had prevented war for the last 40 years. "India doesn't need more than five weapons to hurt us badly, and we wouldn't need more than 10 to return the favour," he said. "That is why there has been no war between us for the past 40 years." "India and the Cold War: mutually assured destruction," he said. "The two (India and Pakistan) can't afford a nuclear war, and despite our sabre rattling, there is no chance Pakistan understand the old principle that ensured peace in of a nuclear war that would send us both back to the Stone Age," he said. He claimed that Pakistan had to invest in a nuclear programme "to ward off nuclear blackmail from India". "I would like to make it clear that it was an Indian nuclear explosion in May 1974 that prompted our nuclear program, motivating me to return to Pakistan to help create a credible nuclear deterrent and save my country from Indian nuclear blackmail," he said. "We are forced to maintain this deterrence until our differences with India are resolved. That would lead to a new era of peace for both countries," Khan wrote. "I hope I live to see Pakistan and India living harmoniously in the same way as the once bitter enemies Germany and France live today," he said. Khan blasted various governments in Pakistan as well as "successive incompetent and ignorant rulers" for not engaging in basic development of the country, and raising the people's standard of living. "We are far worse off now than we were 20, or even 40, years ago when we were subjected to embargoes," he said. Directory: wp-content -> uploads -> 2014 2014 -> For want of a nail 2014 -> Stop Militarizing Law Enforcement Act of 2014 2014 -> Ihbb asian Championships 2014 middle school bowl Round 4 First Quarter 2014 -> Ihbb european Championships 2014 Bowl Round 4 First Quarter 2014 -> International History Bee and Bowl 2013-14 Asian Division Question Set Bowl Round Six 2014 -> United states patent and trademark office 2014 -> Coffs harbour eisteddfod vocal syllabus 2014 -> Listen News Programs Schedule pledge now 2014 -> Slow club announce third album complete surrender Download 0.74 Mb. Share with your friends:
|