Daily Excelsior... Editorial

EDITORIAL

By Samuel Baid
The gunning down of 18 Christians in a Catholic Church in Bhawalpur during the Sunday service was shocking but not ....more

Problem of poverty
Thesis and anti thesis
how not to eridicate it

By Abhijit Patnaik
If the poverty table released by the Planning Commission is a fair indication, we have more than 340.65 million people ...more

Beginning of the end

By K K Khosa
The single most important factor responsible for the growth and sustenance of terrorism in India has been Pakistan. In recent times many an analyst .... .more

The Pak aspiration to dominance

By Sharad Dixit
The current Indo-Pak scenario is rife with uncertainty and subject to a great deal of speculation. Grandees on both tend to....... .more

EDITORIAL

USA, bowed under Pak burden

WTC attack may have been an attack on the American belly at its greatest bulge, but it became a world concern as it depicted the destructive potential of terrorism in chilling photo-takes. As the terrorist commanded aeroplanes penetrated the most sturdy symbol of development and advance, the world realized how sharp edged the missile of terrorism had grown. It could sit back and see how more havoc-some these missives could get and how vulnerable the world they lived in was. All the nations of the world who were not living under cave-shelters were sitting ducks for this sort of high brigandism. That impression has been lastingly impinged upon the world psyche and would direct all future thought of the world on terrorism. It underscores the need to subdue megalomaniacs with dubious credentials and causes. Terrorism is an anathema that all the nations of the world abhor, save the handful of countries that are overtly or covertly sponsoring it. The world wants this terror removed from the face of the earth, removed and effectively buried, whence it would not rise to menace the world again.

That was how America got almost automatic allies in its vow to fight the terrorists out. That ‘help’ was given before it was solicited. And America as the most aggrieved party and also as the current ‘headman’ of the world got the ‘mandate’ to fight this war. The war began. And America went and got itself drown in the Pakistani mire. As the USA enters the second month of the 'war on terrorism' it is becoming increasingly clear that the American effort ‘on behalf of humanity’ has become one more strategic outlook of the American nation. Now America turning to Pakistan was not all an unusual turn of US turrets. Pakistan was the most ideal place, wherefrom to launch an attack on the land-locked Afghanistan where the sources of this manifest terrorism lurked under the Taliban shelter. Pakistan also had invaluable stocks of intelligence about the Taliban and the terrorists under their wing. So America turning to Pakistan, if not quite expected, was at least understandable. The outrage that the world had expressed also raised hopes that probably the enormity of the carnage in Washington would chastise the Pakistani establishment.

But for these considerations, the world may not have countenanced the Pak- Participation in the war on terrorism since the world had ample evidence to know the country as the mother of this terrorism. Indeed, the Pak involvement in jihadi-terrorism had been portrayed in very fine detail by none other than the intelligence agencies of the Us itself. The world press had described the ‘manufacturer of Pakistani jihad- factories with telling specifications. So when America called Pakistan as the front-ranker in the war the world winced. America going out of its way to 'win over' Pakistan has left the world aghast. When it began to treat it as the very soul of the new fight, the world has begun to doubt the very intents of American strategists. At the same time there are clear indications that the American effort against the terrorism has been thwarted by the Pak sabotage. Serious doubts have been raised about the quality of intelligence Pakistan has supplied. Hence America is now turning to Northern Alliance to a greater measure. But that is hardly sufficient. America needs to get realistic about Pakistan if it intends to remain true to the aim of the war on terrorism. Else, it would get irretrievably bogged down with this burden, there.

Tragic instruction in Assam

It is tragic indeed, when those braving hard and harsh odds to guard the life of common people, become the cause of taking life of innocent civilians as it happened in Assam some days back. Security agencies are there to safeguard the people against the unseen deaths. It becomes a travesty of their duty when they become the cause of death instead. The people have a right to question the type of protection they are getting, even ask whether they need this protection. But people need protection and the security forces have been giving it all over the country, especially the north and northeast. These are the areas where the high hand of foreign agencies particularly that of ISI has been highly suspected. There the agents of the foreign instigators are in wait, so to say, for such events so that they can wipe away hundreds of their own atrocities with one lapse on the part of the security agencies Often they would ‘do a killing’ just to get the security agencies blamed. An actual incident of a killing at the hands of the security forces is a joyful occasion for them. There have been countless incidents in Kashmir where the terrorists have washed their bloody hands clean with singular events of the security forces over-reacting. Most of the times even the over-reaction has been provoked in a planned manner by the same agents.

The security forces have to be extra-vigilant in these circumstances. But the circumstances in which the security agencies work are already surcharged with tension and risk. With the ‘bought’ suicide-attackers who have already sold their lives to their employers, the ‘risks’ for the security, have multiplied enormously. Here a greater responsibility devolves on the general populace to facilitate the security agencies in their work. It takes very little to go through security cheek. The people have to realize that they are as much a party to their own security and the security of others, as the security agencies and as much responsible. Going through the simple security cheek may make a difference of life and death to another number of people. Had the Assam youth been just a little patient he would have been alive today. And if we are more co-operative to the security forces we may not only save our own but would also take out much of the tension from the security -man's duty. He after all, is also a human being, an Indian human being serving us fellow Indians. That me must share in his burdens as well as responsibilities, if only to make his work easier, more effective, more assured, more safe.

Pak Christians face anti US Fury

By Samuel Baid

The gunning down of 18 Christians in a Catholic Church in Bhawalpur during the Sunday service was shocking but not unexpected in an atmosphere charged with frenzied hatred created by pro-Taliban fundamentalists who have been protesting American bombing of Afghanistan. It was not unexpected because fundamentalists claim their fight is for Islam and at one public meeting in Quetta, Jamate -ul-ulema-i-Islam leader shouted that Jews and Christians should be killed. Kill them he said on October 9.

Bhawalpur is in Pakistan’s southern Punjab where the Jamiat ul-Ulema-i-Islam has strong influence among extremist Sunnis. It is this part of Pakistan which has produced rabidly anti his organisations like the Sipah-i-Sahaba and Lashkar-i-Jhangvi both of whom have their roots Jamiat-ul-Ulema-i-Islam and have strong links with Taliban. As is well known Taliban too are the product of JUI madrasas.

Although Christians or for that matter all minorities in Pakistan, are treated as less than second class citizens specially after the introduction of separate electorate system and the promulgations of Blasphemy laws in 1985, this is the first time that gunmen have so attacked a church and butchered the worshippers. Until now Sunnis were killing Shias were killing Shias in their mosques in this fashion and vis-a-vis. There have also been cases of Ahmediyas being killed in their places of worship. But never until this Sunday.

Christians become easy target of the fundamentalists whenever Pakistanis are angry with the actions of the United States or Jews anywhere in the world particularly in West Asia. In 1992, even the demolition of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya provoked Muslim miscreants (not essentially fundamentalist) into destroying Hindu temples and Christian Churches in Punjab and Baluchistan. Members of these communities were killed and their property looted. It was suspected that the ruling Muslim League had a hand in this destruction. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's own brother Shabhaz Sharif was allegedly involved. The Government promised to rebuild these places of worship but was soon warned that the Government of a Muslim State was not supposed to build temples or churches. Around the same time a Christian village in Punjab was ransacked by armed gang alleging that a Christian had committed blasphemy. Human rights organisations inquiry revealed that the charge was absolutely false.

The Sunday attack on the Bhawalpur church came when christians had already been living under a shadow of fear of reprisals if the United States attacked Afghanistan.

The Musharraf Government had assured them that no harm would come to them. But they were not sure because the pro-Taliban fundamentalists were claiming they were fighting a war; Islam against Christian crusade. They took this cue from an unguarded remarks of President George Bush in which he described the war against terrorism as a crusade. He later retreated but fundamentalist insist it is jehad.

Since 1985 when Gen Zia-ul-Haq amended the 1973 Constitution to provide for separate electorates and the Blasphemy Laws were framed, all minorities have been living as threatened non-entities. Christians have come in conflict with fundamentalists by protesting against these laws.

While all minorities have been reduced to the status of second rate citizens, Christians and Ahmediyas have become special targets of the Blasphemy laws. These laws provide for death penality for offenders.

Sunday attack on the Bhawalpur church may be an indication that Osama bin Laden's supporters are planning to punish Gen Musharraf for his support to the US by creating communal and sectarian chaps in the country.

Problem of poverty
Thesis and anti thesis how not to eridicate it

By Abhijit Patnaik

If the poverty table released by the Planning Commission is a fair indication, we have more than 340.65 million people in the countryside living below the poverty line. For discovering the reason of such a massive scale poverty, we must first discover why prices of essential goods are so high. The outstanding items, of course, are food, clothing and housing. Why have they become so costly today?

First, let us take the case of foodgrain, say, of wheat. If the farmer is not lazy, ill-fed or under nourished, and applies himself to his job with alacrity, he can raise at least two crops every year. A really hard working farmer can, and does raise even three crops a year, but for the present let us confine our attention to a two-crop farmer of average ability and industry.

The cost of production of the second kharif crop, say of rice, is appreciably less than that of the rabi crop of wheat, though the quantity of grain produced is more or less the same. The procurement price of wheat or rice for a two-crop farmer with the same maintenance expenditure works out as follows; One acre farmer; Rs. 2.25 per kg; two acre farmer: Rs. 1.10 per kg; five-acre farmer; Rs. 0.85 per kg.

The purchase price paid by the consumer for wheat or rice will be Rs. 1.25 per kg. More to cover the cost of transport, taxes, profits, etc. of the middleman. In the olden days the village bania and the city dealer used to charge about 10 per cent for their services. Now the Food Corporation of India handles the same job and charges about 33 per cent for the middleman's operations.

So much for the price of foodgrain. What about the cost of clothing, other consumer goods and housing? In this connexion one has to remember that by and large the farmer not only sets the price of raw materials for industry but also the cost of labour employed therein, which varies more or less in direct proportion to that of foodgrain. Further, the products of industry, or consumer goods, have to sell at prices equal to the cost of raw materials, the cost of labour, the cost of profits. Thus, sugar or cloth has to sell at a price equal to that of raw materials (sugarcane or cotton or wool), cost of labour, cost of processing (cost of establishing and running a sugar factory or cotton mill) and profits of the manufacturer. Since the cost of raw materials and labour constitutes more than 75 per cent of the total cost, and since the cost of capital employed is also merely the cumulative value of past labour saved, farm prices determine the price of sugar or cloth, or any other consumer goods in a decisive manner. Therefore, higher prices of agricultural goods imply higher or inflated prices of all consumer goods, cloth and housing included.

In a predominantly agricultural country like ours, increasing the prices of agricultural commodities merely places more currency, or paper, in the hands of farmers, but does not lead to the removal of poverty from, or the growth of prosperity, in the countryside. Such increase in prices simply amounts to a devaluation in the purchasing power of the currency, which in turn raises the prices of all consumer goods. Only shortsighted people can be so naive as to hope for any other result, as they seem to have been hoping for the last 50-years.

Now, what is one to do to reduce prices? The answer is simple. We must prevent farmholdings, from going below a certain economic level. About 54- years ago, when we had just become free and had greater respect for truth, the stalwarts of the Congress Party (there was only one Congress then, and no other party except the CPI) had fixed the size of an economic holding at 6 ¬ acres or 10 bighas in U.P. In the context of the international economy today, that is the consumer purchasing wheat at Rs. 2.50 per kg. The size of an economic holding can perhaps be reduced to five acres, but not lower, if a farmer is to earn Rs. 5,000 per year from his farm for the family's maintenance. Smaller holdings will lead either to starving families or high prices, or both. Therefore, smaller holdings must be consolidated to this level if the nation is to eradicate poverty.

What exactly are we doing? Unfortunately, the various governments have been doing exactly the opposite of what is or was necessary for the purpose. Farmholdings have been progressively reduced, and all in the name of land reform and social justice to ensure greater well-being of the poor. In reality, such land reform has merely raised prices and increased poverty. During the last 15 years alone, millions of small, uneconomic holdings of one acre or less have been carved out and distributed among the weaker and poorer sections of the community, apparently to help them stand on their own feet, but in reality condemning them for over to a life of drudgery and starvation.

Why has the politician done this? Is be a fool or a knave? He is both, but at different levels of the political hierarchy. The data style politician in the lower rungs of the political ladder is a knave, in the style of the zamindars and taluqdars of the past. He will do anything so maintain or increase his power in his particular area of influence in the countryside. Only the weak and the hungry can be led or misled to a procession, a meeting, or a ballot box. The well fed and prosperous gentry ask too many inconvenient questions and do not care for him, or his opinions. The data loses his credibility and the followers the moment a few persons in the village do well and start questioning his activities and bonafides. Therefore, he cannot tolerate the prosperity of any villager beyond an immediate personal circle of family members. Indeed, he does his best to prevent such prosperity.

The upper-rung politician, or leader, may not be so base-minded. However, like a simpleton he tries to eradicate rural poverty simply by raising the prices of agricultural goods. But does the poor farmer benefit by this? In a country where 48 per cent of the national wealth is residing in agriculture, increasing the prices of agricultural goods merely raises the general price level and leads to inflation, i.e., a fall in the purchasing power of money. So, the result of raising prices of agricultural goods "to benefit the poor farmer" is exactly the opposite of what is intended, namely inflation and higher prices leading to greater poverty and destitution. The farmer ends up by paying more for what he buys.

Obviously, the leader is a fool, and a knave. In his ignorant progress to the Tenth Five Year Plan, he is assisted by any number of self seeking , dishonest, civil servants and academicians, the so-called "intellectuals" who will do almost anything for those in authority or political power, if the latter are able to throw a few crumbs to them. These yesmen are not given to free or fair thinking. Therefore, the utilitarian philosophy and economics of free trade and open competition, put forward in similar circumstances by men like Adem Smith, Ricardo, Spencer, and Bentham, that call for hard, honest work, and fair play, have no attraction for our academicians, administrators and politicians.

Remember the speed with which politicians rushed to join the Janata Party and became socialists of sorts in 1977 to ascend the throne of the Union Cabinet, forgetting all about the dead doyens Rajaji and Ram Manohar Lohia, their teaching and their own principles.

What then is the answer to the problem of poverty? The problem is long standing and worldwide. A close study of the economic history of many countries shows very clearly that freedom and competition in trade and industry has always succeeded in eradicating poverty. Controls and lack of freedom -- political, economic and personal have invariably stifled development and growth. A nation prospers when its citizens prosper. Citizens prosper when they are left free to work for themselves, for their own progress, to prosper in their trade, business or industry. They have the incentive to work harder when they can earn and retain what they have earned by the sweat of their brow. They must have the freedom to produce better goods cheaper, for their own and their consumers' benefit. They must be allowed to earn their profit.

Personal freedom is merely a part of economic freedom and is subservient to it. But are we benefiting by the experience of others? Unless we liberalise our mindset no liberalisation policy can help remove poverty from the country. INAV

Beginning of the end

By K K Khosa

The single most important factor responsible for the growth and sustenance of terrorism in India has been Pakistan. In recent times many an analyst have been at pains to enlist and explain the various factors responsible for the growth of global terrorism including its Indian version.

The indoctrination of innocent people at an impressionable age by highly motivated religious fundamentalists, the support rendered by certain nation states by providing their forces and resources and also by pursuing the spread of terrorism as one of the objectives of their foreign policy, the exploitation of the drug trade which is one of the most lucrative and perennial source of funds shamelessly and without any feeling of guilt or hesitation are some of the major factors that have been responsible for the steady growth and sustenance of world terrorism. Be that as it may, in the context of its growth in India the mother of all these factors has been none other than the very existence of Pakistan as an independent nation state. But for Pakistan not even one of the above stated factors could have had any effect in the Indian context.

No militant or terrorist movement has been everlasting. India has been facing terrorism for the last two and a half decades. Although predicting a firm date could prove hazardous yet its end is most certainly related with the existence of Pakistan as an independent nation state. That the inevitability of the non-existence of Pakistan is a stark reality is borne out by the fact that no aberration can last for long. The fact that Pakistan is a geographical, historical, as well as an ideological aberration, makes her all the more vulnerable to being obliterated from the map of the world.

Pakistan is a geographical aberration because it was arbitrarily carved out of the south Asian subcontinent, which has been one geographical entity starting from the Hindukush and ending at the Indian ocean since times immemorial, due to the nefarious designs of the British. Her being a historical aberration is borne out by the fact that as a nation state she does not posses any history on which she can lay exclusive claim. She shares her history with the mother country, which she is loath to acknowledge and identify with.

Last but not the least is the fact of its being an ideological aberration because of two reasons. Her creation as a separate nation to fulfill the aspirations of the Muslims based on Jinnahs two-nation theory which envisaged that Hindus and Muslims could not co-exist as one nation was rendered in fructuous ab initio because more number of Muslims chose to live in India than those who opted for Pakistan. Secondly even after the division of India was complete Pakistan was not satisfied with what it got and wanted to annex other Muslim dominated areas which were contiguous to its boundaries especially Jammu & Kashmir for which efforts in the form of three wars and one proxy war began almost instantaneously even as these states had opted to be a part of India. The separation of East Pakistan in 1971 to form an independent state of Bangladesh further proves that Pakistan was and continues to be an ideological aberration as well.

The terrorists’ attacks on New York and Washington on the 11th of September 2001 have triggered off cataclysmic changes in the world scenario. Apart from ending the splendid isolation of the U. S.A. it has acted as an adhesive in cementing the relations between a large number of nations which seem to have finally woken up to the reality of the existence of terrorism based on religious fanaticism. This sudden awakening and the resolve to retaliate will bring about the said changes in the world order. History of the world shall be rewritten and nations shall vie with each other to find a place in being a part in its making. But history as we all know tends to repeat itself. Therefore it is important for those who wish to participate in its making to keep in mind the past. For only those who are well versed with history can make good history.

When we look at the past we find that India is one of those few civilizations that have a unique distinction of having grown and developed over a period of more than a few thousand years. Many a metamorphism took place over the course of these centuries, but because of the inherent strength of the foundations on which this edifice was built, the core factors constituting the culture and civilization have remained largely intact. The cardinal principals on whom it is based being eternal in nature have stood the test of time over the last few millennia. In comparison the other great conquering empires that rose during the course of this period from time to time uniting different races of the world got obliterated in due course because their philosophies and thought was preached with fire and sword.

The modern Indian state has been in existence for just fifty years, which is, but a short period in the history of this great nation. The new world order free from the scourge of terrorism sought to be brought into existence by the latest resolve of the international community shall have to draw its strength from the basic tenets of Indian philosophy in order to achieve stability. The fundamentals established thousands of years ago should have to be made the basis of this world order. An integral part of these fundamentals is a unified Indian subcontinent. This may take another few decades but it is inevitable. All the factors that are responsible for the present fragmented dispensation shall have to give way. No leadership should lose sight of this reality and in fact should work to achieve this end. Not all can have such foresight but things will become clearer very soon. The cataclysmic changes over the next few years will result in the above end being met and we should be prepared for it. The endgame has begun. India’s role has become critical. History shall repeat itself.

The Pak aspiration to dominance

By Sharad Dixit

The current Indo-Pak scenario is rife with uncertainty and subject to a great deal of speculation. Grandees on both tend to play to the gallery, leaving the public to distinguish between actuality and rhetoric. Gen. Musharraf for example, tells India to "Lay Off" one day and offers talks the next. He condemns the attack on the J&K assembly one day and supports the 'freedom fighters' the next. Closes his borders to the West and promotes exfiltration in the East. India too say that it would not exploit Pak compulsions and promptly announces the destruction of a dozen army posts across the LoC. Fernandes acknowledges the military and financial help given to the Afghan Northern Alliance, Farooq Abdullah advocates cross-border action and the Government professes peaceful intentions. The fact is that Geography has once again conspired with events, relegating India to a reactive position. Pro-action is precluded by more immediate, perhaps larger concerns. A look at the Pakistani mindset, its compulsions and aspirations, could highlight the situation.

The Pak psyche is indelibly coloured by the dynamics of the partition. The desire for separation stemmed from an ethno-religious imperative that bred a pathological resistance to perceived domination by people of other faiths.

The options available were to fight it or to migrate. Neither being immediately feasible for many, the third option of partition, tamely conceded by our idealistic, impractical leadership, was exercised. The Pak expectation was that the partition would evolve into fragmentation, as many Muslim majority areas exercised a similar option. The outcome would have been a motley array of squabbling states, powerless and insignificant. This would have left Pakistan as the dominant power in the region. These expectations were held as Hyderabad, J&K, Junegarh Jodhpur, Bikaner, Jaisalmer, Indore and other Muslim majority or Muslim ruled entities opted to join India. It still rankles and the dream persists.

The rancour was exacerbated by the personal frustrations of leaders like a politically bypassed Jinnah, a Bhutto with a Hindu mother who could not attain the eminence he desired after five years in post partition Bombay and an emigrant Musharraf to name a few. This is evidenced in many initiatives like the introduction of a course in the Pakistan Military Academy (their equivalent of our National Defence Academy) entitled "Islamic Studies and the Ideology of Pakistan". It is neither religious nor philosophic. Its focus is the political and military logic of the creation of Pakistan and the requirement to undo India.

The education system similarly reinforces the antipathy with nursery books depicting a 'Zaalim' (a cruel person) as a Sikh and a Hindu as an infidel (Kaafir). The 'Taliban' as it is currently known is also a result of fundamentalist indoctrination, the need to meet the requirements of military force minus the uniform, and perhaps due to the limitations of the conventional education system. The resentments and complexes were amplified by the relative success of the Indian experiment.

The sum total of these and other factors is an ethnic rage, deliberately inculcated, cynically employed, not merely in the region but well beyond, and like most ethnic passions - beyond reason. This ethno-religious orientation though cultivated for external consumption, is also part reason for Pakistan's own compulsions. Large portions of the country continue to be rural, tribal, less educated or a combination thereof. Such masses when injected with the opiate of ethnic chauvinism, have little concern for modern political sophistry, statehood, goverments, democracy etc. The result has been factional loyalty and internal conflict. The Mohajirs, the Shias, the Sindhis, the Baluchs are all targets of, and sources of, violence and discrimination. Remember Qasim Omar, the Negroid cricketer who first spoke of match-fixing involving Pakistani players? Never heard of him again. The Northern Light Infantry that was used as fodder in Kargil comprised Northern/Kashmiri tribals. The State refused to acknowledge their participation in the war. It even refused to accept their bodies. The recent attack on Christians inside a church occurred in Bahawalpur. The city is incidentally the home of Maulana Masood Azhar, the progenitor of the Jaish-e-Mohammed - a major terrorist group. Traditional Punjabi dominance is resented, and is the object of much opposition.

The Western borders of course have ever been a source of trouble. The volatile Afghan tribes and their shenanigans keep the police and the paramilitary forces on their toes. The difficult terrain, the commonality of human stock and their extra - legal proclivities make for porous borders, best ignored. The Taliban was initially created in Pak religious schools to bolster the Pushtun majority in Afghanistan, establish an orthodox theocratic rule and to enable some kind of indirect control over the feisty neighbour. The objectives mentioned earlier were secondary. Collateral benefit to use western jargon. The Taliban was largely successful. The problem is that once created, the monster wouldn't go away. Repercussions were minimised so long as its attentions could be diverted externally, to Chechnya, China, Kashmir etc. The September 11th strikes however, stirred a hornets' nest.

The world's sole superpower decided to retaliate. The ISI/Taliban/narco-terror nexus now stands acknowledged. The erstwhile tolerance of the West can no longer be presumed. Pakistan has to attempt control. The head of the ISI has been sacked. Three senior nuclear scientists were arrested for their Taliban links. Thousands flock the Western border straining to join the fight against the US. The road to China is blocked in seven places by protesters. An airfield has been overrun and occupied. Demonstrations are massive and frequent. The pro-Taliban/anti-US/pan-Islamic sentiment is pervasive.

Cynical analysts suggest that these protests are controllable, but are permitted by Musharraf to let some steam escape, to present a liberal face that apparently tolerates dissidence and to further milk the West by citing support despite serious internal problems. Whether the crises are real, contrived or a combination of both, Pakistani efforts are clearly to protect the Taliban by all means including the provision of disinformation. They are also intended to maintain a degree of control that would further the established and the evolving agenda. The third objective is the expansion of the ambit of hostility to include Jews and Hindus. The former constitute a world wide/Taliban/terrorist/anti-imperialist target. This would serve the ends of the narco-terror-criminal-fundamentalist axis while ostensibly aiming for Israel. Funds would flow from the oil rich, establishments everywhere would be disrupted, and anarchy would abound to the singular benefit of the extra-legal groups. The 'Hindu' bit is of course, a Pakistani priority. An Eastern extension of the asymmetric, invidious, covert and cheap conflict (since it would now be totally funded through the narcotics trade) that would permit indefinite prosecution - Bhutto's thousand-year war - till Kashmir is annexed. Then will start the disintegration of India (as hoped for earlier), and the growth of a 'Pakistan-Plus-Kashmir' that could legitimately claim to be equal to, if not superior to, the 'erstwhile hegemonic neighbour'.

The possibilities are dangerous. Much will depend on the resolve of those fighting the present war and the extent to which they pursue it. Ultimately however, India will have to define its limits of tolerance, its belief in its sovereignty, the criteria it deems critical, that could demand possibly, the exercise of all available options.

PTI Features