India’s Pakistan Question

We posted Rajmohan Gandhi’s piece for Dawn a couple of days ago. Here’s what Coomi Kapoor wrote in the Indian Express on the same day:

Stop the obsession with Pakistan!

Out of the mouth of a babalog politician recently came words that warmed my heart. “We are giving too much importance to Pakistan. It is just a small piece of land, India can’t be compared with Pakistan” was Rahul Gandhi’s wise comment to the media in Shimla.

Rahul must be given all credit for expressing sentiments, which most seasoned politicians would have been too timid to state. The BJP spokesperson Ravi Shankar Prasad predictably gave the mandatory reflex criticism, suggesting that Rahul did not know what he was talking about. Actually Rahul’s remarks struck a responsive chord with many. I suspect that the silent majority in this country agrees with Rahul that we greatly exaggerate the importance and relevance of Indo-Pakistan relations.

Pakistan occupies a disproportionate amount of time and space of our foreign policy makers. The Indian media is similarly obsessed with the subject. Government spokespersons, politicians, newspapers and TV channels feel it necessary to constantly speculate and comment on Indo-Pak relations. Whether the representatives of the two countries will meet on the sideline of whatever international meet both countries are attending. Whether there will be an agreement of any sort. Whether the subsequent joint statement released will be in our favour or theirs. We are triumphant every time we come across fresh evidence of Pakistan’s involvement in terror acts in India. We howl with anger when Pakistan refuses to accept the evidence put before it. We get frustrated when third parties like the USA do not come out unequivocally on our side. Every message we get from Pakistan is discussed and analyzed threadbare on our TV talk shows.

A regular stream of Indo-Pak experts from both sides of the border are busy shuttling between the two countries and lecturing us on what we should do or not do. One group takes the line that poor Pakistan is in such a sorry state that we should do nothing which will dislodge the sane civilian leadership, even turn the other cheek, if necessary. The opposite camp eggs the government on to rattle sabres hoping to whip up domestic jingoism for its own political ends.

In our hearts we know that despite the brouhaha and optimism, we will continue to go round and round in circles, without any appreciable change in status. They are not going to give up their claim to Kashmir, nor are we planning to cede any of our territory. They are certainly not going to acknowledge their complicity in terror attacks, no matter how much proof we present. Some voices in Pakistan may acknowledge culpability, but in the end, they are not going to put the real ringleaders behind the 26/11operation in Mumbai in jail. The USA needs Pakistan for its own strategic purposes, so it is not going to stop supplying arms and funds to Pakistan, no matter what cast iron evidence we produce. Only the very naïve would believe that foreign policy is decided on the basis of right and wrong.

A succession of Indian governments have wasted much time and energy engaging in dialogues with civilian governments in Pakistan, even when we are not sure who exactly calls the shots in that country. For instance, when the Kargil intrusions took place during then Prime Minister Vajpayee’s visit to Pakistan, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif was quick to blame the army and claim he knew nothing about it. Today, apart from the army, even Pakistan Prime Minister Yousaf Gilani and President Asaf Ali Zardari speak in different voices. With the Taliban of late successfully engineering terror attacks all over Pakistan — even in the sanctum sanctorum, the army headquarters — it is difficult to predict who will be in control of this rapidly disintegrating country tomorrow.

I am certainly not advocating that we break ties with Pakistan, adopt force, stop talking or stop taking adequate measures to protect our own internal security. But why not simply treat negotiations as part of routine diplomacy, without hyping it up every time and hoping for some magical breakthrough? Rahul is perfectly right in suggesting that by constantly focusing on Pakistan in our domestic and international statements, we do ourselves more harm than good. We make the rest of the world tend to bracket us with Pakistan. Whereas, there is no comparison between the two.

Last year our GDP was $1.208 trillion; Pakistan’s a mere $170 billion. We are the twelfth largest economy in terms of market exchange rates and the fourth in terms of purchasing power. Our growth rate is a healthy 6. 5 per cent or more and we are considered one of the fastest growing economies in the world. Pakistan’s growth rate is barely 2 per cent. Literacy in Pakistan is around 55 per cent. In India our literacy rates are around 75 per cent. Today the Indian rupee is worth 1.8 Pakistani rupees.

A new generation in our country is far less bothered about Pakistan, than an older generation, including most of our politicians, who cannot de-link from the past. The same appears to be the case in Pakistan. I was heartened to read a recent survey in Pakistan which indicated that the majority regarded the USA as the country’s principal enemy, not India. True we cannot wish away our neighbours, but surely it is time we stopped being quite so obsessed with them.

[Here’s a fuller version of Rahul Gandhi’s press conference in Simla:

At a press conference in Shimla, the Gandhi scion said:” We are giving too much importance to Pakistan. It is just a small piece of land. India can’t be compared with Pakistan.  Pakistan’s internal issues do affect us, but we are giving too much time and importance to Pakistan in our minds. In my opinion, it deserves not even half the importance we are giving it.” 

Rahul Gandhi said: “If you see, the attitude of the world has changed towards Pakistan. It’s not a day’s job. It’s a long process. India has created pressure and the entire world is putting pressure on Pakistan. Certain issues related to Pakistan have to be managed, which is already being done. We are in a comfortable position. There is no comparison between India and Pakistan”.

Rahul further said: “I belong to the family which has never stepped back, which has never gone back on its words. You know that when any member of my family decides to do anything, he does it. Be it the freedom struggle, the division of Pakistan or taking  India to the 21st century”. 

On the recent controversy in BJP over the founder of Pakistan Mohammed Ali Jinnah, Rahul said: “They (BJP) are just talking about Jinnah, who is history now. I can’t think  about Jinnah even for five seconds.. not for one second.” – PTH]


Filed under India, Pakistan

40 responses to “India’s Pakistan Question

  1. yasserlatifhamdani

    This article is shows the arrogance and ignorance of Nehru-Gandhi family as well as their supporters.

    Rahul Gandhi’s equally arrogant great grandfather said the same thing in 1930s…

    So long as this family stays in power in India, there is no hope for peace in the subcontinent.

  2. Bloody Civilian

    interesting to compare gandhi’s grandson with nehru’s great-grandson. different generations. different professions. rajmohan gandhi is an NRI.

    he tells us in one of his books how he felt happy and elated at hearing of liaquat ali khan’s assassination. he was only 17 or 18 at the time. he has always felt guilty about that.

    we need more with his honesty and humility in the subcontinent than those with rahul’s and (the ‘younger’) nehru’s arrogance and ‘wisdom’.

  3. Majumdar

    There are two ways of looking at the whole statement.

    One is what YLH is suggesting it is.

    Second, is that de-emphasising on Pak is a way to deflect attempts by the Hindutva brigade to use Pakistan to stoke tensions between Hindus and Muslims domestically.

    I am inclined to think it is the latter (although I am no gr8 fan of the Nehru-Gandhi family as you wud have figured out by now).


  4. GrimySaint

    Dont read much into Rahul’s politicking. A statement here or there does not indicate party policy. Moreover, being an Indian myself I heard of these comments only after visiting your blog!

  5. neel123

    Whether you guys in Pakistan like it or not, Pakistan’s good days are over, and unless there is a change in course it has pursued for past six decades, the fast changing world would find Pakistan falling by the wayside, justifying the diplomatic indifference that will follow.

    Once out of favour with the Americans, Pakistans international reputation is likely to remain intact only for wrong reasons.

  6. yasserlatifhamdani


    Slightly altered with apologies to Ghalib mian:

    “Hazaron khawaishain aisi kay hur khawaish pay dum niklay

    Bohot niklay teray arman phir bhee kaum niklay”

    Indians like you are dreaming, hoping, wishing and praying for this for a very long time.

    What you want won’t happen. And stop lecturing us. We are still here… we will fight on… we won’t surrender Pakistan to either the militants or malevolent fools like you. We will sacrifice ourselves… but we will never give up.

  7. yasserlatifhamdani


    One of the things that I read about Jinnah was Rajmohan Gandhi’s essay in “Understanding the Muslim Mind” …his essays on 8 most important Muslims of South Asia… including Sir Syed, Jinnah, Azad, Iqbal and Bacha Khan. Way before Jaswant Singh… Rajmohan Gandhi, the grandson of Mohandas Gandhi, had said what needed to be said.

    Rajmohan is an honest man … he is not the sort who would contribute to glorification of his grandfather at other people’s expense… even though Seervai lampooned him for his ” India wins errors” book on Azad’s biography.

  8. Bloody Civilian

    seervai does show that rajmohan’s ‘india wins errors’ was some kind of a knee-jerk reaction in which he, rather uncharacteristically for a scholar, seemingly completely failed to refer to either the Transfer of Power volumes or the Mountbatten papers.

  9. Bloody Civilian

    btw, the story about the news of liaquat ali khan’s assassination.. i read it in his introduction to the same book “understanding muslim thought” (?? or something)).

  10. karun1

    Indians like you are dreaming, hoping, wishing and praying for this for a very long time.

    What you want won’t happen. And stop lecturing us. We are still here… we will fight on… we won’t surrender Pakistan to either the militants or malevolent fools like you. We will sacrifice ourselves… but we will never give up.

    This looks like some essay by a 5 year old !!

  11. maestro

    “small piece of land’ seems to keep the 3rd largest army on its toes all the time. Arrogance comes easily to those who are riding on a high. It also reveals the true character. We, the Pakistanis are in the midst of immense adversit and we will come through it and we will be stronger for it. Rahul’s grand father was responsible for the partition and it seems as if torch of flaming fires of hatred has been passed down to the 3 rd generation.

  12. karun1

    Rahul Gandhi’s attitude is of indifference not of gloating over Pakistan’s failure. I am sorry to say that people from India who participate in this blog are far and few. Majority neither bother about what happened in the cabinet mission plan nor what is happening in pakistan now. Rather if there is any developmental issue there far more people who are interested and vocal and that for me is the right concern.

  13. Gorki

    This looks like some essay by a 5 year old !!

    Perhaps; or maybe a famous British orator. 😉

    Enjoy the following:

    “….Even though large tracts of Europe and many old and famous States have fallen or may fall into the grip of the Gestapo and all the odious apparatus of Nazi rule, we shall not flag or fail.
    We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender… ”

    (Winston Churchill; house of commons speech May 26th 1940)


  14. PMA

    The new lobbyists vying for US attention:

    While US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s visit to Islamabad highlighted the often bumpy relationship between the United States and Pakistan, the BBC’s Diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus reports on the struggle between the Indian and Pakistani lobbies for influence in Washington.

    I have come to a downtown Indian restaurant in Washington DC to try to gauge the balance of forces in a growing battle for influence on Capitol Hill. Across the table is Sanjay Puri, the chairman of US Inpac – the US India Political Action Committee. Sanjay Puri says that Inpac’s goal is to give a political voice to some 2.7m Indian-Americans.

    “This is not about representing India’s interests,” he insisted. “We look at things from an American perspective. “It is in America’s interests,” he went on, “to have strong trade ties with India. “It is important for us to have a strategic relationship with India, which happens to be the democracy in a region where we need a stable partner.”

    Across town, in a small office building not far from the Senate, I visited Taha Gaya, the executive director of Pal-C – the Pakistani American Leadership Centre. Taha is a law graduate and has worked as a congressional staffer on Capitol Hill. Describing himself as a second-generation Pakistani-American, he seeks to lobby on behalf of his community and insists that he is not fighting the Indian-American lobby.

    “There is no doubt that India is the growing economic power in the region,” he told me – but he said that there was also “no reason why Pakistan should not benefit from the economic growth of its neighbour next door”. Taha Gaya explained that on some issues the two lobbies had sometimes worked together.

    “ Our activities are not aimed against the people of Pakistan or against the State of Pakistan ” Sanjay Puri.

    But the Mumbai attacks last year changed all that.
    “When Mumbai happened,” he explained, “we saw a resurgence of participation from the older generation of Indian-Americans – those who had grown up in India” – who, he claimed, reverted to what he described as “the old more negative dynamic”.

    Inevitably then the two lobbies seem destined to be on different sides of the barricades. The recent US foreign aid bill for Pakistan is a good example. Pro-India groups lobbied hard for all sorts of conditions to be inserted into the bill. Sanjay Puri was part of this campaign. This was not about supporting India’s interests, he insists, and neither was it motivated by hostility towards Pakistan.

    “Our activities are not aimed against the people of Pakistan or against the State of Pakistan,” he told me. “It is about accountability and transparency. We are very active in making sure that when US taxpayers’ money is being spent, especially in these difficult economic times, there has to be a level of transparency.” The Indian-American community, he told me, “is supportive of aid that relates to democracy in Pakistan, education, reforms progress on women’s rights and so on”.
    “But if Pakistan says that it needs F16 jets to hunt down terrorists,” he adds, “I don’t think the average American is going to buy that.”

    For a referee in this struggle, I turned to Professor Walter Andersen, director of the South Asia programme at the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University. A former diplomat, he has watched the development of these US-based lobbying groups with great interest. The galvanising event he told me, was the struggle over the US-India nuclear deal which came to a head in 2008.

    The US wanted to help India with civil nuclear technology but was prevented from doing so by legislation banning the export of fuel or know-how to any country that had not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. So the Bush administration sought to make an exception for India. “The Bush team very smartly contacted the India lobby,” Professor Andersen told me, “and worked very closely with it.” The US Chamber of Commerce and its India section also got involved because of the prospect of business.

    “So you had American business interests, the administration and the Indian-American lobby all very actively pushing for this. There was a lot of opposition. In some ways it went down to the wire,” he noted, “but their persistent effort paid off.” The battle may be joined on Capitol Hill but Professor Andersen notes that it is an increasingly unequal struggle.

    “As Americans look at India and Pakistan,” he told me, “the gap is growing in terms of positive and negative; much more positive on the Indian side and much more negative on the Pakistan side. The negativity on the Pakistan side,” he explains, “is related to the violence there and the sense that there has been double-dealing by the Pakistani government. On the one hand they say they are with us and then maybe parts of the military really do support some of these jihadi groups for Pakistani foreign policy purposes.”

    Perceptions of India, he explains are very different. It is viewed as a vibrant democracy with a dynamic economy. And of course India is seen by many Americans as confronting a similar terrorist threat to that faced by the United States.

    Professor Andersen also emphasises the impact of the Mumbai attacks. “These had almost three days of continuous coverage on US television,” he told me. “There was American interest in what happened; there was American sympathy and Pakistan, by contrast, came off quite badly.”

    All in all, the growing strength of the India lobby is a factor complicating the Obama administration’s approach to the region. “I suspect that that the Obama administration was not at all happy with the conditionalities that were written into the appropriations bill for Pakistan,” Professor Andersen said. “The pro-India groups were explicit that they wanted such conditionalities and they had friends in the Senate and the Congress who went along.”

  15. neel123

    @ yasserlatifhamdani,

    Brother, if we are around after two decades from today, I will remind you of your spectacular outburst….

    Good luck… !

  16. amazed

    What she is saying is pretty much how most folks believe. Of course you can not wish Pakistan away – it’s right there on your West & you try & put operation Gibraltar; Kargil & the bleed through Kashmir policy but then you get Bombay. And when you can push even those into the background you are reminded of Pakistan by the Indian fundoos who use Pakistan to taunt/punish Muslims.
    ………and in-spite of being divorced for over six decades you still fantasize & wonder what if………

  17. amazed

    There are a significant number of people in India who can not forget the divorce & still ………how should I put it ?
    The best way I guess is when you tell your significant other who’ll soon be “ex” – “let’s still be friends !” some I might add do believe there’s nothing wrong with getting intimate with your ex – yes some even believe it’s even ok to have sex.

    From the ex’s point of view India is in another relationship; the trouble is the ex (Pakistan) too is sleeping with India’s new mate (America).
    Some in Pakistan complain about the rough sex (do more) & some just do not believe in threesomes.
    In India more don’t believe in threesomes – “lets just move on” they say “lets make a go of it with America”

  18. amazed

    …………..but I think in India there is also a question mark – why ? why did it have to be this way – indeed there are those too that wonder why is it this way ?

    In “The story of India” (which of course is also the story of Pakistan 60 out of 5000 years in separation does matter mathematically) – a scientist says language & religion do not count when compared to genes – so is Rahul Gandhi saying one ought to overlook that as well ?

  19. YLH

    There is no spectacular outburst… so keep hoping and wishing neel… 20 years from now you’ll still be hoping and wishing.

    We are not going away. We are here to stay…. now you can help us control our extremists which are our common enemy … or you can gloat now and discover later that time is a great equalizer.

  20. YLH


    What five thousand years are you talking about… South Asia is a geographical entity… Pakistan is very much part of it.

    But as one empire or state…. all the Indian subcontinent barely has been together for a little over 300 years in the last 5000 years… notably under Maharaja Asoka, Maharaja Aurangzeb Alamgir and the latter part of the British rule….

    Geographical unity of the subcontinent is a reality … and Pakistan’s existence nor the idea of Pakistan as expressed by Pakistan’s founding fathers is not in negation of it. Political Unity of the subcontinent however is clever fiction.

    The recognition of these two facts perfectly reconciles the varying visions of Jawaharlal Nehru and Aitzaz Ahsan expressed in their books Discovery of India and the Indus Saga respectively…

  21. YLH


    Yes I read the story in the same book.

    My impression – I don’t have the book right now …read it at the hallowed halls of Alexandar Library at Rutgers University…- was that he was 5 or 6 years old then.

  22. YLH,

    While there’s no doubt Kapoor (you should read her more often if you get the time and this goes for the IE in general) and Gandhi could have said what they said a bit more politely and not have been so disparaging and condescending, the moot point is that if Pakistan is treated a bit more normally rather than it being the be all and end all of India’s foreign policy, it would actually end up helping both countries.

    The day India can look at Pakistan as just another country and measure its worth by neutral metrics (such as GDP, education or whatever) rather than beating its breasts about how an “anomaly of a country which was born by tearing apart my country should be screwed over as a matter of poetic justice.”

    In other words, I’d rather have level-headed limited relations rather than the hysterical ruckus that takes place as far as Indo-Pak relations is concerned.

  23. Bloody Civilian


    now that you mention it, he was 12 at the time of partition. so would have been 15 or 16 in october ’51.

  24. neel123

    @ YLH,
    Have to heard of the saying – ” God helps those who help themselves” ….. ?

    Why do you guys in Pakistan need India and the US to help from the current mess, when you guys have no intention of helping yourselves by re-thinking your policies of the past ……. ?

  25. karun1


    good to see you back…. 🙂

    The only problem is in pakistan’s case the enemy is internal not external: so the entire thing sounds like pakistan vs pakistan.

    also Pakistan has to do far more to earn its good will with India(which it has repeatedly dishonoured over the last 60 years). They could perhaps start with dealing with LET and JEM in south punjab to earn that trust. But truth be told as in ayesha siddiqas other article in DAWN ,the TV crew was attacked from the establishment which serves as the front face of JEM. The pathetic statements made by Rehman Malik everyday makes that thin cord of hope go thinner.

    what is the guarantee that if Pakistan is not dealing with JEM and LET at this juncture it will deal with them ever? and who will give that? YLH??

    Who are these friends who keep their precious silence. who are these people who speak only of taliban and not of LET. Who is that who demands friendship when he harbours dagger inside his cloak.

    In short, I am disgusted.

  26. karun1

    and yes i have accepted pakistan as a sovereign nation and have no qualms over its existence till the point they come and attack me or create a humanitarian situation as in Bangladesh

  27. karun1

    Win! my good wishes are with you, but pls dont win at my cost and let your win not be my loss.

  28. Recent history in Pakistan is similar to events in Iran during the rule of the Shah. Both leaderships were strongly backed by the US, and were involved in widespread repression or attacks on their own people. Both regimes followed policies that were deeply unpopular domestically. In Iran, this led the revolution of 1979 which created an Islamic Republic. Could something similar happen in Pakistan?

  29. Hayyer

    Rahul Gandhi could have phrased it better. Coomi Kapoor paraphrased his views and gave them body, The former is on a learning curve and the latter much the experienced commentator.
    Pakistan gets too much time because India has no alternative. It’s great power ambitions must contend with that small piece of land. It would like to be reckoned with in the same class as China but is nearly always eyeball to eyeball with Pakistan. It became a nuclear power only to put itself in the shadow of a nuclear apocalypse from its western neighbour.
    Pakistan is the ghost from its past that India must live with. It was not meant to be that way but it is, and nothing that Coomi Kapoor says, or Rahul Gandhi for that matter, will change that.
    It would be nice for India to imagine life without a Pakistan problem, as it can without a Kashmir problem. For years it pretended that there wasn’t a Kashmir problem. Given time it can doubtless convince itself that there is no Pakistan problem and therefore stop paying it due attention. Indian politics is riddled with such paradigms. Nehru’s Panchsheel with China was one such. Reality eventually catches up; in the case of Pakistan India cannot escape the reality however much it may want to till it comes to terms with that country.

  30. yasserlatifhamdani


    I am not interested in having a discussion with a Hindu fascist fundamentalist freak. Ok? We don’t need your help… with or without it we will succeed. Make no mistake about it. As for “rethinking” … I think anyone can read my body of work and see that I have never condoned Pakistan’s activities and mistakes… but I don’t need some loser like you telling me.

    Kindly don’t address anymore posts to me.

  31. PMA

    Hayyer: I read your comments of November 1, 2009 at 8:59 am with interest. So when do you suppose that time will come? I mean when would India accept the reality of Pakistan and “come to terms with that country?”. On our side of the border we been waiting for that day for a very very long time.

  32. Hayyer

    My comments were in context of RG and Kapoor’s views. The problem you may have noticed is that some people in India want to pay Pakistan less attention than it gets here. They want to live their lives without discussing the Pakistan context all the time. That I gathered is rather similar to your views, namely that Pakistan and India should turn their backs on each other. I thought you would have been glad to see your views echoed by RG. They weren’t at all about the accepting the reality of Pakistan. Neither were my comments

  33. punjabi


  34. Sridhar


  35. Hayyer

    Is there any point to this gloating? A lot of the extremist thought that has brought Pakistan to its present pass is equally present in India, in all religions.
    The reality of Pakistan intrudes relentlessly. It is not about accepting the reality of Pakistan; it is about not burying your head in the sand.

  36. Given what I know about Rahul Gandhi and his previous statements, I dont think YLH and others including Coomi Kapoor are taking his comments in the right spirit. Rahul Gandhi repeatedly (and very rightly) talks about two Indias. One of course, being the English speaking classes and the other the vast rural and urban poor classes.

    I think the fixation with Pakistan is really the preserve of the English speaking classes. One must note here that the English media only accounts for about 25 % of the total media market in India, the rest is made up of Indian languages. I dont know if anyone here has any idea of how much time non-English, especially non-Hindi newspapers give to Pakistan.

    So perhaps Rahul’s comment was aimed at the English speaking classes to stop worrying about Pakistan and start worrying about their own deprived brethren.

  37. yasserlatifhamdani


    I just got tired of kicking your ass on chowk. It lost its marginal utility … Otherwise they beg me to be on that website.

    On another note… I heard the Americans rejected your visa again…
    Wanted to inform you that I was in Washington DC earlier this year and had a fruitful trip. Tell me if you need any help. Maybe I can pull some strings on the hill or in the administration for your sorry ass.

  38. the truth


    Best whishes to all fellow beings,
    I want to make one think clear, Mother India is more than 2500 yrs of history. It has its great values & culture. The current democratic set up is based on “unity in diversity” to the people, for the people & by the people. Its not based on the religion, language or extremist ideology. It’s a secular country; people have the right to practice their own religion. Their r multi religion people living in harmony. Each state have different language, different culture, different dressing style, in spite of all this we r united as great nation.

    It’s the land were great values & ideas r given to the world. Its birth place of Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism. Its the birth place of yoga. So many inventions & discoveries. Its richness was first ruined by the Muslim rulers who came from arab countries and invaded northen India, devastated many land mark temples & took the gold and diamonds and killed many people, took away the beautiful womens.

    Thus the Islam came to India, some great muslim rulers ruled India, like akbar, babar, shajahan ects. Hindus & Muslims lived with great harmony. Then came the british to once again ruin India and came the Christianity.

    We Indians belive accept all religions. I used to go to church, my best friend is a muslim. I see allah in ram and ram in jesus. That’s why India is a secular country but there r some evil in every religion & country with narrow mind to demolish babar mashid (they belive ram temple was there which was destructed by early muslim rulers) & Gujarat riots for poltical reasons. Majority Indians don’t support this they want live with harmony.

    The largest democracy had a muslim as the first citizen of the country president Dr.A.P.J. Abdul kalam (father of Indian missile technology). Indian cricket team with 1 billion supporters is captained by a muslim (mohammed ahazaruddin) India’s no 1 flim star is a muslim with crores of fans(sharuk khan) top Indian tennis player (sania mirsa) India’s no 1 music director oscar winner(A.R rhaman ) with so many fans is converted muslim. Like this I can go on say .

    All this r because India is a secular country were there is a equal opportunity is given to all people irrespective of religion which he belongs. The prime minister is a shikh, defence minister is a Christian.

    So to all my Pakistani brothers & sister don’t think India as hindu country and develop hated feeling on us. Hinduism is most tolerate religion in the world. we accept all religion & faith.(exept few, rss) don’t forget that ur fore fathers r Indians.
    1. Is ur country secular?
    No, its formed on the basis of religion and extremist idea
    Bow before ur mother land & mother first
    2. Is Islam preaches voilance?
    No, its formed on the basis of love
    Why u follow some anti islam extremist(ISI, LeT, Taliban)

    3. Indian cricket team with 1 billion supporters is captained by a muslim (mohammed ahazaruddin ) can a hindu play atlest cricket in ur country?

    4. The largest democracy had a muslim as the first citizen of the country president Dr.A.P.J. Abdul kalam. Can a hindu atlest freely vote in ur country ?

    5. India’s no 1 flim star is a muslim with crores of fans(sharuk khan). Can a hindu go to a theater in pakistan ?

    6. u cant even look after u r own territory then why are so worried about Indian territory (khasmir)? Already afk & pak are filled with terrorist u want to include khasmir in it? Do u think by sending few terrorist to India u can achive ur evil wishes. Even allah will not support those barbaric idiots.

    7. do u think mulims in India will support u? not even dreams they r Indians first
    Indian muslims r safe and prosperous in every field in India & u don’t worry about them ( tell this to ISI ,LeT thinking as worriers. A true worrier will not come at night through back gate kill those innocent people . if u have guts face the Indian army at the battle field not to the women and childrens with empty hands)

    8. can u deny that terrorist camp does not exit in Pakistan ? not only to India its endanger to the world. Instead u r government is saying we are also victim of terrorism (with all my condolence to the victim familys) . not to hurt u but the fact is what sow will u reap. Why we should suffer, just because India include hindus.

    To the people of Pakistan I want reveal a truth that ur government want to distract people of Pakistan from main problem of poverty, illiteracy, extremist, recession and to fuel nationalism the only tool is to use kashmir slogan knowing that its not possible.
    The ISI in term recruit young man and brainwash them of glory do harm to innocent people . I don’t know what joy the get in this act. The hell is waiting for them . now to further distract people from ongoing suicide attacks and bombing they r putting the blame on India ,what can the poor people do just to belive it grow hated feelings on India and hindus. Further these extremist r speaking vulgarly on open. This is not possible in India.( There r extremist in India also but they never attacked another country. We the people will teach them lesson through our unity ) by keeping ur hand at ur chest in the name of allah can ur government tell that India is threat to u? they cant because they want run the govt and please the extremist


  39. vajra


    The enthu bataani who wrote this doesn’t follow cricket, and hasn’t got a TV in his ward.

    Please be kind.

  40. Milind Kher

    We have people who can give Zaid Hamid a run for his money!!