View RSS Feed

Dhananjay

You Decide - India-Pakistan Joint Statement at Sharm-el-Sheikh

Rating: 4 votes, 5.00 average.
Following is the joint statement issued after talks between the prime ministers of India and Pakistan at Sharm-el-Sheikh, Egypt on Thursday July 16th, 2009:

The Prime Minister of India, Manmohan Singh, and the Prime Minister of Pakistan, Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani, met in Sharm-el-Sheikh on July 16, 2009.

The two Prime Ministers had a cordial and constructive meeting. They considered the entire gamut of bilateral relations with a view to charting the way forward in India-Pakistan relations. Both leaders agreed that terrorism is the main threat to both countries. Both leaders affirmed their resolve to fight terrorism and to cooperate with each other to this end.

Prime Minister Singh reiterated the need to bring the perpetrators of the Mumbai attack to justice. Prime Minister Gilani assured that Pakistan will do everything in its power in this regard. He said that Pakistan had provided an updated status dossier on the investigations of the Mumbai attacks and had sought additional information/evidence. Prime Minister Singh said that the dossier is being reviewed.

Both leaders agreed that the two countries will share real time, credible and actionable information on any future terrorist threats.

Prime Minister Gilani mentioned that Pakistan has some information on threats in Baluchistan and other areas.

Both Prime Ministers recognised that dialogue is the only way forward. Action on terrorism should not be linked to the composite dialogue process and these should not be bracketed. Prime Minister Singh said that India was ready to discuss all issues with Pakistan, including all outstanding issues.

Prime Minister Singh reiterated India's interest in a stable, democratic, Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

Both leaders agreed that the real challenge is development and the elimination of poverty.

Both leaders are resolved to eliminate those factors which prevent our countries from realizing their full potential. Both agreed to work to create an atmosphere of mutual trust and confidence.

Both leaders reaffirmed their intention to promote regional cooperation.

Both foreign secretaries should meet as often as necessary and report to the two foreign ministers who will be meeting on the sidelines of the forthcoming UN General Assembly.


This whole statement reminds me of a joke I heard as a kid. Apparently there is a Humor Club meeting that a memeber once invites his friend to attend. When they go for the club meet, some one stands up and says "16" and people start laughing. Later, someone else stands up & says "37". There is silence for a coupel of seconds and the whole room breaks in to a laughter again. And so it goes for the rest of the meeting. Afterwards, on the way out, the guy who attended the club meet for the first time, asks his friends, who was a member of the club, as to what just happened. His friend explained that since they have been members of this club for years, they have pretty much heard all the jokes that there are. So, they have assigned each joke a number. When a member shares a number, they know which joke he wants to share and they laugh!

Unfortunately, the joint statements of India and Pakistan have indeed become jokes by themselevs and it is just about time to assign a number to each childish point that is reiterated adnauseum in such statements.

Read this - "Prime Minister Singh reiterated the need to bring the perpetrators of the Mumbai attack to justice. Prime Minister Gilani assured that Pakistan will do everything in its power in this regard." Let's assign this as # 12. Oh ya... and a snake I saw in the jungle yesterday promised to crawl in a straight line from now on.

Or how about this cliche - # 27 "Both leaders agreed that the real challenge is development and the elimination of poverty." Oh ya and the alchoholics at the Alchoholics Anonymous meet agreed that food subsidies by western countries were responsible for the failure of the Doha round of the World Trade Agreement. So what's there not to agree?

Want a really funny one? Here is # 41 - "Prime Minister Singh said that India was ready to discuss all issues with Pakistan, including all outstanding issues. " Oh really? You mean we were going to discuss non-outstanding issues as well as outstanding issues? I did not know that! How ignorant of me. These idiots are insulting the common sense ("aam bheja" - hey I just coined a new word ) of the common man (aam admi).

Did you get a sense while reading the above joint statement like some one just out of an MBA school is running the company? What with the statement "Action on terrorism should not be linked to the composite dialogue process and these should not be bracketed." Really? If so, what exactly is stopping the 2 countries from talking since last November? I thought terrorism WAS one of the 5-6 key topics of composite dialogue. Boy, I feel so not well-read!

Want proof of childish behavior of novices? How about the 2nd half of this statement - "Action on terrorism should not be linked to the composite dialogue process and these should not be bracketed." Oh really? What exactly does "bracketed" mean? Sounds like 2 children talking in their code language so that mommy would not undertstand the mischief in school that they are refering to, doesn't it? Besides, what does "Action on terrorism should not be linked to the composite dialogue process" NOT cover that "and these should not be bracketed" DOES cover? Idiots!!

Who the heck do they think they are serving? Some other wine-sipping "intellectual" sitting in an air-conditoned room with a great command of the nuances of diplomatese but with an utter lack of a comprehensive strategic perspecitve on how best to protect & advance India's interests OR the common man working his xxx off to make a living who just needs some honest answers he can understand?

Did some thing happen, say on November 26th, 2008? Let me give the beuraucrats and ministers some clues - it has to do with some 5-star hotels in Mumbai, some Pakistani "tourists" coming to Mumbai shores on a boat and the rest of India glued to it's TV sets for 60 hours after that. It has to do with some Chief Minister of Maharashtra taking his bollywood buddy on a terror tour of a 5-star hotel. It has to do with a former home miniskirt, I mean Home Minister, making childish statements. Was I talking about the Home Minister of Maharashtra or of India? The answer is YES

We have not negotiated with Pakistan since then. I wonder why? May be because a 4-year old stole the pencil of a 5-year old who then decided to take "katty" with (decision not to talk to) the 4-year old?

Need even more clues - you retards in the Foreign Ministry of India & in the Prime Minister's Office? Then bang your head real hard on the wall 10 times and you will remember. If you still do not remember, ask the mothers of the NSG commandos who laid their lives on 26/11 to "check out" some Pakistani guests from some 5-star hotels in Mumbai.

Oh ya, and one last note for the Foreign Ministry of India. Do publish the list of all "cliches" and their assigned numerical codes so that all future statements can just include a single line of numbers. We can save a few thousand trees by reducing the amount of paper that such crap is printed on. That may just be the biggest benefit coming out of these joint statement! How tragic

Submit "You Decide - India-Pakistan Joint Statement at Sharm-el-Sheikh" to Digg Submit "You Decide - India-Pakistan Joint Statement at Sharm-el-Sheikh" to del.icio.us Submit "You Decide - India-Pakistan Joint Statement at Sharm-el-Sheikh" to StumbleUpon Submit "You Decide - India-Pakistan Joint Statement at Sharm-el-Sheikh" to Google

Updated February 20th, 2010 at 12:07 AM by Dhananjay

Categories
Politics , Jitega Bharat

Comments

  1. Jimmy -
    Jimmy's Avatar
    Hi - I like how you used your sense of sarcasm & humor to hit the bull's eye. The foreign services of India are truly in a juvenile stage. This joint statement is just another in a series of uninspiring ones reflecting an utter lack of vision and long-term plan.

    In the recent history (last 10-15 years), I think Jaswant Singh was the best foreign minister we had.

    I wonder what qualifies the current foreign minister for his job? Any one has a clue?
  2. Radha -
    Radha's Avatar
    This is indeed a timely discussion. Read this article below:

    Is Krishna another Shivraj Patil?

    New Delhi, July 31, 2009

    After Prime Minister Manmohan Singh defended the Balochistan blunder, the Opposition cornered foreign minister S.M. Krishna on Thursday over the inclusion of the troubled Pakistani province in the joint statement.

    In fact, the government was at a loss as it failed to give a convincing answer to why Balochistan was mentioned in the document.

    Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee ducked the question, while Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna tried to evade it. Krishna, who was replying to the Lok Sabha debate on the PM's foreign visits, was cornered by the BJP-led Opposition and constantly booed and jeered as he fumbled for words.

    If that was not enough, the NDA, the Samajwadi Party, the Left, the RJD and the AIADMK walked out of the House, protesting against Krishna's unsatisfactory reply over Balochistan and the end-user monitoring agreement with the US. Refraining from mentioning Balochistan, Krishna said: "There have been two very effective interventions on the Indo-Pak statement so I won't dwell on it." "When the two PMs met, the issue came up and we readily agreed because we have nothing to hide," he added.

    This opened the floodgates. Opposition leader L.K. Advani said Pakistan had been accusing India of meddling in Balochistan, which was absurd and bunkum.

    "If we have nothing to hide we should have protested the B word. We could have said India has nothing to do with Balochistan. Even within the Congress there is a demand to clarify the B word. Leave alone politicians, foreign policy experts and the strategic community also feel that the PM and Pranab have not explained the reason for the inclusion of the B word. It is meaningless to participate in this discussion," Advani added.

    To bail him out of the tight spot, Mukherjee tried to intervene much to the chagrin of the Opposition bench.

    A source close to Krishna said the nervous foreign minister didn't like Mukherjee's intervention because it further lowered his confidence.

    Later, BJP leader Yashwant Sinha said Krishna "is proving to be another Shivraj Patil" and the country's foreign policy won't be safe in his hands. "Krishna is proving to be the former home minister Shivraj Patil whom the Congress had to get rid of. He is taking much less time to prove himself a Shivraj Patil," Sinha added.

    He too wondered why Mukherjee had to intervene in the debate. "We saw a very strange incident in the Lok Sabha today (Thursday). The government fielded Pranab to intervene in the debate. For the FM to intervene when the external affairs minister was present was strange," he said.

    "Pranab and the prime minister will not always be available for to hold Krishna's hands," he added.

    During the debate, the seasoned Mukherjee too beat about the bush.

    When BJP members asked what national interests were served by mentioning Balochistan in the statement, Mukherjee replied it was unilateral. "It does not mean that we have any subversive role to play in Balochistan."
    Updated August 5th, 2009 at 01:49 AM by Radha
  3. Nila -
    Nila's Avatar
    I have posted here the brief of the talking points from the speech made by Shri Arun Jaitley, Leader of Opposition in Rajya Sabha while intervening in the debate on the working of the Ministry of External Affairs.

    He tears apart the government's defense of the India-Pak joint statement at Sharm-el-Sheikh, Egypt in July '09. I have always liked how methodical he is in presenting his case. No wonder, he is one of the best & most sought after lawyers in the country!