Has Pakistan-India animosity yielded any good?

During August both Pakistan and India will celebrate their  independence from the British Raj in 1947. Over the years both the countries have fought various wars, accumulated piles of conventional arms and also attained the status of ‘Atomic Powers’. They may boost of spending billions of dollars every year on buying arms but bulk of the population of both the countries live below the poverty line. My question to the rulers and citizens of both the countries is; has animosity between Pakistan and India yielded any good?

My own reply is a big no and I am sure that people from both the countries also share the same feelings, except the hawks present on either side of the border. These hawks are the product of British Raj that ruled this part of the world by following ‘divide and rule’ policy. While leaving the subcontinent it left a thorn, Kashmir. Those who don’t believe in my point of view must read the misdeeds of Toney Blair, British Prime Minister that led to attack on Iraq, a country still inferno after nearly 15 years.

While the citizens of Pakistan, India and Bangladesh may have some doubts about the economic potential of their homelands, British Raj knew the real worth when it made Indian subcontinent its colony. Even at that time the area was known as ‘Golden Sparrow’. In modern day term the area has robust agriculture and industry, treasures of minerals hard working people and above all a market comprising of billions of people.

Kindly allow me to say that had India and Pakistan not been spending billions of dollars on purchase of arms and instead using it for the development of infrastructure, educating their children and health care, these countries would have been ‘economic super powers’ and ahead of Malaysia, Singapore, Korea, Japan and even China. Spending least on education, healthcare and providing ‘safe drinking water’ have pushed these countries deeper in economic disorder, social malice and extremism.

If one looks at the most stable and fast growing economies, Germany emerges as the most outstanding one. When the Germans decided to unify East and West Germany, many critics termed it ‘dooms day’ for West Germany. However, it will be very hard to find the rudiments of East Germany now. I also say that one of the reasons Britain opted to quit European Union is also the legacy of British Raj. People of United Kingdom still don’t understand that they are no longer the super power. However, to prove their superiority they keep on interfering in the affairs of the countries commonly known as ‘Members of Common Wealth’.

Lately, anti-government demonstrations in Indian-Kashmir have attained a new hype. Hawks from both sides of the border claim that Kashmir belongs to them. The super powers and even the UN have failed in asking what the people of Kashmir want’. If one could recalled the issue of Sudan was resolved quickly and prior to that Cyprus trauma overcome, only because the super powers had the consensus.

One may ask why the super powers are not serious in resolving Kashmir issue. My own understanding is that super powers love to create disputes, develop rebel groups, provide them funds and arms to keep their armament factories running at full capacity.

Having watched the recent wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen and Syria and earlier wars in Vietnam and Korea, I will not hesitate even for a second to call these ‘Proxy Wars’. The irony is that rulers become a puppet of super powers and ultimately meet the fate of Saddam Husain, Anwar Sadat, Ziaul Haq, Indra Gandhi, Mujeeb-ur-Rehman and the list can continue.  

While the proxy wars bring nothing except destruction to the countries where these are being fought, super powers continue to grow stronger and have ample funds to promote proxy war. However, they usually hide their ugly faces behind the multilateral lenders and NGOs and talking about refugees issue. It is never too late to mend. People of the third world must realize that super powers thrive on proxy wars and they get nothing but destruction and killing of innocent people.

US the worst dictator

The West owes Russia a lot, first a sincere apology and a welcome into Europe. Russia has been and is an extremely important nation and very unjustly denied its rightful place there. What doesn’t belong to Europe is the US, not in any way whatsoever, especially because being a dictatorship.

Why does America’s anti-Russia military club NATO still exist, after the Soviet Union’s equivalent Warsaw Pact disbanded in 1991 when the Soviet Union and its communism voluntarily ended? NATO is nothing but America’s anti-Russia military club, against Russia and against any nation that supports Russia.

The US killed Gaddafi of Libya because he supported Russia in international relations. The super power created a failed state and jihadist mayhem that has virtually destroyed the country. All was done in the name of change of regime and the assault was directly supervised by the US Ambassador in Libya.

The US overthrew Yanukovych in Ukraine only because he turned down the EU’s offer to Ukraine after learning that the price-tag for Ukrainians would be $160 billion if Ukraine were to comply with the EU’s demands. There are some credible evidences that the U.S. was already organizing the coup against him starting a year before the coup, and nine months before Yanukovych turned down the EU’s offer.

The US after failing in overthrowing Assad in Syria, facilitated ISIS to make an entry and now along with many other European countries supposedly attacking ISIS bases but virtually destroying Iraq and Syria. This created worst refugee problem and to close the door for these Paris was attached by ISIS.

The US was also the leader in initiating a war against Iran, after Islamic Revolution, with the help of Iraq, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. The sanctions are there for more than three decades. Now the efforts are to split Iraq in three states. Saudi Arabia is fighting a proxy war in Yemen.

This is dictatorship and totalitarianism of the US fully supported by the West, against Russia and any other nation that isn’t buckling to the U.S. aristocracy and its allied aristocracies in Europe.       

Let’s start with the results of a 2009 investigation by Germany’s Spiegel, or Mirror, magazine, which is a mainstream German news site, that’s a bit more honest than America’s equivalents. They headlined, very directly: “NATO’s Eastward Expansion: Did the West Break Its Promise to Moscow?”

They identified what that “promise” was, which Russia claims was violated, and which Spiegel was investigating: “that NATO’s expansion into Eastern Europe violated commitments made during the negotiations over German reunification.” The next sentence in Spiegel’s report states unequivocally their conclusion: “Newly discovered documents from Western archives support the Russian position.”

The question Spiegel’s article discusses isn’t whether NATO’s continued existence is an evil, but instead whether NATO should have extended eastward up to Russia’s own borders — whether, to make this matter quite clear now, if the USSR had won, and its Warsaw Pact and not NATO had continued (though neither should have continued), the Warsaw Pact should have extended itself all the way to including Mexico and/or Canada? 

One is inclined to conclude that the West lies about this history and only the few people with brains and open minds will get the important point:

When the then merely West Germany was negotiating reunification of Germany with the then merely Eastern half of Germany, is exactly in accord with what Russia’s allegations have been saying all along, and exactly the opposite of what West Germany’s Foreign Minister then, Hans Dietrich Genscher, has been asserting to have been the case.

Jack Matlock, the US ambassador in Moscow at the time, has said in the past that Moscow was given a “clear commitment.” Hans-Dietrich Genscher, the German foreign minister in 1990, says this was precisely not the case.

After speaking with many of those involved and examining previously classified British and German documents in detail, it can be concluded that there was no doubt that the West did everything it could to give the Soviets the impression that NATO membership was out of the question for countries like Poland, Hungary or Czechoslovakia.

Europe remained allied with the U.S. and continues participating in NATO, especially after having been instructed by America to lie, and to have deceived Gorbachev, who behaved honorably throughout and afterward, is Europe’s great shame.

The US is also Europe’s enemy — not merely Russia’s enemy. Not merely the truth’s enemy. Not merely democracy’s enemy.