Pakistan Urdu Press: February 23-March 1, 2010
  • Share
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Whatsapp
  • Linkedin
  • Print

  • Editorial, Nawae Waqt, Feb 27, 2010

    Pakistan should end the option of talks with India

    “Foreign Secretary level talks between India and Pakistan ended without a major breakthrough. India remained adamant on its own stand and did not pay attention to Pakistan’s stance. Thus an un-meaningful dialogue ended without a result,” writes Nawa-e-Waqt in its editorial.

    The daily quotes Prime Minister Manmohan Singh as saying that “if Pakistan wants talks on issues other than terrorism, then its delegation should be stopped from visiting India”. The paper opines that “after Manmohan Singh’s statement there was no basis to send the Pakistani delegation to New Delhi.” The paper says that before leaving for New Delhi Pakistani Foreign Secretary told the media that the “Kashmir issue is on Pakistan’s priority, talks will include all issues including water”. But India was successful in deceiving the world community. It sent the message to the world including the US that it has resumed talks.

    The paper further opines that the “issue of water needs immediate resolution”. In this context it opines that “the water coming from Kashmir flows as blood in our veins. Because of water Qaed-e- Azam ( Jinnah) has termed Kashmir as Pakistan’s central vein”. The paper writes that “today India has pressed this vein very hard…if the Kashmir issue is resolved; the dispute over water will also be resolved.” The daily says that “Pakistan should end the option of talks with India and should raise the issue at international fora and if there is no immediate positive outcome we should try to go for an extreme option. Every body knows the meaning of ‘extreme end’. We have not made nuclear bomb to showcase it.”

    Editorial, Khabrein, Feb 27, 2010

    Pakistan should have assessed situation instead of agreeing for talks on “phone call”: Khabrein

    Yet another Urdu daily, Khabrein in a similar reaction observed that the “Indo- Pak talks could not achieve any result as usual. Table talks started but there was no meaningful dialogue.” India wanted to talks only on the issue of terrorism but Pakistan wanted to include other issues like water and Kashmir.

    The daily opines that “India wanted to have dialogue on its own terms and has been evading an engagement with Pakistan on the composite dialogue. By having this kind of dialogue; India wants to show the world that it wants peaceful relations with all its neighbours.” The daily opines that instead of agreeing for talks on a telephonic call, Pakistan should have analysed all the situations, should have understood India’s designs and then it should have said yes to talks. Without elaborating on “Pakistan’s strategies” the paper suggests the government “evolve a strategy so that India comes under pressure” and opines that only in case of a pressure India can deviate from its agenda and will talk on other issues on which it does not want to talk. The daily opines that “India’s attitude in the recent talks suggest that we can hope for “Aman ki Asha”, but practically nothing seems achievable.

    Azkar, Khabrein, Feb 27, 2010

    Constitute parliamentary delegations to take the dialogue process forward : Azkar

    The Azkar Urdu daily, however, has welcomed the Indo-Pak talks. The Azkar daily in its editorial opines that “with the talks between the Indo-Pak Foreign Secretaries ice seems melting between the two countries.” The paper writes that “though, India seems reluctant to resume the composite dialogue process, the press conference by the two foreign secretaries indicates that there is light at the other side of the tunnel.”

    The paper suggests that now both the parliaments should review the factors which impede the composite dialogue process to resolve all the disputes. It says Salman Basheer should give a briefing about the developments in a joint session of Pakistani Parliament. India should do the same in its parliament and constitute a parliamentary delegation to take the talks forward. The paper believes that the bureaucracy never shows flexibility and only the leadership can do the same. The paper says that “it is fortunate that both the countries now have democratically elected leadership and the parliament is functioning independently.