Now, India to Pak- If you slap me, I will slap you twice.

Jagan Nath Dhar   Editor Koshur Samachar 2019

Decisive actions on terror have raised our josh, hopes. Response, earlier; was: Offering the other cheek

For a long time, now, Pakistan had got accustomed to killing Indian citizens without being paid in the same coin. This time it found that the going has gone hard. In the early nineties it managed to murder hundreds of Kashmiri Pandits. Not a crow cawed over the hapless community’s tragedy. Last month the happening proved different. On the Valentine day when lovers were offering gifts to the ones they liked, the ISI- supported Jaish-e-Muhammad extremist killed 41 members of the Indian security forces who were on their way to help the Jammu and Kashmir Police in maintaining law and order. The Indian Air Force reciprocated the murderous assault by hurling bombs at the Balakot headquarters of the JeM where the terrorist organisation has trained thousands of young men to kill innocent humans in the Kashmir valley. The I.A.F. bombing was criticized by no country. European nations described it as a deserving action against terrorism. The United sates, whicht has been providing financial, defence and political aid to Pakistan, for 72 years, characterised the Indian bombing as “counter-terrorism action”. On March 11, the United and India issued a joint statement asking Pakistan to take “concerted action to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure and deny safe haven to all terrorist groups in its territory. The same day, Saudi Arabia’s Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Adel Al-Jubeir said that his country and India should work together for “irreversible, verifiable and credible steps against all terrorists without any discrimination”. Earlier, Pakistan’s bosom friend, China, issued a statement blaming the February 14 killings.

International law permits actions like the Balakot bombardment. In global jurisprudence, reason given, for such acts, is that when a nation tries to destabilize the entity of another sovereign nation, the latter country has a right to use arms to protect itself. The Indian action is the one, also allowed by domestic law. An example given, in this regard, is that when some armed person tries to kill another human being, the latter is within his right to kill the attacker. Life is the most precious attribute of an individual and he has a right to protect it.

For a long time, now, Pakistan has been threatening India that if action is taken against the persons it has trained to kill people in India, Pakistan will use its nuclear arms. The Pak Government has to listen to one of its sane statesmen who said: If Pakistan hurls one nuclear bomb on India it may receive 20 in return. As a result, there may be no Pakistan left. Pakistan needs to ponder over the views of Albert Einstein, godfather of the atom bomb. He was asked: What sort of arms will be used in world war three. The physicist replied: I do not know because the number is so large and I cannot tell you what weapons will be used in world war three, but I can tell you what weapon will be used in world war four. Only stones because human society will vanish and life will have to start afresh — with apes, who will be able to fight the enemy only with stones. In Einstein’s time, atom’s electron and proton attributes used to be defused to procure top-class energy. Now, fusion of such elements gives a much more forceful energy that can, also, be used in destroying human populations and world’s regions. Nine years after the atom bombing of Hiroshima and Niroshima and agasaki, Einstein came to the conclusion that atomic power will do more harm than good. He helped foundation of Pugwash, an oganisation pleading elimination of nuclear power from the world. In this atmosphere, it is easy for Pak leaders to give nuclear threats; it is impossible for them to control the consequences of a nuclear war.

About the Pulwama incident, Pakistan, first denied its hand in the event. When it was told that the Jaish-e-Muhammad had accepted that the killer of the Indian CRPF personnel was a Jaish volunteer, Pakistan said that that organisation was not in Pakistan. A few days later, it said that it had taken into custody some leader of the JeM, its chief was ill and in a military hospital. Telling untruth has been a consistent habit of the Pak polity. In 1947-48, it denied its army was backing the tribal attack on Jammu and Kashmir. When India provided documentary proof at the U. N. meeting, Pakistan had to accept the allegation.

Pakistan says it seeks a solution of the Kashmir issue. That can become possible only if the government of that country stops helping terrorists in carrying out anti-national acts in India. As things stand, mosques and madrasas in Kashmir are being utilized for creating a hate- lndia atmosphere. Prominent American social worker and successful businessman F. F. Islam said on March 10 that madrasas need to be modernized. He added that all the Indian madrasas are providing only Islamic education. This education is incomplete. Changing times require that students should not be taught exclusion but inclusion. Madrasas need to provide students knowledge about different cultures and a balanced approach He emphasized that terrorism needs to be eliminated tooth and nail. In the madrasas of Pakistan and those, patronized by Kashmiri separatists “B” stands for “bandook”, while it, earlier, used to stand for “book”; “G” used to stand for “goat". Now, it stands for “gun”. Pak and Kashmiri separatists have to bid good bye to the hate-lndia education and training. Then alone will it be possible to start a bilateral dialogue on any issue. Pak leaders have been making promises; they need to deliver also.

Disclaimer:

The views expressed in the Article above are Author’s personal views and kashmiribhatta.in is not in any way responsible for the opinions expressed in the above article. The article belongs to its respective owner or owners and this site does not claim any right over it. Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing."

Courtesy: Jagan Nath Dhar and March 2019, Koshur Samachar