Last updated on: December 6, 2008 at 3:26 pm
By
Desh Kapoor
In a very interesting article, Economist.com raises the very important question on Pakistan based on the interview of Asif Ali Zardari with an Indian TV channel. What does a Pakistani politician (or a common man) mean when he/she talks of "Pakistan"? And then, of course, what does he/she mean by saying "Pakistan" is not involved? IT MAY have been a slip of the tongue. But there was something very revealing about a remark that Pakistan’s president, Asif Ali Zardari, made in an interview with an Indian television channel on November 30th. Asked about allegations that Pakistan was involved in the murderous onslaught on Mumbai, he promised, before the world, strict action “if any evidence points towards any individual or group in my part of the country”. The (perhaps unintended) implication that Mr Zardari is in control of only part of Pakistan is all too true. And that helps explain why it is so difficult for India to respond. The article then goes in to the point of India or the West should not "weaken" the politicians by looking to start a war. Fair enough, I agree. But then if this politician is "good for nothing".. and those who are the mischief makers are tireless in their hate and campaign... then, what is a non-Pakistani victim supposed to do? Wait endlessly till the time that this politician GETS the power?? Or take out the demons that the Army/Intelligence has sown themselves? Read more