- 4 hours ago
A joint letter by Indian and Pakistani intellectuals advocating for the resumption of bilateral dialogue, trade, and diplomatic ties has sparked a debate.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:01Good evening, you're watching India First. I'm Gaurav Savant.
00:05At a time when Pakistan is threatening India with a nuclear bogey,
00:11its ministers are threatening to chop off the hands that turn off the tap on the Indus Waters Treaty,
00:18117 intellectuals from India and Pakistan have written a letter to the Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan,
00:25not only for resumption of dialogue, trade and people-to-people contact,
00:30but also work towards demilitarization and de-escalation to achieve their aim,
00:37what they call as lasting peace across the region.
00:41What prompted this letter? The timing and the contents of this letter are extremely curious.
00:49And the fact, not once have these worthies sought an end to Pakistan state-sponsored radical Islamist terror
00:59that's been bleeding India for decades. Not once.
01:03Not once have these worthies sought the arrest, prosecution and punishment
01:10for terrorists like Hafiz Mohammed Saeed and that Mawlana of Terror Masood Azhar
01:15and Dawd Ibrahim Kaskar, let alone officers of Pakistan Army and ISI,
01:20who have relentlessly and continuously conspired to bleed India through a thousand cuts over decades.
01:29These worthies are also silent on failures of past comprehensive dialogue.
01:35We've had comprehensive dialogue in the past. We've had composite dialogue in the past.
01:40We've had resumed dialogue in the past. We've had back channels with Pakistan in the past for peace.
01:46Each dialogue was followed up by a terror attack by Pakistan.
01:51And I've reported these on ground.
01:53For example, remember then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Wajpayee going to Pakistan,
01:59that Lahore bus journey in 1999 and the enthusiasm around it,
02:04the same peaceniks who were saying this is a new dawn of peace between India and Pakistan.
02:10Exactly that time, Pakistan Army was intruding on the Kargil Heights.
02:15And we had the Kargil War. Pakistan stabbed India in the back.
02:20We had over 500 fatalities on the Indian side.
02:23And then the same year in 1999, Pakistan hijacked IC 814 and we had to release terrorists.
02:30That happened in December 1999.
02:33After that, again for resumption of dialogue, India invited,
02:37then Pakistani military dictator turned CEO turned president,
02:41their military dictator Parvez Musharraf.
02:43He was given a tri-services guard of honor.
02:46And then that Agra summit happened,
02:48which was followed up by an attack first on Jammu and Kashmir Assembly
02:53and then the Parliament of India in 2001.
02:55Dialogue and terror.
02:57And then the massacre of army families in Kaluchak military station.
03:02Imagine terrorists entered a military garrison
03:05and massacred military families,
03:07including a child as young as 18 months old,
03:10killed by Pakistani terrorists.
03:13Then there was this so-called era of peace
03:15that this letter also mentions peace between 2004 and 2007.
03:20You know what happened during that period of peace between 2004 and 2007?
03:24In 2006, we had a terror attack in Mumbai
03:27in which 200 Indians were killed.
03:30Series of blasts across trains.
03:32And 2004 and 2007, when the so-called era of peace,
03:36this was followed up by the Ahmedabad blast in 2008
03:39and then by 2611 Mumbai terror attacks
03:42in which 166 people were massacred.
03:45But then there was more diplomacy,
03:47more dialogue and comprehensive dialogue
03:49and cricket diplomacy.
03:51Did it bring peace?
03:52No.
03:53There were more terror attacks.
03:56Post-2014, dialogue was given another chance.
03:59Diplomacy was given another chance.
04:01But then Pakistan stabbed India in the back.
04:03Once again, there were terror attacks in Pathankot,
04:06then Pulwama, and then Pahlgam last year.
04:092025, the terror attack in Pahlgam.
04:12Pakistan does not understand Aman Ki Aasha.
04:15Pakistan only understands Brahmas Ki Bhasha.
04:20The question is, why doesn't this so-called Aman Ki Aasha ecosystem
04:26understand that?
04:27And why doesn't this Aman Ki Aasha ecosystem
04:30just once, just once,
04:34put the onus of peace on Pakistan?
04:37Tell Pakistan, stop terror first.
04:40Prosecute and punish Hafiz Saeed, Masood Azhar, Daoud Ibrahim.
04:44If you genuinely desire peace, dialogue,
04:46and people-to-people contact with India,
04:49just once,
04:51put India first.
05:04Pakistan continues to support cross-border terror in India.
05:09Continues to back terrorists who bled India.
05:12But that has not deterred groups of citizens from India and Pakistan
05:16from pushing talks between New Delhi and Islamabad.
05:20A group of 117 citizens from India and Pakistan
05:24has written to Prime Minister Narendra Modi
05:26and Pakistan Prime Minister Shaibas Sharif
05:29seeking revival of diplomatic ties.
05:34The signatories include Farouk Abdullah,
05:37Mehbooba Mufti,
05:38Manoj Jha,
05:39Mani Shankar Ayer,
05:41former Raw Chief A.S. Durlat
05:42and former TMC leader Humayu Kabir.
05:46The letter seeks the reinstatement of high commissioners
05:49restoration of normal visa services,
05:52reopening of the Atari-Vaga border,
05:55resumption of commercial flights
05:56and reopening of the Kartarpur-Sahib corridor
05:59to revive India-Pakistan ties.
06:03Jammu Kishmir has been a bone of contention for the two countries
06:08and we as PDP always advocate that it has to become a bridge of reconciliation
06:13between the two countries.
06:32The BJP has called this move
06:44Congress leaders have also questioned the motive behind the joint letter.
06:49I am really surprised as to how these very eminent people can forget this history.
06:56What do you want to talk to Pakistan about?
06:59What is it that India wants from Pakistan?
07:02And the only thing India wants from Pakistan is that there should be no export of terror.
07:11But the appeal comes as India has adopted a hardened anti-terror doctrine.
07:16New Delhi has declared that future terror attacks will be treated as acts of war.
07:21It has reiterated that terror and talks cannot go together
07:25and that those who sponsor or shelter terrorists
07:28will be treated no differently from the terrorists themselves.
07:35That policy overhaul came after the Pahldam attack.
07:40Attacked on Noor Khan base.
07:42Which saw India launching Operation Sindhu to punish Park terror machinery.
07:48India had enough after decades of attacks by Pakistan-based terror groups.
07:54From the 1993 Bombay blasts,
07:59the parliament attack
08:0226-11 Mumbai massacre
08:04to Uri
08:08and Pulwama terror strikes.
08:10The government has given it.
08:14The water and water
08:18will not be one of the same.
08:24Even as the peace appeal gathers signatures,
08:28Pakistan parched by India stopping Indus water,
08:31intensified its rhetoric.
08:34PPP chief Bilawal Bhutto Zardari warned of profound consequences
08:38against India for shutting water flow.
08:41Pakistan has treated the suspension as unlawful
08:44while preparing legal action
08:45and warning that water's diversions would be an act of war.
08:51While Pakistan minister Musaddiq Malik went a step further,
08:55threatening to cut off those hands
08:57that sought to claim Pakistan's share of water.
09:13With Pakistan yet to satisfy India's demand for credible action against terror,
09:18the push for dialogue has reignited a familiar question.
09:22Why should terror and talks go together?
09:33One of the main signatories of this letter is O.P. Shah,
09:38a key campaigner for good neighbourly relations between India and Pakistan.
09:42And peace amongst neighbours is always a great idea.
09:46But that peace has to be in a terror-free environment.
09:49O.P. Shah is the chairman of the Centre for Peace and Progress.
09:53He joins me on this India First special broadcast.
09:57Mr. Shah, welcome.
09:58Sir, can you tell us what prompted this letter,
10:03the timing of this letter?
10:10I have been involved in the Indo-Pak relations way back from 1991
10:19when I organised the first Indo-Pak dialogue
10:22at the India International Centre in Delhi.
10:26Then I took two delegations to Pakistan in 1991 and 1992.
10:32And since then I have been actively involved
10:34in contributing for improving Indo-Pak relations.
10:39This has been my practice.
10:44And in the last two, three years,
10:46almost every month on June,
10:49we used to have a discussion between Indians and Pakistanis
10:54on various issues.
10:55So in the last meeting that we had on 6th of June,
10:59it was felt that why not we try and work out something
11:05where Indians and Pakistanis can join hands together
11:11in writing a letter to the two prime ministers
11:13and requesting them for a dialogue between them
11:17so that peace could be restored.
11:20And a lot of things which are not available to Indian and Pakistani citizens
11:28would be available to them.
11:29Lovely.
11:30So you started this initiative in 1991.
11:33You visited Pakistan in 1992,
11:36which was followed by terrorists massacring 257 innocent people in Mumbai in 1993.
11:45Peace is a two-way street, sir.
11:481993, ISI did something which led to a series of bomb blasts in India
11:56and 257 people died and 700 plus were injured.
12:00I can't hear anything.
12:02Naturally, sir.
12:03These are things that are very difficult to not just hear but also fathom.
12:07But tell me this.
12:08Every effort that India put for peace with Pakistan
12:12was followed up by a terror attack from Pakistan.
12:16Tell me, sir,
12:16why doesn't any letter of yours put the onus on Pakistan
12:21to end terror for dialogue with India?
12:35Mr. Shah, I know my words are rather unpalatable
12:39for those who bat for Pakistan.
12:43You know, you talk about demilitarization.
12:46And I want to understand why.
12:49Let me see.
12:50Let me see.
12:50I'm going to read out certain portions of this letter
12:53as we reestablish that link.
12:55Because today we are going to ask these very tough questions.
12:58Sir, being a peacenik is a great idea.
13:00Even I want peace with Pakistan.
13:02But I don't want my countrymen to end up in pieces
13:04for your peace with Pakistan.
13:07This letter, I want to go full frame.
13:09You know, just, we'll sort that audio out with you in just a moment.
13:12Sort out that audio for a moment.
13:14What does this letter say?
13:15The letter states resume discussions on Jammu and Kashmir,
13:20including revisiting the framework negotiated between 2004 and 2007.
13:26This is Pakistan's wet dream.
13:30That negotiated settlement of 2004 and 2007
13:34is this so-called Musharraf's four-point agenda.
13:37Where is the room for this after abrogation of Article 370?
13:41But look, how many people in our country
13:44are peddling Pakistan's agenda in our country?
13:47Are they peaceniks or under the guise of being peaceniks,
13:52they're actually peddling Pakistan's agenda?
13:56Steps towards demilitarization.
13:59So now there's conversation around demilitarization.
14:01Again, this is something that Pakistan wants.
14:04Pakistan wants India to reduce the number of soldiers
14:07in Jammu and Kashmir
14:09and demilitarize the Siyachin Glacier.
14:12Again, something that Pakistan wants desperately
14:14to create lasting peace in the region
14:17is what these peaceniks say they want.
14:21Is that how you'll have peace?
14:22I want to take a look
14:25and I want to play out those graphics
14:27of every attempt made by India for peace
14:30which was followed up by terror from Pakistan.
14:34Take for example, 1999,
14:38Atal Bihari Vajpayee with all good intentions,
14:41he visited Lahore by bus.
14:44And you know, there was this landmark peace initiative,
14:47bilateral ties with Improved, diplomatic outreach.
14:50What was Pakistan doing?
14:51Their army chief Parvez Musharraf
14:53did not even salute the Indian prime minister.
14:56Worse, Parvez Musharraf was infiltrating his soldiers
15:00across 150 kilometers,
15:0320 to 30 kilometers deep inside Indian territory
15:06in Kargil.
15:07From Mashko through Dras Valley to Kaksar
15:10to Kargil to Batalik
15:11to what is now known as subsector West,
15:14subsector Hanif near the Siyachin Glacier.
15:17Pakistan wants India to demilitarize
15:20because Pakistan is not on the Siyachin Glacier.
15:22India is on the Saltoro Ridge line.
15:24That's a nightmare for Pakistan.
15:27That is why they want demilitarization.
15:28And look at the number of Indians
15:30who are out to stab India in the back.
15:32And how?
15:33By peddling Pakistan's agenda.
15:36May 1999, 26th May 1999,
15:40Operation Vijay had to be declared,
15:42full-scale military operations
15:43to push back Pakistani intruders.
15:45Aman Ki Aasha followed up by this war.
15:48We lost 530 brave Indian soldiers.
15:52Why?
15:52Because Pakistan had violated peace.
15:55And that wasn't the first time.
15:57IC 814 was hijacked in December.
16:00That Maulana of Terror
16:01were among three terrorists
16:02who had to be released.
16:05I once again want to bring in O.P. Shah.
16:07Mr. Shah, this letter,
16:09not even once,
16:10puts the onus on Pakistan
16:12to stop terror for peace.
16:14Explain this.
16:15Why, sir?
16:21Well, we have written the letter
16:23with a request
16:24to both prime ministers,
16:27both Indians and Pakistanis together,
16:31so that the normalcy
16:33in the subcontinent can be restored.
16:35There could be better relations
16:37between Indians and Pakistani,
16:39so that the generations to come
16:41can enjoy a better life.
16:43It is with that intention
16:45this letter was written.
16:47Have generations from 1999
16:49or 1991 to 2026
16:54enjoyed a better life?
16:57And contribute towards
16:58the improvement of relations
17:00between the two countries.
17:00How?
17:01When Pakistan sends in terrorists,
17:03how?
17:03Why don't you put the pressure
17:05on Pakistan?
17:06Why do you equate
17:08the victim of terror, India,
17:09and the perpetrator
17:10of terror, Pakistan?
17:11How can both be the same, sir?
17:14We have not,
17:16please,
17:17we have not used those words
17:18as you are using.
17:20Our intention
17:21was
17:22and continue
17:23to be
17:24a request
17:26to the two leaders
17:27of the subcontinent
17:28to bring normalcy
17:30in the relationship
17:32so that both
17:33Indians and Pakistanis
17:35can stand to gain.
17:36and through
17:37intensive dialogues
17:39and discussions
17:40between the government
17:41of Pakistan
17:41and the government
17:42of India,
17:43things can improve.
17:45The problems
17:46which exist
17:46between the two countries
17:48can be shorted out.
17:49Show me one step
17:51Pakistan has taken
17:52to end terror,
17:52Mr. Shah.
17:54It is always good
17:55to be a peacenik,
17:56but show me one step
17:57Pakistan has taken
17:58to end terror.
18:03I am not making
18:04any judgment
18:05on any issue.
18:06On this issue,
18:08the 56 Pakistanis
18:11and 61 Indians,
18:13well-meaning Indians
18:15and Pakistanis
18:16came with a request
18:17to the two governments,
18:19please normalize
18:21the relations,
18:22please have dialogue,
18:23please sit together
18:25so that our problems
18:27are shorted out.
18:28So why couldn't you
18:29write,
18:29please stop terror,
18:31Pakistan?
18:32Pakistan,
18:32please stop terror.
18:34Why not?
18:37Do Indian lives matter?
18:38You have already
18:39told them.
18:40Good that you are
18:41telling them.
18:41Do Indian lives matter
18:41to you?
18:43When we are talking
18:44about this letter,
18:46when we are talking
18:47about this letter,
18:48this is what we have
18:49made out.
18:50No one appreciates terror.
18:51You have made out
18:51a case for demilitarization.
18:53No one will support terror.
18:55Explain,
18:56why would you peddle
18:58Pakistan's agenda
18:58of demilitarization?
19:01That is peddling
19:02Pakistan's agenda,
19:03demilitarization.
19:05I for one
19:05would not like
19:07to support terrorism.
19:08As far as
19:09demilitarization
19:11is concerned,
19:13it's a desire
19:14for most Indians
19:16and most Pakistanis
19:18that if we have
19:21a situation
19:22in which we make
19:23bigger investment,
19:25we make more
19:26expenditure on the
19:27social sector
19:28and we spend
19:29less on that,
19:30we create a situation
19:32in which this
19:33could happen.
19:34It's a desire.
19:37Pakistan is doing it.
19:38Why do you equate
19:39India and Pakistan?
19:40How can you equate
19:41a victim of terror
19:42with the perpetrator
19:44of terror?
19:44There is no we.
19:46we are,
19:49it's not equating
19:50one or the other.
19:52It's the
19:52common
19:53desire
19:54of these
19:56117s Indians
19:57and Pakistanis
19:58that we want
20:00to have that
20:00kind of atmosphere
20:02in this
20:02subcontinent.
20:03Pakistan state
20:03sponsor radical
20:04Islamist terror
20:05should end.
20:06And we request,
20:07we have requested
20:08our,
20:10I,
20:12we have requested
20:13our governments
20:13to create
20:15that situation
20:16and since
20:17there is a
20:18trust deficit
20:19in our country,
20:21in our subcontinent,
20:22we,
20:23as members
20:24of the civil society,
20:26as well-meaning
20:27citizens,
20:28whatever contribution
20:30that we can make
20:31in creating
20:33a better climate,
20:35in creating
20:36climate of trust
20:37and confidence.
20:37That's our desire.
20:38How can trust
20:39be created
20:39when they massacre us,
20:41whether it is in
20:42Kargil,
20:43whether it is in
20:43Mumbai 2611,
20:45whether it is in
20:46Pathankot,
20:47whether it is in
20:47Pulwama,
20:48whether it is in
20:49Pehelgaam,
20:50they massacre us.
20:51Mr. Shah,
20:52the way to hell
20:53is paved with
20:54good intentions.
20:55I'm sure you know that.
21:00Mr. No one,
21:03no one supports
21:04things which are wrong.
21:07We are only
21:08through this letter
21:10are emphasizing
21:12on the positive aspect.
21:15No one,
21:16who would support
21:17terrorism,
21:18who would support
21:19killings.
21:19Pakistan does,
21:20Pakistan state does.
21:22We are only,
21:23we didn't,
21:25why are you scared?
21:26Are you scared?
21:27Are you timid
21:28part of our effort?
21:30To expose Pakistan
21:30state terror,
21:31sir?
21:36I'm neither scared
21:38nor scared of anyone.
21:42I'm only trying
21:45if I can make
21:46some contribution
21:48in bringing about
21:52atmosphere of trust
21:53and goodwill
21:54so that better things
21:56can prevail
21:56in subcontinent.
21:57No one wants
21:59terrorism.
22:00How does it suit
22:01anybody?
22:02Your letter
22:02does not mention,
22:04your letter
22:05does not even
22:05mention the T word.
22:07Such is the fear
22:09of Pakistan
22:09unless there is
22:10another reason.
22:11Why doesn't it
22:12mention the T word?
22:14Stop terrorism.
22:15Prosecute
22:16Hafiz Saeed.
22:17Prosecute
22:18Masood Azhar.
22:20Jail
22:20Dawud
22:20Ibrahim
22:21Kaskar.
22:22Simple words.
22:24You are so well
22:25read.
22:25All of you are
22:26so highly educated.
22:27That's your
22:27interpretation.
22:29Our effort is to
22:31make contribution
22:33in creating a
22:34climate of trust
22:35and goodwill.
22:37That's our desire.
22:38That's our efforts.
22:40I'll continue to do
22:41so.
22:41I have been doing it
22:42in my own
22:44humble way.
22:46I,
22:47whatever way that
22:48you wish to read
22:49and construe,
22:50it's up to you.
22:51That's your choice.
22:52My simple question
22:54Mr. Shah
22:54is after
22:56Pakistan
22:56has shown
22:57a terrible
22:58I have already
22:59answered that.
23:01Is ostrich
23:02like attitude
23:03the only way
23:04you think
23:04there will be
23:05peace?
23:05Because Pakistan
23:06plays on
23:07these sentiments
23:08of people like you,
23:10sir.
23:10I can't hear you.
23:10Naturally,
23:11because I ask you
23:12very tough questions
23:13and I quickly
23:14want to cut across
23:15and bring in
23:16Manish Tiwari,
23:17former information
23:18and broadcasting
23:18minister,
23:19into this conversation.
23:21Mr. Shah,
23:22many thanks
23:22for joining me
23:23because
23:24the big question
23:25is should there
23:26be resumption
23:27of dialogue
23:27as some
23:28worthies in India
23:29and Pakistan
23:30demand?
23:31I want to bring
23:32in Manish Tiwari,
23:33three-time
23:33member of parliament,
23:34former union
23:35and information
23:36broadcasting minister
23:37and one of India's
23:38foremost commentators
23:39on strategic affairs.
23:40He incidentally
23:40has borne the brunt
23:42of Pakistan's
23:43state-sponsored terror.
23:45His father,
23:46Dr. V. N. Tiwari,
23:47a member of parliament,
23:49was assassinated
23:50by terrorists
23:51in April 1984
23:52by Khalistani terrorists.
23:54Mr. Tiwari,
23:55welcome.
23:56Your reading
23:57of this letter
23:58seeking resumption
23:59of dialogue
24:00with Pakistan
24:01signed by 117
24:02intellectuals
24:03in India
24:03and Pakistan
24:04and you heard
24:05Mr. Shah
24:06on the broadcast
24:07just now
24:07saying it's his effort.
24:09He's trying it
24:10since 1991.
24:11He continues to try
24:12despite Park terror.
24:17It's unfortunate
24:19and most regrettable
24:20that it's been
24:22only one year,
24:24two months
24:24and eight days
24:26since the massacre
24:28of innocent tourists
24:29in front of their families
24:31in the Baisaran Valley.
24:32So, therefore,
24:34what makes me
24:37extremely perplexed
24:39if not exasperated
24:41is that
24:42how can we forget
24:43this perfidy
24:44so soon?
24:45And if you were
24:46to contextualize
24:49things
24:50in a certain perspective,
24:52going back
24:53to now
24:54the late 1970s,
24:56Pakistan
24:57has been sponsoring
24:58terror against India
25:00to seek retribution
25:02for the creation
25:04of Bangladesh
25:05by India
25:07in 1971
25:08and that's
25:10an enduring
25:11ongoing project
25:13of the Pakistani
25:14deep state.
25:16Punjab became
25:17the first frontier
25:18of the strategy
25:20to bleed India
25:20with a thousand cuts
25:22in 1980.
25:23By 1989,
25:24it was upscaled
25:25to Jammu and Kashmir.
25:27Two, three years later,
25:29it was upscaled
25:30to the entire country
25:31and every time
25:33that we have tried
25:34to talk to Pakistan,
25:36they have
25:37come back
25:39with a state-sponsored
25:41terror attack
25:42against India.
25:43This has been
25:45a continuous pattern
25:47now going across
25:49different dispensations
25:51and administrations
25:52over the past
25:54four decades.
25:56So, explain this.
25:58Sir, how do you
25:59view this?
26:00We have had
26:01comprehensive
26:01bilateral dialogue,
26:03we have had
26:03composite dialogue,
26:05we have had
26:05renewed dialogue,
26:07we have also had
26:08back-channel dialogue
26:09with Pakistan,
26:10we have had
26:10cricket diplomacy
26:11with Pakistan,
26:12nothing prevented
26:13Pakistan's state-sponsored
26:15radical Islamist terror
26:16from bleeding India.
26:18We have had
26:19cricket diplomacy,
26:19we have had
26:20people-to-people
26:21contact.
26:21Sir, in your view,
26:23and you have
26:23written about this,
26:25are there any
26:26grounds whatsoever
26:27for resumption
26:28of dialogue?
26:31No, Gaurav,
26:32first of all,
26:33India needs
26:34to figure out
26:36institutionally,
26:37collectively,
26:38across the
26:40political divide,
26:41that what is it
26:42that we want
26:43from Pakistan?
26:44And the answer
26:45to that is
26:46nothing.
26:46The only thing
26:48that India
26:48seeks from
26:49Pakistan is
26:50the state-sponsored
26:52project of terrorism,
26:55which goes back
26:56almost five decades,
26:58as I had earlier
26:59stated,
27:00that needs to stop.
27:01There's the
27:02military-jihadi
27:04complex,
27:05the entire
27:07network of
27:08Tanzims
27:10that they have
27:11spawned now
27:12going back
27:12to 1980s,
27:14which coincides
27:15with the
27:17launching of
27:18the jihad
27:18in Afghanistan
27:20post the
27:21Soviet invasion
27:22in 1979.
27:25That entire
27:26network needs
27:27to be dismantled,
27:28and it needs
27:29to be dismantled
27:30in a manner
27:31which is
27:31verifiable.
27:32Otherwise,
27:33what is there
27:34to talk about?
27:35You see,
27:35on one hand,
27:37we, as you
27:37earlier stated,
27:38and I have
27:39written about this,
27:39in fact,
27:40I wrote a long
27:41piece in the
27:42Tribune recently
27:43about the failed
27:44saga of India-Pakistan
27:46talks,
27:47that we've tried
27:48everything,
27:49composite dialogue,
27:51comprehensive
27:52bilateral dialogue,
27:54resumed dialogue,
27:56across the
27:57tenure of
27:58different prime
27:59ministers,
28:00and every time
28:01there has been
28:02a terror attack
28:04by Pakistan
28:05in return.
28:06So,
28:07ultimately,
28:07we, as a country,
28:09need to figure out
28:10what is it
28:11that we want
28:12from Pakistan,
28:14and what is
28:15this dialogue
28:15all about?
28:16What are the
28:17terms of this
28:18dialogue?
28:19Why do we
28:21need to talk
28:21to them
28:22at this point
28:23in time?
28:24Where is the
28:24pressure coming
28:25from?
28:26Interesting.
28:29so...
28:30No, you've
28:32mentioned pressure.
28:33Where is this
28:34pressure coming
28:35from?
28:35In your view,
28:36sir, is there
28:37pressure that's
28:38being built on
28:39India to resume
28:40dialogue with
28:41Pakistan?
28:41And who, in
28:42your view, is
28:43mounting this
28:44pressure on
28:44India for
28:45dialogue, sir?
28:47Well, that's
28:48a question I
28:49think all of
28:50us need to
28:51collectively apply
28:52ourselves to.
28:53Because in
28:56May, there was
28:57a statement by
28:58a very senior
28:59functionary of
29:00the Rashtore
29:01Swain,
29:01Sevakistan,
29:02who said that
29:03civil society
29:05contacts between
29:06India and
29:06Pakistan should
29:08resume.
29:09now you have
29:09this letter
29:10signed by
29:11eminences,
29:13quote-unquote,
29:14from both
29:15India and
29:15Pakistan,
29:16saying that
29:17there should
29:18be a
29:19normalization
29:19of relations,
29:21a normalization
29:22of relations
29:23without terror
29:27completely being
29:28proscribed and
29:30circumscribed.
29:31What does that
29:32mean?
29:32Only last year,
29:34after the
29:35kinetic exchanges
29:36between India
29:37and Pakistan
29:38between 7th and
29:3910th of May
29:402025, when
29:42multidisciplinary
29:44delegations of
29:45parliamentarians,
29:46strategic experts,
29:47and diplomats
29:49had traveled
29:49across the world,
29:50the message that
29:51we gave to the
29:52world was that
29:53terror and
29:53talks cannot
29:54go together,
29:56that blood and
29:57water cannot
29:58flow together,
29:58and India
29:59will not
30:00make a
30:00distinction
30:01between the
30:02state sponsors
30:03of terror
30:04and the
30:05proxies which
30:06they use.
30:06So my
30:07question to
30:09those who
30:10are advocating
30:11talks or
30:14normalization of
30:15relations with
30:16Pakistan, has
30:17Pakistan given
30:19any concrete
30:20guarantee that
30:21they will
30:22dismantle the
30:24entire infrastructure
30:25of terror which
30:26they have created
30:27over the past
30:28four decades and
30:30used against
30:30India?
30:31Today, Pakistan
30:32is the epicenter
30:34of instability in
30:35South Asia.
30:36See what is
30:37happening between
30:37Afghanistan and
30:38Pakistan?
30:39You know,
30:40Pakistan had
30:40always craved
30:41for Afghanistan
30:42as strategic
30:43depth.
30:43In the August
30:44of 2021, when
30:46the Americans
30:47packed up and
30:47left and handed
30:49over the country
30:50to the Taliban,
30:51Pakistan was
30:52exulting.
30:53They thought
30:54that they had
30:54a team in
30:55place in
30:56Afghanistan.
30:57And see what
30:58has been
30:58happening now
30:59for the past
31:00one year, the
31:01same Taliban,
31:02which they
31:03thought they had
31:04created, incubated,
31:05sheltered, you
31:06know, the
31:07Quetta, Shura,
31:08and the fact
31:10that Osama
31:11bin Laden was
31:12found in
31:13Abbottabad right
31:14next to the
31:14Pakistan National
31:16Academy, that
31:18same Taliban
31:19has now very,
31:21very vigorously
31:23turned against
31:24Pakistan.
31:26Similarly, they...
31:27So, permit me
31:28to ask you,
31:29sir, you
31:31know, that
31:31very uncomfortable
31:33question, though,
31:35your father was
31:36assassinated by
31:37terrorists.
31:38Dr. V. N.
31:39Tiwari was
31:39assassinated by
31:40Pakistani-backed
31:41Khalistani
31:42terrorists at the
31:43height of terror
31:44in Punjab,
31:451984.
31:46Sir, has there
31:47been any change
31:48in Pakistan's
31:50stance of
31:51sponsoring terror
31:52to bleed India
31:54through a
31:54thousand cuts
31:55and destabilize
31:56India, whether
31:57Khalistan, Jammu
31:58and Kashmir, or
31:59rest of the
31:59country?
32:00Mr. Tiwari.
32:04Actually, Gaurav,
32:05the story goes
32:05back to 24th of
32:07January 1972,
32:10when Zulfkar Ali
32:12Bhutto convened
32:13a conference in
32:14Multan, which is
32:15called the Multan
32:16Conference, and
32:17their two seminal
32:18decisions were
32:19taken by the
32:20Pakistani strategic
32:21elite.
32:22One, that they
32:23would eat grass
32:24but get a
32:25nuclear bomb
32:25at any cost,
32:27which led to
32:28the whole
32:28A.Q.
32:29Khan network,
32:30that they
32:31stole nuclear
32:32technology from
32:33all over the
32:34world, and
32:35finally did end
32:36up getting a
32:37bomb, with the
32:38West looking the
32:39other way.
32:39And the second
32:40was to bleed
32:41India with a
32:41thousand cuts.
32:42And it took
32:43them about a
32:45few years to
32:45build that
32:46capacity, and
32:47as I earlier
32:47stated, Punjab
32:48became the first
32:49frontier, and
32:50then it was
32:51upscaled to
32:51Jammu and
32:52Kashmir, and
32:53after that by
32:54the middle of
32:55the 90s to
32:56the rest of
32:56the country.
32:57And so
32:57therefore there
32:58has been no
32:59rollback in
33:01so far as
33:02the core
33:03strategy of
33:04the Pakistani
33:04deep state,
33:06who is
33:06India is
33:07concerned.
33:07You know,
33:08Pakistan is
33:09not a country
33:10which has a
33:11military.
33:12It is a
33:13military which
33:13owns a piece
33:14of geography
33:15called Pakistan,
33:16and it
33:17continues to
33:19belabor under
33:22an institutional
33:24humiliation which
33:26they suffered
33:26with the
33:28creation of
33:28Bangladesh, and
33:30their desire for
33:31retribution, even
33:33five decades
33:33later, remains
33:35as possibly
33:38fresh and
33:38alive in their
33:39memory as
33:40it was in
33:411971.
33:42So till the
33:43time, the
33:43Pakistani deep
33:44state does
33:45not really
33:46surmount that
33:49psychological
33:49scar which
33:51is there on
33:52their institutional
33:53psyche and
33:54does not
33:54dismantle the
33:55entire infrastructure
33:56of terror which
33:57they have
33:57created, what
33:59are you going
33:59to talk to
34:00them about?
34:01Sir, the
34:02contents of
34:03this letter,
34:04when it talks
34:05about posting
34:05high commissioners
34:06in each other's
34:07country, resumption
34:08of trade, talks,
34:10dialogue, demilitarization,
34:11de-escalation,
34:13does this read
34:14like Pakistan's
34:15agenda, is
34:16this more like
34:17Pakistan's wish
34:18list being
34:19peddled?
34:25Look, demilitarization
34:27of Jammu and
34:29Kashmir does not
34:31only mean
34:32demilitarization of
34:34Jammu and
34:36Kashmir which is
34:38currently in our
34:39position.
34:39it also means
34:41demilitarization of
34:42Pakistan-occupied
34:44Kashmir that
34:45legitimately had
34:47been transferred to
34:48India by Maharaja
34:50Hariseng on the
34:5122nd of October
34:531947.
34:55In fact, if you go
34:56back to the
34:56parliament
34:57resolutions,
34:58unanimous
34:59resolution of
35:001994, then
35:02retreated in
35:022013, parliament
35:04has unanimously
35:05said that the
35:06only unfinished
35:07business of
35:07partition is to
35:09reclaim those
35:10parts of Jammu and
35:11Kashmir which are in
35:12the illegal occupation
35:14of Pakistan.
35:15So therefore, when
35:17you talk about
35:18demilitarization, it
35:21completely and
35:22absolutely foxes me
35:23because the
35:24consistent position of
35:26India, as
35:28reflected in the
35:30resolutions of its
35:31parliament, is that
35:32the only unfinished
35:33business of
35:34partition is the
35:35reclaim of those
35:38parts of Jammu and
35:39Kashmir which are in
35:40the illegal occupation
35:41of Pakistan now
35:43going back to
35:441947.
35:46And therefore, it
35:47brings me to a
35:49fundamental question.
35:50What is there to
35:52talk to Pakistan
35:54about till that
35:55point in time that
35:57India does not have
35:59verifiable guarantees
36:01or India does not
36:03have a verified
36:05modus vivandi that
36:07the whole
36:07infrastructure of
36:08terror has indeed
36:09been dismantled?
36:11I think that needs
36:12to be the starting
36:13point of any
36:13conversation.
36:14If at all, there
36:15has to be one.
36:16Very pertinent point
36:16to make there, sir.
36:18Many thanks for
36:18joining me and I
36:19now want to throw
36:20this open to our
36:21guests for a wider
36:23discussion.
36:24Is this letter
36:25very worrisome?
36:26Does it actually
36:27peddle Pakistan's
36:29agenda signed by
36:3061 worthies even
36:32in India?
36:33Lieutenant General
36:33D.P. Pandey is
36:34former Chinar
36:35Corps commander.
36:36Dr. Tara Kartha
36:37is former Director
36:38of National Security
36:39Council Secretariat.
36:40Sandeep Unnithan
36:41is a senior
36:42journalist.
36:42Apologies for
36:43coming late.
36:44But I want to
36:45begin by asking
36:45you, General
36:46Pandey, you've
36:47commanded the
36:48Kashmir Corps.
36:50Do you find this
36:51letter worrisome?
36:53The talk about
36:54de-escalation and
36:56demilitarization,
36:57does this read like
36:58Pakistan's wish
36:59list?
37:01Gaurav, firstly,
37:03good evening to
37:03all my family
37:04here and
37:05to you.
37:06Let's start by
37:07asking one simple
37:08question.
37:09Is it worrisome
37:10or not?
37:10It is worrisome.
37:12It is not even
37:13one year that
37:14Barsedan happened
37:15and we saw that
37:16visual which was
37:17very, very disturbing
37:18in which people
37:19were just being
37:20butchered on the
37:21name of religion.
37:22What has changed?
37:23What has changed
37:25today that we
37:27really badly
37:28want an
37:29engagement to
37:29commence in
37:30what has
37:31Pakistan offered
37:32to us since
37:32then?
37:33What worrisome
37:34is that
37:34somewhere the
37:35thousand cut,
37:36what is the
37:36meaning of a
37:37thousand cut?
37:38We bleed
37:39slowly, we
37:39forget the
37:40past cut and
37:41thereafter we
37:42await the
37:43next cut because
37:43we start feeling
37:44that the next
37:45cut may not
37:46come but it
37:46comes.
37:47And that is
37:48exactly what
37:48has been
37:49happening to
37:49as has been
37:51evident.
37:52So every
37:52time there
37:53is a same
37:54group of
37:55gang will
37:56start starting
37:57mouth and
37:57start getting
37:58mushy about
37:59the kebabs
38:00and whiskeys
38:01and track
38:01diplomacy,
38:03less engaged.
38:04You look at
38:04our own top
38:05leadership,
38:06our Prime
38:07Minister Modi
38:07went all
38:09across to
38:09Lahore thinking
38:10that this step
38:11across Lahore
38:12will change
38:12the strategic
38:13direction of
38:15the country.
38:15No, sir.
38:16when they
38:17have decided
38:17their basic
38:19existence is
38:21not about
38:21Jammu and
38:22Kashmir.
38:22Their basic
38:23existence is
38:24what Asim
38:24Mani told
38:25the people of
38:26Pakistan origin
38:27who were
38:27brought in
38:28Islamabad a
38:28few days
38:29before Pahl
38:30Gang was
38:30prosecuted on
38:31India by
38:32Pakistani
38:33terrorists.
38:34He said
38:34very clearly
38:35that we are
38:36two different
38:36people and
38:37we are going
38:38to actually
38:40aim and
38:41agenda.
38:42And okay,
38:42let's forget
38:43everything.
38:43In last few
38:44days, last few
38:45months, what
38:45have been talked
38:46off, we
38:47will nuke,
38:48we will
38:48carry out,
38:49we will go
38:50down, we
38:51will take
38:51half the
38:51world down.
38:52These are
38:53languages which
38:54are being spoken
38:55by a sane
38:55country.
38:56The last
38:58question I
38:58need to ask,
38:59what do they
39:00have to offer
39:00to us?
39:01Why do we
39:02require those
39:03days to go
39:04down and
39:05embrace this
39:06one country?
39:07Yes, it
39:08may open us
39:08avenues to
39:09get it out
39:10to Central
39:10Asian Republic.
39:13It may open
39:14certain avenues
39:15to go to
39:15Afghanistan.
39:16But we can
39:17supplement all
39:18that.
39:18We actually
39:19don't need
39:20anything from
39:21Pakistan in
39:22the region.
39:23We need
39:23nothing from
39:24Pakistan.
39:25Good point
39:25you make.
39:26Pakistan needs
39:26us.
39:27Dr. Tara
39:27Kartha,
39:28Pakistan right
39:29now is in
39:30trouble virtually
39:31on every front.
39:32When Pakistan
39:33is in trouble,
39:34you have an
39:34ecosystem that
39:35rises in our
39:36country and
39:37worthies.
39:37Some of them
39:38you may have
39:38worked with in
39:40the security
39:40system.
39:41they suddenly
39:42rise.
39:42Are they
39:43defending
39:44Pakistan?
39:45Are they
39:45giving a
39:46lifeline to
39:47Pakistan through
39:48this demand
39:49for dialogue?
39:50I very much
39:51think so.
39:52That is
39:53definitely true.
39:54And I have
39:54seen this in
39:56my career where
39:57people from
39:58within this
39:58country have
39:59created more
40:00problems for
40:00us than
40:01anybody else.
40:02In fact, I
40:03remember when
40:04General Musharraf
40:05was peddling
40:06that Chenna
40:07formula.
40:07Oh my God,
40:08there were
40:09a number of
40:09people here
40:10who supported
40:10it.
40:11Chenna formula
40:12would have
40:13divided that
40:14Kashmir along
40:14religious lines.
40:15So yes, I
40:16do agree.
40:17Pakistan is in
40:18trouble.
40:19They've got
40:19trouble in
40:19POK.
40:20They've got
40:20trouble along
40:21the tribal
40:22areas.
40:22They've got
40:23trouble in
40:23Balochistan.
40:24So why would
40:25I want to
40:25talk to you
40:26just now?
40:27You've got
40:27more problems.
40:28Deal with
40:28that first.
40:30Deal with
40:30your own
40:30issues.
40:31Number two,
40:32you want to
40:33stabilize relations
40:34with me.
40:35You stop the
40:36trade.
40:36You start
40:37it if you
40:38want.
40:38Do I get
40:39an official
40:40offer from
40:40you saying,
40:41okay, let's
40:42start trading.
40:43Then I will
40:43see that as
40:44a definite
40:44talk.
40:45Number three,
40:46even if we
40:48are, they
40:49say, okay,
40:49you know,
40:50let's have
40:51all these
40:51talking going
40:52on.
40:52You want
40:53me to talk
40:54to a
40:54military regime.
40:56What stake
40:57does General
40:58Munir have in
40:59peace with
41:00this country?
41:01He doesn't.
41:02He has more
41:02stakes in war
41:03with India.
41:03His survival
41:04depends on war
41:05with India.
41:06How dumb
41:07are we that
41:08we want
41:08dialogue with
41:09Pakistan,
41:10Sandeep,
41:10at a time
41:11when Asim
41:12Munir and
41:13those around
41:13him have
41:14made it very
41:15clear and
41:15more than
41:16clear.
41:16They believe
41:17in the
41:17ideology of
41:19Gazmai,
41:20Hind,
41:20where they
41:21want to
41:22deal with
41:23kafirs in
41:24India.
41:24They treat
41:25us as
41:25kafirs,
41:26non-believers,
41:27infidels,
41:27and they want
41:28to convert
41:29us.
41:29They want
41:29to behead
41:30us.
41:30And we
41:30are seeking
41:31dialogue,
41:32Sandeep.
41:32History repeats
41:33itself.
41:34Absolutely,
41:35Gaurav.
41:35And you
41:35know,
41:36the shocking
41:37part about
41:37this is that
41:38we don't
41:39seem to
41:39learn from
41:40history.
41:40And the
41:40fact is that
41:41what the
41:41Pakistan army
41:42has been
41:43doing,
41:43what General
41:43Pandey
41:44mentioned,
41:44the army
41:44with the
41:45country,
41:46this army
41:47has been
41:47targeting our
41:49three centres
41:49of gravity,
41:50the centres
41:51of gravity
41:51which will
41:52enable their
41:53military
41:53objectives to
41:54succeed.
41:55the government,
41:57the Indian
41:57military and
41:58most importantly
41:59the people.
42:00And it is
42:00through such
42:03letters and
42:04such kind
42:04of aman
42:06ki tamashas
42:07that they
42:08are creating
42:08this illusion
42:09that there is
42:10a huge cohort
42:11of people in
42:11India who
42:12want talks and
42:13therefore the
42:14Indian government
42:15is opposing
42:15this.
42:15This is meant
42:16to sow
42:16confusion within
42:18India and
42:18this should be
42:19rejected at
42:20face value,
42:20Gaurav.
42:21General Pandey,
42:23very pertinent
42:24point,
42:24Sandeep,
42:25you said
42:25they should
42:25be rejected
42:26at face
42:26value.
42:27General Pandey,
42:28this letter,
42:29is this
42:30Pakistan's
42:30wish list
42:31being peddled
42:32by 61
42:33Indians also?
42:37Yeah,
42:37absolutely.
42:38Actually,
42:38look,
42:39one of the
42:40statements
42:40which came
42:40out that
42:41Jammu Kashmir
42:41is the
42:42point of
42:42contention
42:43here and
42:43therefore we
42:44need to
42:44talk across.
42:45Gaurav,
42:46there is no
42:46way.
42:47Jammu and
42:47Kashmir is
42:48not even
42:48on the
42:49table.
42:49They don't
42:50think Jammu
42:50Kashmir is
42:51relevant for
42:51them.
42:52Their idea
42:53is to hurt
42:53India,
42:54Bharat.
42:54It is
42:55not about
42:55you look
42:56at what
42:56is happening
42:56in the
42:57last two
42:57days.
42:58They are
42:58talking about
42:59creating the
43:00entire history
43:01of the
43:03Bharat
43:03subcontinent.
43:04So,
43:04there is a
43:05shift.
43:05The unfortunate
43:06part,
43:06Gaurav,
43:07today is
43:07that we
43:08have got
43:09fissures
43:09within our
43:10own cells,
43:11our own
43:11people,
43:12who are
43:12either due
43:13to political
43:14reasons or
43:15they are
43:16very,
43:16very fought
43:17about trying
43:17to hit
43:18back against
43:19the government.
43:20They will
43:20keep on
43:21coming back
43:21and be
43:22sounding nice
43:23to the
43:24Pakistanis.
43:25And I
43:25always leave
43:25one simple
43:26line,
43:27please understand,
43:28over a
43:29drink of
43:29whiskey or
43:30a kebab or
43:32some degree
43:32of love,
43:34dissing affection,
43:35you know,
43:35when you see
43:36those movies,
43:37you start
43:37believing that
43:38everything is
43:38hunky-dory.
43:39If that was
43:40so, why is
43:41Pakistan within
43:42itself under
43:43trouble?
43:44Those people
43:44who are
43:45killing
43:45the
43:45Afghan
43:46children,
43:47those people,
43:47those guys
43:48who are
43:48killing
43:48civilians,
43:50unarmed
43:51civilians in
43:51our country,
43:52all over
43:53their own
43:54country,
43:54in the
43:56areas of
43:56Patun,
43:57you look at
43:57the Shia
43:58community,
43:58where they're
43:59treating,
43:59do you think
44:00once we start
44:01engaging them,
44:02they'll become
44:02very hunky-dory
44:03and nice to
44:04us?
44:04I don't think
44:05so.
44:05Their mindsets
44:06are radicalized
44:08beyond repair.
44:09They require
44:09at least a couple
44:10of generations
44:11to change
44:12as you can
44:12system and
44:13start working
44:13towards a
44:14modern thought.
44:16The failure
44:17of ours is
44:18that we don't
44:19have a great
44:20strategic
44:20communication,
44:21information
44:22warfare campaign
44:22where we can
44:24actually blunt
44:27these kind of
44:28a talk which
44:28is there
44:28happening.
44:29You know,
44:29IWT
44:30conferences,
44:31seminars which
44:31are happening,
44:33even when the
44:33tap is still
44:34not totally
44:35closed,
44:35you see,
44:36the effect of
44:36IWT is
44:37going to be
44:38starting to
44:38change in
44:39the market
44:39for two
44:39years.
44:41It's just
44:41started
44:42investigating
44:42why is it
44:43happening so,
44:43why are they
44:44getting people
44:44out of the
44:45place?
44:45It is
44:46possibly to
44:46actually shift
44:48the focus
44:48what is
44:49happening
44:49within the
44:49country.
44:50Absolutely.
44:51And Dr.
44:52Tara Kharta,
44:53for the moment,
44:53if I just want to
44:54briefly mention
44:55this letter
44:56that talks about
44:58revive the
44:59dialogue and
45:00then talk about
45:00what happened
45:01between 2004
45:02and 7.
45:03Musharraf's
45:04four-point agenda.
45:05Ma'am, I want
45:05to understand
45:06when this
45:07so-called
45:07four-point
45:08agenda was
45:08being talked
45:09about,
45:10wasn't this
45:10exactly the
45:11time that
45:12Pakistan won,
45:13it carried out
45:14a terror attack
45:15in Mumbai,
45:15200 people
45:16were massacred,
45:17and 2008,
45:19Ahmedabad blast,
45:20Surat attempted
45:21blast, and
45:222611 Mumbai
45:23terror attacks,
45:24166 massacred.
45:25They were
45:26training to
45:26bleed us while
45:28they were talking
45:28peace.
45:29They may be
45:29doing exactly
45:30the same thing
45:30right now,
45:31Dr. Tara Kharta.
45:32Oh, I
45:33absolutely agree,
45:34Gaurav.
45:34I mean,
45:35whenever these
45:35guys talk of
45:36peace, I start
45:37getting suspicious
45:38that there is
45:39something going
45:39on.
45:40But I just
45:41want to say
45:41one thing.
45:42See, when
45:43there are people
45:44here who have
45:45been talking
45:45of people to
45:46people, you
45:46know, there
45:47should be some
45:47contacts.
45:48I don't think
45:49this is what
45:49they had in
45:50mind.
45:51You know,
45:51you're talking
45:52of, you
45:53know, people
45:53with genuine
45:54causes, like,
45:55you know, say,
45:56for example, the
45:56trade room, when
45:57they stopped the
45:58trade, I think
45:59about 50,000
46:00people lost jobs.
46:01So, yeah, there
46:02are issues
46:02there, which
46:03one would like
46:04to see, you
46:05know, come
46:05back.
46:06But the real
46:06issues, I
46:07mean, you
46:07have the
46:08absolute nerve
46:09to say that
46:10we should talk
46:11about Jammu
46:12Kashmir.
46:12What on earth
46:13are you talking
46:14about?
46:14So, this
46:15particular letter
46:16is terrible.
46:18All the same,
46:20should we talk,
46:20should we have
46:21actual, genuine
46:22talks between
46:23them to make,
46:24especially, one
46:25thing I support,
46:26the media,
46:27openness between
46:28media.
46:28Let them
46:29understand the
46:29lies that their
46:30own regime is
46:31talking.
46:32If they can
46:33get access to
46:34what, a lot
46:35more information,
46:37they will also
46:38understand.
46:38They don't have
46:39much faith in
46:39the Pakistan
46:40army.
46:40There is a
46:41lot of people
46:42there are fed
46:42up of them.
46:43So, we need to...
46:44Tendous Waters
46:45Treaty, Sandeep,
46:46that is suddenly
46:47mentioned.
46:48Pakistan is
46:49saying we'll
46:49chop off their
46:50hands, that's
46:50giving us that
46:51nuclear bogey,
46:52which incidentally
46:53had been called
46:53out during
46:54Operation Sindhur.
46:55Very clearly,
46:56Pakistan, it
46:57seems, hasn't
46:58been able to
46:58read Prime
46:59Minister Narendra
47:00Modi's mind
47:00effectively, unless
47:02they're trying to
47:03mount, you know,
47:04pressure from
47:05multi-pronged
47:06attack, that
47:06India will succumb
47:07and agree to
47:08dialogue with
47:09Pakistan.
47:09You know, they're
47:10saying RSS wants
47:11dialogue, then
47:11they're saying, you
47:13know, civil society
47:13wants dialogue, US
47:15is putting pressure
47:15on dialogue, so
47:16India will relent
47:17and have dialogue,
47:18Sandeep.
47:19Absolutely, Gaurav.
47:19You know, this is
47:20the Pakistan army
47:21looking for a new
47:23plot after Prime
47:24Minister Modi called
47:25out Pakistan's
47:26state sponsorship
47:27of terror in May
47:282025.
47:30And he warned
47:31that there would
47:32be new red lines
47:33and the fact that
47:34there was no
47:35non-state and
47:36state actor
47:37business that this
47:38nonsense that has
47:39been going to
47:39on for four
47:40decades, what
47:40Manish Diwari
47:41mentioned earlier
47:42on in your show,
47:43that has been
47:44called out for the
47:45first time in four
47:46decades, Gaurav.
47:47Nuclear blackmail
47:48has been called
47:49out.
47:49Now, this is the
47:50Pakistan army now
47:51scrambling for
47:52new, you know,
47:54a new playlist,
47:56you know, a new
47:56script.
47:57They want a
47:58breather.
47:59India's breathing
48:00down their necks,
48:01so is Afghanistan
48:01and the trouble
48:02with it.
48:03IWP as a way
48:04out of this.
48:05For their own
48:06water mismanagement,
48:07Gaurav.
48:07This has been
48:08documented by
48:10several agencies,
48:11global agencies,
48:12the World Bank.
48:14Pakistan's water
48:14problems are its
48:15own problems of
48:16water mismanagement.
48:18They're trying to
48:18pin the blame for
48:20their mismanagement
48:21of water, the fact
48:22that they have one
48:22of the lowest per
48:23capita water storage
48:25anywhere in the
48:25world.
48:26They are a water
48:27stressed country
48:28because of their
48:28own misdeeds.
48:30The fact that
48:31they're diverting
48:32all of their
48:32resources to build
48:34nuclear weapons,
48:35they want to eat
48:36grass but have
48:37nuclear weapons
48:38but not build
48:39reservoirs to
48:41look at their
48:42agriculture which
48:43accounts for 90%
48:44of their water.
48:45So the last 30
48:47seconds that I have
48:47on this part of the
48:48show and I just
48:49want a yes-no
48:49answer.
48:50You know,
48:51Pakistan claimed
48:52that there was
48:53track 2 happening,
48:54track 1.5
48:54happening.
48:55The Foreign
48:56Secretary,
48:56Vikram Misri,
48:57he made it very
48:57clear that there is
48:58no track 2,
48:59there is no track
49:001.5.
49:00These are all
49:01private bodies.
49:01They may be doing
49:02whatever they want.
49:03They're not speaking
49:03for Government of
49:04India.
49:04Should there be
49:05track 2 or 1.5
49:06with Pakistan?
49:07General Pandey,
49:08yes or no?
49:11No.
49:12Dr. Tarakartha,
49:13yes or no?
49:14They need to
49:14dismantle their
49:14terror infrastructure.
49:16Dismantle terror
49:17first.
49:18Dr. Tarakartha.
49:19I absolutely agree
49:20with General Pandey.
49:21You can't talk to
49:22these guys.
49:23Sandeepunitan.
49:25Talks and terror
49:26cannot go hand in
49:27hand, Doruk.
49:27As simple as that.
49:29Clearly,
49:30the people of
49:31India have spoken
49:32and remember
49:33the Indian
49:34Armed Forces
49:35they'd also
49:36quoted,
49:36you know,
49:38Director General
49:39Air Ops
49:39had quoted
49:40Ramcharit Manas.
49:41The Prime Minister
49:42has been quoting
49:43Indian philosophy
49:44and way of life
49:45repeatedly.
49:46I want to thank
49:46all my guests
49:47but do keep
49:48one thing in mind.
49:50India is very
49:51clear.
50:02And what does
50:03this mean?
50:04This means
50:04that even
50:06Lord Ram
50:06for three days
50:07with folded
50:08hands,
50:08he begged
50:10the sea
50:10to give him
50:11way so that
50:12he could go
50:12to Sri Lanka
50:13and bring back
50:15Masita.
50:15But the sea
50:16didn't part ways
50:17and then he
50:17pulled out his
50:17bow and arrow
50:18and the sea
50:19came hands
50:20folded.
50:20You show
50:21strength,
50:23anybody relents.
50:24You are weak,
50:26people don't
50:27take you seriously.
50:28Rashtra Kaveh
50:29Ramdhari Singh
50:29Dinkar
50:30has also
50:31said this.
50:32We'll talk
50:33about this
50:33in greater detail
50:34but there's
50:34more breaking
50:35news that's
50:35coming in.
50:39The government
50:40is all set
50:40to examine
50:41WhatsApp's
50:42upcoming
50:42username
50:43feature
50:43over concerns
50:44that it could
50:45be misused
50:46for online
50:47fraud.
50:48Sources are
50:48telling India
50:49today that
50:49the government
50:50officials will
50:52now review
50:53the privacy
50:54policy.
50:54They will
50:55also look at
50:56privacy and
50:57security
50:58implications
50:59and Meta
51:00could be
51:00sent a notice
51:01if irregularities
51:04are found.
51:05The government
51:05has now directed
51:06Meta to furnish
51:07a detailed
51:08explanation on
51:09the usernames
51:10feature.
51:11They've been
51:11given three days
51:12to respond and
51:13not to roll
51:14out the
51:15username feature
51:16in India
51:17until consultations
51:18on this matter
51:19are completed.
51:21If any
51:21irregularities
51:22are found
51:23during the
51:23review,
51:24the government
51:25could then
51:26take further
51:27action on
51:28this.
51:28I quickly
51:29want to bring
51:30in Himanshu
51:31Mishra
51:31for more
51:32on this.
51:33Himanshu,
51:34what do you think
51:34of the government
51:35does?
51:35are going to do?
51:37The government
51:40has a new
51:42feature of
51:43the user ID
51:43which is
51:46investigating
51:47all the
51:48features.
51:49They are
51:50made
51:50a notice
51:51and
51:5272
51:52hours
51:54The government has given the time to answer the question and the government has cleared the data
51:59that in 72 hours and the government will not be clear at all,
52:06the user ID features will be closed.
52:10It will not be further than any other way and it will not go to the user.
52:15A big thing is that the government thinks that the privacy of the government is the right.
52:22That is why the government has taken action.
52:24This is a big step.
52:27Meta has launched the user ID on WhatsApp.
52:30The government wants to answer the question.
52:35The government wants to answer the question.
52:37If it is 72 hours, the government can do a great job.
52:40If you want to make a look at this,
52:43then I will have a lot.
52:46I now want to shift focus to our image of the day.
52:51The Indian Army has a new chief, but I want to show you a different aspect.
52:56That is the chief of the Army staff, General Dhiraj Seth,
53:00who reviewed the Guard of Honor and then watched that image.
53:04That's his father, Lieutenant General K.M. Seth.
53:06He is a retired Indian Army veteran, a three-star general.
53:09General Dhiraj Seth is now a four-star general.
53:11But look at that other image.
53:12That's his brother, Rear Admiral Ravneesh Seth.
53:15He is an Indian Navy official, a rear admiral.
53:18So, he saluted his brother, who is now the Indian Army chief.
53:21He is saluted back.
53:22But look at this valor in one family.
53:26The father is a three-star general.
53:29The son is now a four-star general.
53:31And the other younger brother or the younger son is a two-star Navy admiral.
53:38This is the Indian Armed Forces for you.
53:42Countless families who've dedicated their entire life for the dedication,
53:47the service of Mother India.
53:50Veertha or Vivek.
53:52I leave you with these images.
53:55That is all I have for you on India First this evening.
53:57Many thanks for watching.
53:58Jai Hind.
54:07Can I introduce you to you?
54:08No.
54:10Just a little back stuff.
Comments