India's Sinister Designs

President Musharraf may be sincere in holding elections in the coming October. The government machinery is working overtime to meet the deadline but the Indian stance could hinder the holding of elections. Moreover, the United States' present policy regarding the subcontinent would only help India. On several occasions, US officials have advised Pakistan to stay on their side. Recently the US Deputy Secretary of State praised Gen Musharraf and said: "At the moment General Musharraf is on the right side." The praise was nothing more than a warning sign for him. The present crisis is so real that if for some reason President Musharraf decides to go against the US interest in the region, war will be imposed on Pakistan by both India and the US. India has the following reasons to go to war with Pakistan: The Indian armed forces are highly demoralized due to their continuous aggressive posture on the international borders and the line of control (LoC) in Kashmir. Hasty decision by the administration to mobilize a million troops on the international borders is hitting the military establishment. Officers in the Indian army are questioning the logic behind the whole exercise if there is no attack, even a limited one. Politically, Prime Minister Vajpayee draws his power from fundamentalist Hindus and extremists who wish to see Pakistan weak. In addition, pressure from cabinet ministers has further contributed towards the war hysteria. India is not likely to remove its armed forces from the international borders without waging a war. Therefore, as Pakistanis, we should stay awake and be prepared to defend our great nation.

Shazib Hameed Lahore

These days PTV is running a campaign for the collection of TV licence fees. In this regard, I would like the PTV accounts department to clarify to the public if they are really going to save something after spending so much on their collection drive. They may answer the following: 1. How much revenue is being collected annually by PTV through the sale of TV licences? 2. How much expenditure is incurred on:a) printing of TV licence forms, b) media publicity for the payment of TV licence fee, c) payment made to the private company for the contract of TV licence sale, d) commission paid to the banks and post offices selling TV licences. If the profit is too little, there is no sense in charging TV licence fee from the public. This licence may also be abolished just like those for dish antenna, VCR/VCP and radio. This would save the people from unnecessary harassment. The inspectors of Inter-Construct Private Ltd visit houses to check for TV licences in the forenoon when the male members of the families are generally not available. The main beneficiary in this game of TV licence fee seems to be the private company, which has printed its own TV licence forms and is publicizing the fact that banks and post offices are issuing licences on old forms. A clarification of all these points from PTV is urgently needed.

S.H. Zaidi ,Karachi

The Options Before Powell

During his visit to India and Pakistan this month, US Secretary of State Colin Powell has two choices before him. One is to continue to confine himself to warning both Pakistan and India against going to war with each other, and the other is to play a more active and mediatory role in regard to Kashmir by initiating a peace process. This can take the shape of a quadrilateral dialogue - US, India, Pakistan and Kashmir - or an appropriate use of the newly-developed procedures and mechanics at the United Nations. The US by itself or through the UN would supply the catalyst that is needed for a settlement. It is interesting to note that when the Kashmir dispute erupted in 1947-48, the United States championed the stand that the future status of Kashmir must be determined by the will of the people of the territory and that their wishes must be ascertained under the supervision and control of the United Nations. The US was a principal sponsor of the resolution which was adopted by the Security Council on April 21, 1948, and which was based on that unchallenged principle. The basic formula for settlement was incorporated in the later resolutions. The urgent necessities are: (a) To demilitarize the arena of conflict - the state of Jammu and Kashmir - through a phased withdrawal of troops (including paramilitary forces) of both India and Pakistan from the area under their respective control. (b) To take the sting out of the dispute by detaching moves towards demilitarization of the state from the rights, claims or recognized positions of the three parties involved. In order to do this, it might be necessary to make the demilitarization of state the first step towards the reduction of Indian and Pakistani forces on their borders outside of Kashmir. It is after the peace-process is set afoot that the rights and claims of the parties can be considered in a on-violent atmosphere. Such an initiative by the United States on Kashmir will not only end bloodshed and suffering in Kashmir, but would also have a direct and positive effect on international security by eliminating regional fighting, national tensions and the risk of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan. It is in everyone's interest to settle the Kashmir conflict peacefully without further delay.

Dr Ghulam Nabi Fai Karachi