This article is painfully inconsistent. It is clear that the Pakistani state has failed to protect both its own citizens (of which magnitudes more are killed every year compared to cross border terrorism), and encouraged terrorism in India as well -- there is simply no other way for a terrorist group to live and operate out of India. Therefore, terrorist groups in Pakistan survive either as a result of government incompetence, or active encouragement, either of which justifies retaliation from India. It is a fair question to ask who or what have the Indian army targeted, but to suggest the innocence of the Pakistani establishment is quite silly.
The article also suggests that the attacks are a result of Kashmiri dissatisfaction with the Indian state. There are deep insecurities between the Kashmiri people and the Indian state. However, most Kashmiris rely on the development of the Indian state for their wellbeing, not the terrorists or the Pakistani state. Now, after having recognized that (and the absolute domination of the Indian army on Kashmir -- which the article alludes), why would any Kashmiri attempt to cause more chaos and confusion -- a worse outcome for every one of his fellow Kashmiris?
I found the article very balanced, criticizing as it does both India and Pakistan for the conflict. This seems fair to me, given Pakistan's well-known connections to terrorist groups and Modi's deliberate ratcheting up of nationalist tensions.
I have read conspiracy theories claiming China and even Russia are teaming up with Pakistan to destabilize India to reduce the movement of industry from China to India
This article is painfully inconsistent. It is clear that the Pakistani state has failed to protect both its own citizens (of which magnitudes more are killed every year compared to cross border terrorism), and encouraged terrorism in India as well -- there is simply no other way for a terrorist group to live and operate out of India. Therefore, terrorist groups in Pakistan survive either as a result of government incompetence, or active encouragement, either of which justifies retaliation from India. It is a fair question to ask who or what have the Indian army targeted, but to suggest the innocence of the Pakistani establishment is quite silly.
The article also suggests that the attacks are a result of Kashmiri dissatisfaction with the Indian state. There are deep insecurities between the Kashmiri people and the Indian state. However, most Kashmiris rely on the development of the Indian state for their wellbeing, not the terrorists or the Pakistani state. Now, after having recognized that (and the absolute domination of the Indian army on Kashmir -- which the article alludes), why would any Kashmiri attempt to cause more chaos and confusion -- a worse outcome for every one of his fellow Kashmiris?
I found the article very balanced, criticizing as it does both India and Pakistan for the conflict. This seems fair to me, given Pakistan's well-known connections to terrorist groups and Modi's deliberate ratcheting up of nationalist tensions.
I have read conspiracy theories claiming China and even Russia are teaming up with Pakistan to destabilize India to reduce the movement of industry from China to India
Good balanced reporting without blaming Trump for anything... yet. Thank you.
UNbalanced comment name checking your Lord and Savior Donald Trump yet again.