If Pakistan had not accepted the demand to stop cross-border infiltration and the United States had not conveyed to us Pakistan's guarantee to do so, then nothing could have stopped a war.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
A war with Pakistan would be an utter disaster.
Pakistan is not a rogue state, but it harbours and covertly supports rogue elements. While war is not the answer, hard or coercive diplomacy could be.
I'm a big defense hawk and a big fiscal conservative, but in this case, Pakistan continues to imprison the man who gave us Osama bin Laden and continue to have a major ideological bent within the middle echelons of their government that, I think, should cause all of us pause given the size and nature of their nuclear arsenal.
In the 1950s, Pakistan allied with the United States in something called the Central Treaty Organization. We were lined up with, at that time, Iran, ruled by the Shah, and Pakistan and Turkey as a southward shield against Soviet expansion toward the warm waters of the Indian Ocean and the Persian Gulf. It was part of the containment strategy.
You must keep in mind that Pakistan has suffered the aftermaths of the Cold War, and that Cold War had left deep imprints on our society. We were the worst sufferers from the ills of the Afghan war.
Pakistan will never be able to match the Indian militarily, and the effort to do so is taking an immense toll on the society.
There never was a war that was not inward.
Pakistan is not a unified country.
We believe that the United States and the rest of the international community can play a useful role by exerting influence on Pakistan to put a permanent and visible end to cross-border terrorism against India.
The overwhelming public sentiment in India was that no meaningful dialogue can be held with Pakistan until it abandons the use of terrorism as an instrument of its foreign policy.
No opposing quotes found.