Mr. Shinde’s Half-truths to Deceive! by Rajinder Puri SignUp
Boloji.com

Channels

In Focus

 
Analysis
Cartoons
Education
Environment
Opinion
Photo Essays
 
 

Columns

 
Business
Random Thoughts
 
 

Our Heritage

 
Architecture
Astrology
Ayurveda
Buddhism
Cinema
Culture
Festivals
Hinduism
History
People
Places
Sikhism
Spirituality
 
 

Society & Lifestyle

 
Health
Parenting
Perspective
Recipes
Society
Teens
Women
 
 

Creative Writings

 
Book Reviews
Computing
Humor
Individuality
Literary Shelf
Memoirs
Quotes
Stories
Travelogues
Workshop
 
 
Analysis Share This Page
Mr. Shinde’s Half-truths to Deceive!
by Dr. Rajinder Puri Bookmark and Share

Home Minister Mr. Sushil Kumar Shinde posed as a tough adversary of his Pakistani counterpart Interior Minister Mr. Abdul Rehman Malik who recently visited India. Mr. Shinde rebutted Mr. Malik. He informed Lok Sabha on Monday that Pakistan had not arrested Hafiz Saeed for the 26/11 terror as Mr. Malik had claimed. Mr. Shinde told the House:

“Mr. Rehman Malik has been telling us repeatedly that he had arrested Mr. Hafiz Saeed thrice and that on each occasion, he was let off by the courts for lack of evidence…From the papers given to us, it is clear that the detention of Shri Hafiz Saeed… were for other reasons and not for his role as a conspirator in the 26/11 attack.”

Tough words to please the Indian public! But Mr. Shinde’s statement hides more than it reveals. He did not inform the House the reasons adduced from the papers procured by his ministry for which Hafiz Saeed had been arrested. Mr. Shinde had good reason to be coy about revealing this.

The Pakistan government arrested Hafiz Saeed following the UN Security Council Resolution imposing sanctions against him. The UN sanctions were covered by Security Council resolution 1267. The UN invoked Resolution 1267 against Saeed and his partners for, among other acts, the February 2007 bombing of the Samjhauta Express train in Panipat, India. The accomplices of Hafiz Saeed who perpetrated the Samjhauta Express bomb blast were all identified by the UN. It was under American pressure that Pakistan arrested Hafiz Saeed for his role in the Samjhauta Express terror. The court released him. Under renewed American pressure he was again arrested. The ding-dong tussle over Hafiz Saeed between Washington and Islamabad continued as the US pressured Pakistan to honour UN sanctions. In 2010 Islamabad successfully persuaded China to exercise its UN veto to prevent sanctions against Saeed. Subsequently the US Treasury Department announced its own reward for information to nail Saeed.

In the light of this background was Mr. Shinde revealing to parliament how Pakistan had not arrested Hafiz Saeed for the 26/11 attack, or was he covering up the fact that Hafiz Saeed had been arrested for the Samjhauta Express blast?

In a media interview yesterday Mr. Shinde’s colleague, Foreign Minister Mr. Salman Khurshid responding to Mr. Rehman’s recent visit said:

“So what if Samjhauta happened…what has that got to do with Mumbai?”

It is a given of course that Hindu terrorists apart from their other acts of terror also perpetrated the Samjhauta Express terror. The protests of the accused that police pressure was exerted to extract confessions on the Samjhauta case may be discounted. Let Pakistan deal with 26/11 while India deals with Samjhauta. Both nations are on the same page. That seems to be the name of the game.

Share This:
18-Dec-2012
More by :  Dr. Rajinder Puri
 
Views: 966      Comments: 1

Comments on this Article

Comment Dear Sir,

Why to dilute the intensitiy of sin committed by UPA-1 ?

What gain do UPA politicians get by putting India at same platform with Pakistan on international terrorism ? Almost nothing.

What gain UPA politicians get by tarnishing image of majority community by cooking up names of Hindu terrosists and throwing them in media ? They gain almost everything needed for them to win back next elections. Isn't such an act weaken the RSS and the BJP and hence NDA when it comes to public support ? Didn't it deviate all attention of the public from the extreme corruption spread by UPA-1 at that time ? Isn't this more probable reason than the international politics ?

So, seemingly the Samjhauta scandal has more to do with sinful domestic politics than international politics.

Dinesh
12/19/2012 05:31 AM




Name *
Email ID
 (will not be published)
Comment *
Characters
Verification Code*
Can't read? Reload
Please fill the above code for verification.
 
Top | Analysis



 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1999-2019 All Rights Reserved
 
No part of this Internet site may be reproduced without prior written permission of the copyright holder
.