Are you into zodiac signs? If you have heard the name ‘Linda Goodman’, you probably are. So then you would know things like those born in April-May are called Taureans and their sign is the bull because they are supposedly very stubborn. If India and Pakistan were to have sun-signs, India would probably be a Taurean and Pakistan is Leo since we know the actual birth date of the country – August 1947.
“Leos have a huge and fragile ego, which often gets hurt over trivial matters. Their ego sometimes become a hurdle in their path to success”, sound like Pakistan? Yeah, right.
“Although easy going and respectful, the Taurus can be unbelievably stubborn and inflexible in their approach. So much so that when the logical arguments don’t suit them, they will just refuse to listen!” – that is India right there.
Art courtesy: http://hime1999.deviantart.com/
If you follow news, you may have an inkling of the whole India-Pak NSA level talks drama that has been covered crazily in both the Indian and the Pakistani media since yesterday. India was massively upset with the fact that Mr Sartaj Aziz who is the national security advisor of Pakistan, wanted to hold talks with separatists in India, while on a visit to the nation to hold talks with his Indian counterpart Ajit Doval.
The separatists in India are in favor of secession of the state of Jammu and Kashmir from India, something the Indian govt would never want. And the fact that an important Pakistani representative like Aziz would want to entertain such people is obviously very disconcerting for the Govt. But that is something that the Pakistanis have almost always done. But this time India took a very hard stand and warned Pak that if it held any kind of a dialogue with the separatists, it would mean that it was not committed to maintaining peace between the two countries.
Pakistan decided to get ‘deeply disappointed’ with the fact the India wanted to hold talks with ‘pre-conditions’ and thus called off the talks.
And the common man in India is wondering what the hell is wrong with the two countries. Sure, the fact that someone wants to hold talks with people you do not like is upsetting, but does that mean you put a juvenile condition like “hey if you talk to them, we will not talk to you”.
It makes one wonder if the countries were ever serious about holding any talks in the first place. India’s condition that only terrorism be discussed and Kashmir not – is ridiculous. How can India discuss terrorism with Pakistan, without bringing up Kashmir in the ensuing dialogue. That’s like deciding to discuss World War with a pre-condition that Germany would not be mentioned.
India kept hammering the fact that it would not tolerate Aziz talking with separatists. So while India was being bullish, did Pakistan really have to cancel talks just because of that one reason?