I agree with you about the US favoring Pakistan over India in general but I think the call for a plebiscite is THE fundamental issue here. The US used to support it formally but even dropped that about a year ago. I don't hold up the Pakistanis as well-behaved and I don't know that things wouldn't just be a mirror of what they are now had Pakistan gotten the region in '47 instead of India, but given 100,000 Indian troops patrolling the region (that was the last number I heard) and the regular executions of movement activists I imagine building an open movement would be difficult at best and I have to accept the armed guerillas as politically legitimate because of that. However I'm not an expert on Kashmir any more than on China. If you or anyone else has evidence of the US helping Pakistan in the region (aside from its general pro-Pakistan bias) then by all means I stand corrected. Expiring mind wants to know, Tavis On Thu, 14 Apr 1994, Anthony D'Costa wrote: > Quite the contrary. So far the US blunderings have always favored > Pakistan, and implicitly the Moslem Kashmiris. And look what happened to > the Pundits, the Hindu Kashmiris? They have been made refugees in their own > homeland. > > The US is primarily interested in pushing for the NPT hence the recent > announcement to supply Pakistan with F16s despite the Pressler amendment. > The US concern for human rights is a false one and based on principles that > smack of ignorance and wishful thinking. Consider the US interest in > pursuing such human rights by wanting to attach the clause of banning > products made by child labor in developing countries. All said and done > the NPT is to ensure that other countries do not emerge as competitors in > the aerospace/armaments industry and that developing countries do not > have the advantage of low wage goods. Ironically, much of > the left, liberal or otherwise, US or otherwise, in their zeal for > human rights, forget that these policies condemn > developing countries to their underdeveloped status and push the > already marginalized segments (children and their families) to further > immiserization. > > Perhaps we should re-assess what we mean by nationalism, international > socialism, and the left's vision of the unfolding world economy. > > Anthony D'Costa
