I write in response to your editorial, “Worrying over a sandcastle” (Mint, 2 March). I feel the need to record my cause for worry: We live in close proximity to very violent neighbours—our strategic rapprochement with the US has converted us into a surrogate target for the US. What amazes me is that the national security adviser engaged in negotiating the nuclear deal did not foresee this change in perceptions of our neighbours. The new reality needs to be accepted and a preventive security plan should be put in place. We also need to undertake a serious review of our internal and external security. The need now is to move from a disaster management regime to a disaster prevention regime. These are the new imperatives of the present-day statecraft.
— M.M. Kapur
Sri Lanka, which had been invited to Pakistan after India pulled out, paid for its stupidity in Lahore, where its players where attacked by terrorists on Tuesday.
India had repeatedly warned that Pakistan is not safe for cricket, but unfortunately the Sri Lankan cricket board ignored India’s warning and sent players to that terrorist nation, when the world knows where the militants come from.
Now, on the third day the match had to be abandoned due to terror attacks.
It reflects adversely on the capability of the Pakistani government to provide adequate security to sportspersons: Six Sri Lankan players and a Pakistani umpire, Ahsan Raza, have been seriously injured.
The International Cricket Council should immediately order other cricket-playing countries to isolate Pakistan, at least in Pakistan, until they have eliminated terrorism in their land.
Pakistani television channels showed footage of gunmen with rifles and backpacks running through the streets and firing on unidentified vehicles, almost in a copycat manner with the Mumbai 26/11 attacks. It’s high time to act. Pakistan should accept the reality and accept India’s suggestion to destroy terror outfits mushrooming on its soil.
The attacks should also serve as an eye-opener to all countries that are friendly to Pakistan, including China, that India is not biased against their friend, but merely a concerned neighbour.
— Bidyut Kumar Chatterjee
Namita Bhandare’s “A credible role model for Indian Muslims” (Mint, 3 March) was a good read. But I felt as if the author was trying to force her views on the public.
Just because A.R. Rahman visited a dargah after returning to India and thanked God after his award doesn’t make him a better representative than others such as Aamir Khan whom Bhandare has rejected as a good role model.
Rahman was a Hindu till 21, and spent much of his struggle as a Hindu, something that prevents the Muslim community from embracing him from its heart, though on the surface they would be jubilant for his achievements.
And I seriously object to Bhandare saying Jai ho as the new anthem. Let us not hype this average song. Western audiences may love this song, but we Indians know that we have much more touching songs than this one produced by Rahman and other Indian musicians.
— Kumar Rahul
I agree with S. Narayan (“Will the stimuli work?” Mint, 2 March) that agriculture debt waiver, greater allocation for the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, more subsidies and pay increase to government staff did not contribute to economic growth.
The idea of placing a large order to NTPC Ltd and Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd in one go could have been a booster, something which we did not think about even after tracking this industry for a decade.
— Prasad Dahapute