It was no surprise that the meeting between the Pakistan and Indian Foreign Secretaries ended in impasse. India had agreed to the meeting under US pressure. It made a virtue of necessity by projecting its agreement to the meeting as a bold attempt by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to normalize relations with Pakistan despite public opposition in India. 
But, India did not move an inch from its position that the talks only cover terrorism, specifically the demand that Pakistan punish the alleged organizers of the Mumbai attacks, even without evidence that would hold up in a court of law. Only thus, said India, would confidence be built  Read full content.......

Process’ is about catalysing change. Even if does not yield the expected results, a process is important since it contributes to the upstaging of many long-held fixations. Take, for example, President Obama. Who would have thought a decade ago that an African-American would be US president? 
The terrorists who carried out the carnage in Mumbai and other equally outrageous acts in Pakistan should know that it is impossible to keep change hostage, even to odious rage. A subtle generational change is taking place in South Asia. It is propelled by rising income levels, access to technology, increased connectivity and choices in a globalising  Read full content.......

LAHORE - The penny appears to have finally dropped. Diplomatic niceties aside, the media in the United States, at least, have concluded that the positions India and Pakistan have adopted on their differences are much too hardened to be resolved bilaterally.
Two of the most influential journals in America, the New York Times and the Christian Science Monitor, independently ran editorials on February 26 highlighting this fact while openly calling for US intervention.
The New York Times editorial, titled "India and Pakistan (Barely) talk", argued for "nudging the two sides harder". Meanwhile, the Christian Read full content.......

The United States is sharply expanding its weapons sales to both India and Pakistan in a apparent bid to gain influence in both South Asian countries while “creating new opportunities for American defence firms” a report in a major US newspaper said on Thursday. 
The report appeared in The Wall Street Journal as foreign secretaries of the two South Asian nations met in New Delhi to ease tensions in the sub-continent. 
“The US has sought to remain neutral in the thorny relationship between the nuclear-armed neighbours,” the Journal said, while pointing out that Washington hasn’t been shy about pursuing weapons deals in the region. Read full content.......

Russia’s new military doctrine starts with a list of “military dangers” that includes NATO’s attempt to bring its military infrastructure closer to Russia’s borders and to add new members. 
In contrast to the 2000 military doctrine, which referred vaguely to “the expansion of military blocs and unions to the detriment of Russia’s security,” the 2010 doctrine was more specific. On the other hand, in 2000, NATO expansion was seen as an unequivocal threat, whereas in the 2010 doctrine the alliance is no longer described as a “threat” but as a “danger” that “under certain conditions” could lead to the “appearance of a military threat.”  Read full content.......

On the relatively rare occasions when the media turns its attention to U.S. weapons sales abroad and shines its not-so-bright spotlight on the latest set of facts and figures, it invariably speaks of “the global arms trade.” 
Let’s consider that label for a moment, word by word: 
*It is global, since there are few places on the planet that lie beyond the reach of the weapons industry. 
*Arms sound so old-fashioned and anodyne when what we’re talking about is advanced technology designed to kill and maim. 
*And trade suggests a give and take among many Read full content.......