Open Letter to MEA over Pak min’s callous remark


15th December’ 2012



The Minister of External Affairs – India,

New Delhi


Subject: Pakistan’s Interior minister Rehman Malik’s callous remark on Capt. Kalia.


Mr. Khurseed,


On the Death Anniversary of Hon’able Shri Sardar Vallabh bhai Patel, the real architect of Independent India, I write this letter with deep anguish over the callous remark made by Mr. Rehman Malik, Interior Minister of Pakistan, on his visit to India on 14th December’ 2012 and the eloquent silence of India’s external affairs minister and ministry over the same.


Mr. Malik, Interior minister of Pakistan who is on Indian tour, on invitation by your government, has issued vile statements on Indo-Pak relations, terrorism, and on issue of martyrdom of Captain Saurabh Kalia among others. The statements make mockery of Indian soldiers and our sentiments.


Pakistan’s Interior Minister has insulted the death of Captain Kalia by suggesting that cold weather could be the reason for our brave soldier’s death instead of cold blooded brutality engineered by Pakistani soldiers or terrorists, who are sponsored by Pakistani army / establishment, which were used against Indian soldiers during Kargil war in 1999. The minister also suggested that India has not raised the formal complaint with Pakistan.


Even more distressing is the fact that the India’ external minister and his ministry has not issued even a token statement of protest or presented the facts through press release to set the record straight. It is also disgusting to note that the External Ministry has not demanded any explanation from Pakistan Minister over his statements.


The lies of Pakistan Minister were exposed by Mr. Kanchan Gupta (Former Media Advisor to PM during 1998 – 2004), on micro-blogging site, Twitter. Mr. Gupta mentioned that formal complaint on Captain Kalia’s death was lodged with Pakistan establishment in 1999 and also at three different meetings the issue was raised until May 2004.


Any peace talks with the adversary nation conducted at the cost of the National interest or by disrespecting the martyrdom of Indian soldier, cannot be considered as bridging the trust deficit, but instead it is outright sell-out of Indian interest to enemy nation by the meek government (with enough suspicion of ulterior motive, even if it is unproven or fictional).


As a citizen of India, I would like to demand a strong protest from India’s Minister of External Affairs, who is under constitutional oath to serve to my nation’s best interest, against Pakistan Interior Minister. Also would like to request the ministry to in a suo-moto manner, disclose the communication between Indian government and Pakistan establishment, specifically related to case of Captain Saurabh Kalia.


I request the minister and his ministry to take the cognizance of seriousness of the matter presented in this letter and also undertake a quick follow up action on the matter which is close to every Indians heart.





Jaymin Panchal

Founding Member – Ek Aur Prayaas,




P.S – Images are taken from Google Image // Hindustan Times // LUBP



Kannada Prabha did carry the above letter in its Kannada edition on 17th Dec’ 2012.

Comparisson Worth Noticing

Effectiveness of the medium is always dependent on the user, and not on beneficiary or the medium in itself. Best of the Gun can’t aim the target in hand of novice and even boomerang can hit the target with precision by a trained shooter. Rough transition to above quote can be seen by Comparing growth story of India with Growth story of its sub-set Gujarat, with a view from an INDIAN who has not lived in Gujarat for all this years in Gujarat.

Two phases almost initiated at almost similar time is been considered; a. 2004 – 2012, ManMohan Singh led UPA government as CENTRE and 2. Narendra Modi led state government of Gujarat (sub – set of India).

Early in 2004, two incidents took place in same context and both were shocking – a. The strategy of early election by NDA backfired; paving way for CONGRESS led government and b. Selection (and not election) of ManMohan Singh as Prime Minister of INDIA.
UPA came to power, and was lucky enough to be suitably placed with high growth engine cushion provided by Atal Bihari Vajpayee led NDA government, and top of it, ManMohan Singh who was perceived to be the HERO of middle-class, for the 1991 liberalization act, (which was considered to be his creation but he was rarely seen as politician but the fact remains he followed order of the then PM – PV Narsimha Rao), and thus there was High hope of deliverance with practically not high expectation from non polity entity.Now let’s look at the second scenario , In 2001, to avoid possible loss of BJP bastion – Gujarat, due to well spread perception (not entirely) about mismanaged and corruption laden rule of Keshubhai Patel; the Top brass of BJP brought certain ex-RSS pracharak, known for his organizational skills with in BJP and RSS only – Narendra Modi.
In both the above events, There was little expectation in political sense from the chosen leaders ; however, Manmohan Singh was better placed as for perceived track record of liberalisation, while Narendra Modi was not well known in political or economic scenario, mostly untested.
While initial years of ManMohan Singh were relatively easy; mostly courtesy to the foundation of high growth laid down by NDA government; on the other hand the BJP government at state of Gujarat received mega shocks in the initial years in the form highly destructive earthquake and godhra train burning ghastly incident, which unfolded with repulsive brutality and turned into communal riot and paving way for high temper runs due to it, which affected state heavily on economic terms.In ideal scenario, India as economy should have been quadrupled due to growth engines were under control of architect of Modern Indian liberalization (as economic architecture was at helm of power). While, the state already losing ground coupled with two dreadful events and economy in hands of non-tested politician; should have gone to zilch.However, over the period of time, what world noticed and also witnessed was completely different, although the initial years of Indian economy could sustained its foundation laid in pre 2004 period, but was soon on its way to get eroded (the global downturn started at the end of 2007 and early 2008) even though the control of Indian economy was in hands of well acclaimed Economist, ManMohan Singh; Not only India faced troubles economically, but India witnessed Manmohan Singh failing miserably at political and diplomatic level.

 On the other hand despite, two early shocks and unfavorable central government for majority of its tenure, the state ofGujarat flourished under the able governance of chief minister, Narendra Modi. The growth was noticed not only in statistical figures, but even by diplomatic tie-ups of the countries with Gujarat state. The state was able to showcase tangible difference, and growth in infrastructure – be it roads or power or agriculture.This aspect of comparison is generally missed even while comparison of India as a country with Gujarat as a state is on rampage across any political / economy debate pertaining to India happens. Not with the picture perfect similarity, but almost during resembling tenure and faintly correlating effects of different events; but the result on India and Gujarat are completely at extremes. The details and statistics is intentionally kept at bay in this opening remark, while setting the platform for discussion. 

The main point remains, ManMohan Singh started the race, with factors favorable to him, and yet he was miserable disappointment on the other hand Narendra Modi was laden with heavy backlog and initial years disater; yet he covered the race miles ahead











P.s – the pictures taken from google image || Outlook article || blog post of Kim Aivery; Dick Mac || n other news post