not sure you call it a obsession if you have fought multiple war in past. hey we cannot get over our "obsession" with cuba. If you do not recognize security interests of neighbor, it just complicates things. I can see why pakistani do not trust u.s. They are constantly put down as "failed state" or told to look at "success" of India with 700 million poor simply because some economic stagnation because of war.

Has Hindoo India ended its Illegal Occupation of Kashmirh; has Hindoo India removed its dams restricting water flowing in the rivers of Pakistan; has Hindoo India compensated for its criminal training of Mukhti Bahani terrorists and the loss of East Pakistan due to Hindoo Indian invasion; has Hindoo India vacated the illegally occupied Junagarh, Manavader and Hyderabad Deccan that legally are Pakistani territory.

Harvard paper on Hindoo India’s Cold Start Doctrine against Pakistan; one wonders why Hillary Clinton glibly calls it “Pakistan’s Paranoia” – A Cold Start for Hot Wars? The Indian Army’s New Limited War Doctrine by Walter C. Ladwig III

Read the article here: http:// lalqila.wordpress.com/2010/05/09/harvard-paper-on-hindoo-indias-cold-start-doctrine-a-cold-start-for-hot-wars-the-indian-army%e2%80%99s-new-limited-war-doctrine-by-walter-c-ladwig-iii/

@FP23233

USA can afford to be "obsessed" with Cuba if it wants too. Last I heard, we were not starving our population or exporting terror because of our "obsession" with Cuba. That is the main difference.

You can say whatever you want to but so far India has not been exporting terrorism. Nor have I heard anyone call it a "failed state". Maybe there is a reason they are told to look at India as an example?

While I am all for recognizing security interests of a country, when those "security interests" start threatening the "security interests" of countries that are halfway across the globe from it, maybe it is time to introspect? I would think that would be common sense.

Thank you for a very interesting and informative posting. Yes, if Pakistan did not feel it had been left to defend itself (however paranoid that may or may not be) as we pulled out of the region after the Soviets left Afghanistan, then they would not still be considering the Taliban as potential allies. Although they have been increasingly threatening the government (as we have been increasingly striking with drones across the border), the Taliban do share tribal ties with much of Pakistan (including many in the ISI), which thus still hopes the Taliban will fill another vacuum, after we leave Afghanistan, potentially opening the way for influence by India (and I might add by China, economically active in Afghanistan, ironically -- since we are global economic competitors -- often under American protection).

The larger picture to me has always been the parallels between the Indian/Pakistani relationship and Israeli/Palestinian relationship. The partitions that created each in 1947, out of the waning British Empire, were largely and intentionally along ethnic and religious lines, just as we have seen in the Balkans and, to one extent or another, in Iraq, in the still-unfolding aftermath of the Ottoman Empire.

Despite no state or people being an "angel," nor another a "devil," India is much like Israel, in that it is a prospering democracy whose neighbors are undemocratic and unprospering, with Islamic extremists in their midst, pledging and enacting terror against their more "Westernized" (globalized) neighbor.

Of course, the "wild card" is that the Palestinians, unlike the Pakistanis, have no nuclear weapons, as do both of the democracies.

Ultimately, guarantees of security for both the Pakistanis and Palestinians, with an independent and stable Afghanistan for the former and a state of their own for the latter, will go a long way towards assuaging their underlying, and to a considerable degree legitimate, concerns.

And less radicalized neighbors will be in the long-term best interest of the democracies, India and Israel -- as well as us.

This article's got bad-day-at-the-office written all over it. It reads like it's been written by Rodney King - international relations scholar. Yeah, it's be wonderful if Pakistan and India could put aside their differences and hundreds of millions of Pakistanis and Indians could join together, pick up guitars and sing 'We are the world' around the camp fire.

Also, Pakistan's GDP per capita's higher than India's according to the CIA World Factbook, a fact which might come in handy for the next FP post on India/Pakistan.

Lashker-eTaiba chief Hanif Sayeed has publicly declared that his aim is to reestablish in India the Muslim sultanate of Moguls in 15th to 18th century.

Pakistani Army and governments have created, nurtured, supported and maintained this Lashker-e-Taiba under one name or the other.

And then US government always pressures meek Indian government to turn the other cheek and bear all the terrorism perpetrated by Pakistan on India!

How delusional US government is that pressure victim rather than the terrorist! Even more how naïve and despotic Indian government is that buckles under such US pressure!

@Rahul

You may have good intentions, but if you keep flooding the comments section, people would consider that spamming (even when it is not) and no further discussion will take place. Is that what you really want?

We can keep our cards in our hands and play them one by one, can't we?