Jamaat-e-Islami’s bi-weekly Daawat (July 19), in a comment on Iran’s nuclear agreement with the P5+1, writes: “After a 22-month-long serious, important and arduous negotiation with the P5+1 group of countries, Iran has achieved an important, historic feat by getting the deal signed. This will not only remove misunderstandings about Iran’s peaceful nuclear programme, it will also lead to the end of the atrocious sanctions imposed against it.” The paper has highlighted the expression of “pride” by Iran’s President, Hassan Rouhani, and the enthusiastic endorsements by the governments of India, Pakistan, Lebanon, Iran, Kuwait, Egypt, Afghanistan, Armenia, Japan, and a cautious statement from the Saudi king emphasising the “possibilities of stability in the comity of nations in general and the region in particular”.
Editor of the daily Inquilab, Shakeel Shamsi, in his signed column on July 15, writes: “There was no need for such an agreement because Iran has always said that it is not interested in manufacturing nuclear weapons and wants to use nuclear energy for its domestic requirements. Also, there is the fatwa of Iran’s supreme religious leader, Sayyid Ali Khamenei, to the effect that manufacturing weapons of mass destruction is against Islamic tenets… Israel’s worry is that if sanctions against Iran are lifted and it enters the open market, its defence capability would be enhanced.”
Deadly scam
Noted litterateur and journalist Hasan Kamal, in his column in Rashtriya Sahara (July 18), writes: “The Vyapam scam is undoubtedly the greatest scandal of our time. The 2G and coal scandals appear dwarf-like in comparison. The depth of the scandal in the political, social and economic life of Madhya Pradesh can only be estimated… The governor’s alleged involvement indicates the high level of political personalities who may be involved… The heat of the fire of the (possible) resignation of the governor is bound to reach Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan. A political tremor in Madhya Pradesh is likely to shake the citadel of Delhi too.”
Hasan Shuja, the editor of the daily Sahafat, writes on July 14: “This scam is being regarded as best-organised operation in independent India, but the slow progress of the investigation is enough evidence that government officials and investigative agencies have no urgency to get to the bottom of the matter… Scams in admissions and recruitment are not uncommon but the deaths of many accused and witnesses have taken it beyond limits… Names of former RSS chief K.S. Sudarshan and its senior leader, Suresh Soni, have also been mentioned…”
Pak pot simmers
In a July 20 editorial, Rashtriya Sahara argues: “Following the meeting between the Indian and Pakistani prime ministers in Russia, there was hope that relations between the two countries would once again improve. But the continuing ceasefire violations on the border and Pakistan’s evasive attitude on action against the mastermind of the terror attack on Mumbai, Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi, have dimmed the hope for the normalisation of relations… No Pakistani ruler has the courage to establish better relations with India… No solid results have come from the composite dialogue that began in 1997. There are perhaps powerful elements in both countries who do not want to see them come closer.”
The daily Hamara Samaj in its editorial on July 18 writes: “It seems that Pakistan doesn’t want the gulf between India and itself to be bridged. This is confirmed by the recent comment of Pakistan National Security Advisor Sartaj Aziz, where he repeated his stand that no dialogue with India is possible without a discussion on Kashmir. He has also demanded from India additional proof against Mumbai terror attack accused Lakhvi, while India had clearly said that adequate proof has already been provided… Now it seems it depends on Pakistan whether it chooses to shake India’s extended hand of friendship or keeps relations strained.”
Inquilab, in its July 13 editorial, writes: “There are indications that the Pakistan army does not want to move beyond trade and economic relations between the two countries, perhaps because the army thinks that its grip on Pakistan’s democratic government and national politics can remain firm only if problems persist and its superiority is maintained.”
Compiled by Seema Chishti
