Originally Posted by BANFAN
Who will assure us and why should we believe the party in question on that? We have to weigh out risks and benefits and make our decision.
And actually what risk do we anticipate? Dropping guns? Agents? Or dorpping Harmful objects inside BD? I'm not really clear about the threat. I don't see any extra threat what they can't do now, that they can do through transit?
IMO, Transit should be viewed completely from an economic point of view, no point assuming fictitious threats. If Europe could amidst all the differences, why can't we? If GCC can why can't we? If Africa can why can't we? .... In fact a country surrounded on three sides by another with a potential of a billion consumers, we are really missuing out on such a huge market that could be so easily accessible. But we should make the deals on equal and mutual benefit basis and come out of inferiority complexes. We should't hesitate to take tit for tat actions to keep India tied to their agreements.
If some people are scared of Indian military power, they must know that India doesn't afford to have another troubled border on the East, nor they have that capacity. So to position ourselves on a equal platform, we shouldn't be only asking for thing, we should also be ready to give. And whatever you give can form very strong burgaining tools in the long term. And nothing is unconditional in this world except true love, which is a rare commodity these days....
So I think we should proceed with the transit without doubt, and BAL should publish the draft so that they can incorporate reasonable concerns from the people and experts, to make the best possible deal.
any deal we make is going to be made on Indian terms, so we will never get a fair deal. that is the law of the world. but we must be willing to cut our losses instead of bending over backwards to someone just because they happen to be our ideological butt-buddy.
as Doc said, unless we know about all the details there is no way any rational person can say "this is a great deal" those who have said so with surety are probably nothing more or less than "reverse razakars" whose allegiences lie elsewhere.
the fact that the neighbor's behavior usually occilates between downright hostility and condescending acceptance lends on to predict with reasonable certainty that any deal made would be a huge rip off. there is no hard and fast evidence (ie details of the deals) but common sense indicates that we don't stand to benefit.
the fact that a moral right (water issues) is tied to a convenience (transit) is further fact that the deal is lopsided to begin with. we must negotiate with every tool we have and transit is one of them.