economist wants india to give kashmir to pakistan

jan 15th, 2007

very well. let's say their arguments are valid.

so why didnt they give their colony of northern ireland to the irish republican army then?

good for the goose is not good for the gander. double-standards, eh? bloody limeys!

http://www.economist.com/daily/columns/asiaview/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8513648&fsrc=nwl

as reader shahryar noted:

Excerpt from Lessons of the Northern Ireland Peace Process

Lesson #1 is that the state must defend itself at all costs


The state must demonstrate its staying power against those who challenge it with violence. Once a terrorist campaign has been launched, the government has no choice but to oppose it with all available resources. The state must demonstrate that it retains a monopoly on the legitimate use of force. This right, which inheres to every state, cannot be challenged by any non-state actors, especially terrorists. And the state has to sustain this policy, which is really a case of political willpower, over a period of years.


Without a demonstration of the government's stamina to prosecute the war, the state would cede its authority and cease to exist. The group in opposition would simply triumph by force of arms. There may be peace, of a sort, but it would be a false peace -- and certainly not a peace process.


As we know, the British government proved it would not be cowed, but would instead respond forcefully to the IRA. Over a period of years, the message became clear. Try as it might, the IRA could not drive the British from Northern Ireland.