Why is the PM scared?

The prime minister of India Mr. Manmohan Singh always portrays a scared figure. Whenever he appears in public or in the Parliament or even in international conferences he seems to have a complex. He is not convincing in his speeches and is always a feable person. His latest appearance in the Parliament justifying his joint statement with the Pakistan authorities, and defending it on the basis of Atal Behari Vajpayee's attituted towards Pakistan after the Kargil war, does not put him in a comfortable position. If dialogue with Pakistan was so necessary, then why did he wait all this time from 26/11. Of date Pakistan has done nothing against the masterminds of 26/11. Seiously I believe he is just a yesman of Sonia Gandhi, who in turn is another yeswoman of the American Diplomacy.

i dont so. that he appears to be scared and all. ya he is not a dynamic personality like priyanka gandhi but he has got brain. that is for sure.

That's because the PM is a finance nerd and not a stand up act. To date I have not met such a nerd with a larger than life in your face loud personality. He may not be dazzling people with speeches, but rest assured there is a brain in there and thats all that matters.

yes like he is not some one who is a very good orator like obama and all but i think he is good at his job. so lets leave him alone.

No doubt like many people have pointed out he has indeed helped with the finance section of our economy and there is definitely quite a smart brain behind it all. No, you do not have to speak as well as Obama does but neither does one have to appear to be as scared like the great Gordon Brown looks like while making speeches. I guess the whole body language makes a huge difference. It's like often if David Cameron is making a speech and he is talking a load of BS, people still lean towards him cos of the power his speech hols and the persuasiveness behind it, kinda like the will that I WILL make it happen! :) Gordon Brown can't do that because everything he seems to do backfires, so the persuasiveness and self-belief in his speeches are lacking and strangely I find that with our PM sometimes too. Almost as if he doesn't mind letting everyone else speak and just being that guy who listens to it all in the corner of the room. :S

Under attack from his critics in Parliament, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh made a spirited defence of his policy of engaging Pakistan. He has revealed a policy shaped perhaps by short-term tactical considerations, but structured within the framework of an overarching strategic vision. Critics may question his commitment to engaging Pakistan as a show of weakness, but in the long run there is, as Singh pointed out, no other option save war. Even to discuss issues of importance to India such as terror emanating from Pakistan, it requires interlocutors in Islamabad.

This is not to say that areas of concern vis-a-vis the joint statement at Sharm el-Sheikh, between the PM and his Pakistani counterpart Yousuf Raza Gilani, do not remain. The primary one is Balochistan. Singh's acquiescence to the inclusion of Balochistan in the joint statement is in keeping with his commitment to transparency and engagement. But it seems now there is little reciprocity from Islamabad. The signals being sent out by Gilani are confusing.

On the one hand, he has lauded Singh's statement in Parliament as statesmanlike. On the other, he has pandered to domestic constituents by portraying the reference to Balochistan at Sharm el-Sheikh as New Delhi's admission that it is indeed responsible for fomenting insurgency in Balochistan. The ambiguous signals emanating from Islamabad regarding supposed evidence of Indian involvement in the region are puzzling as well, given that New Delhi has repeatedly denied being provided any such proof. US special envoy to Af-Pak Richard Holbrooke has also stated that no credible proof has been offered by Islamabad.

Singh would do well to remember his own reference to Ronald Reagan's 'trust but verify' aphorism. The overall course he has charted out for India's Pakistan policy is sound. But, judging by the progress of the Balochistan issue, he should factor in the possibility that Islamabad may find gaining a tactical advantage more expedient than signing on to the larger strategic goal of peace between the two neighbours. His reaffirmation that there would be no progress without concrete returns on the terror issue is welcome in this regard, as is his focus on India's internal security mechanisms.

In the larger scheme of things, the vigorous debate in Parliament over Singh's policies is a welcome development. It has elicited a clarification that was needed and served notice that progress with regards to engaging Pakistan will not be allowed to compromise Indian interests. And in this, it sends a clear signal to Islamabad, that it cannot bank on New Delhi meeting it more than halfway each time. The administration is constrained by the need to satisfy both the public and a restive opposition. If the two countries are to have a constructive dialogue, Islamabad must play its part as well.

https://www.india-forums.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=941252&TPN=42