Social adaptability is the ability to get along with others whatever be their temperaments, IQ levels or social and economic status. Anyone who lacks the knack of getting along with others will be a misfit as a leader. The leader has to adjust himself suitably with different elements so that he could fit in harmoniously in a group. He has to rise above his personal likes and dislikes to accommodate the larger interests of the group. He must serve as a cohesive force to bind the group strongly as a single unit or entity.
way or the other, Pakistan has got a strong diplomatic support base in the US, which treats the former as its close partner in the war against terrorism. In spite of the fact that Pakistan has been the breeding ground as well as a refuge for a number of declared terrorists the US administration has extended its support to the Pakistan Government in curbing the tide of militancy. Thus, Pakistan has more or less secured rather clean credentials in the arena of global diplomacy. It also points to the significance of peaceful bilateral relations between the two neighbours. We are certainly superior to Pakistan in terms of military might, but a war with the latter will prove to be_nothing more than a pyrrhic victory for us because it will damage our reputation and image as a democratic, peace-loving country leaving us isolated and ostracised in the global comity of nations. Experience has shown that bilateral agreements with democratic Governments of Pakistan were torpedoed by military. Look at the fate of Shimla Agreement and Lahore Declaration. As our friend, No. 1 has referred to Mr. Narendra Modi’s sudden unannounced visit, I want to say that it may be perceived as a transformational moment for India. Nothing defines good neighbours more than Mr. Modi’s dropping in for tea to wish his Pakistani counterpart on his birthday. Pathankot airbase attack should not dampen the spirit of friendship.
Comments : No. 2 has been able to speak for the full two minutes assigned to him. He
has also shown the confidence, though rather at a belated stage, to express contrary views despite what No. 4 said earlier. Besides, No. 2 has also countered the arguments of No. 1 with fair success. He has also shown logic and reasoning in his arguments and presented them convincingly to the group. During his performance, he has been succesful in holding the attention of the ■group and gaining acceptance.’ On the other hand, he was a late starter. Overall, the candidate has not shown any negative qualities. He is able to play a dominant role after warming up. He has the ideas and influencing ability. Recommended.
No. 3 : Friends, in my opinion, the arguments presented by No. 1 seem more valid. The international situation is changing rapidly. Nothing ever remains static. This means we should keep our options open, review the situation as it develops and decide on a course of action best suited to the occasion. Nobody can overrule the Pakistani Army which has the real say in that country. The military and the Chinese influence are all powerful in Pakistan. The active support by Pakistan to terrorism in Jammu & Kashmir still continues. As per a peace package offered by the then Prime Minister, Mr. Atal Bihari Vajpayee on October 22, 2003 on the eve of Diwali and followed by former External Affairs Minister under the UPA, Mr. Natwar Singh, Pakistan had resumed diplomatic ties, Delhi-Lahore Bus service, Samjhauta Express and air services and started Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus link (w.e.f. April 7, 2005), Khokrapar- Munnabao ■ rail link (started in February 2006), Amritsar-Nankana Sahib bus service (flagged off by Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh in Amritsar on March 24, 2006), liberal visa facilities and allowing senior citizens of both the countries to cross Wagah border without hassles of visa formalities, etc. However, the acid test of genuineness of all these peace postures by Pakistan would have been whether Pakistan stopped the cross- border terrorism aided>and abetted by it in J &K and elsewhere in India. U nfortunately this has not happened to date.
Pakistan had shamelessly refused India’s demand for handing over the underworld don Dawood Ibrahim and Hizbul Mujahideen supremo Syed Salahuddin, showing its true intents. Later on, as our friend No. 1 has pointed out, it had contended the Indian claims of ISI’s complicity in the 26/11 Mumbai attacks despite strong evidence.
In the recent Pathankot airbase attack also, we see a pattern that belies many claims. There is no need to introspect as to whether India is misreading the taxonomy of inherent complexities and differences in the difficult Pakistan-India equation. To my mind, India should not prefer desisting from talks and Counter
Force Doctrine. The Indian Army must change many of its static formations on the border into more mobile and leaner units which must be capable of sudden and swift retaliation in the event of an attack. This should be more so in case military installations, key facilities and critical infrastructure fare.’attacked.
Comments : The case af .No. 3 is more or less similar to that of No. 2, except that he has expressed views contrary to those advocated by No. 2. What is more, No. 3 presents his views with more force and also feeling. There are some original ideas among his arguments. He has also made a stronger impact on the group as compared to No. 2. He has not exhibited any negative traits. He is willing to accept responsibility in his turn, that is, when he is asked or required to do so. With training, he is likely to overcome his mildness and initial inhibitions. Can be given a chance.
No. 4 : Folks, I am quite disappointed that there are different views on the subject that is so elementary and obvious. One should be out of one’s senses, if one has to believe that Pakistan would ever abandon its warpath against India and become a friend of this country. It is a day dream and a futile hope. We will only be deceiving ourselves and misleading others. I am rather surprised that No. 2 could use his fertile imagination and put forward some silly arguments to prop up his case. To me, it is unpatriotic even to believe Pakistan on anything. We are fools, if we ever listen to what Pakistan says on any subject under the sun. It is all sheer eyewash and propaganda trash.
Comments : No. 4 is rigid and intolerant. His statements are direct and biased and he does not want to leave any option except war. Temperamentally, he is aggressive and quarrelsome. He cannot accept criticism and dffering viewpoints in the proper spirit. Since he displays marked negative qualities and cannot cooperate except on his own terms, he is not suited for teamwork. Rejected.
No. 5 : Dear friends, Pakistan cannot think of permanent peace with India as it is still heE-bent upon annexing the whole of Jammu & Kashmir by hook or by crook. Even by signing a No-War Pact we are likely to be lulled into complacency; in regard to our defence preparedness, as it happened with China to our “Flindi-Chini Bhai-Bhai” slogan and attitude. We neglected our defences against China, trusting it to be our great friend. But China stabbed us in the back and taught us an important lesson forever. Right now, we can proceed as per the Shimla Agreement and Lahore Declaration. The most-critical question is, however, whether India should pay its belligerent and haughty opponent in the same coin or should it continue to pursue the pohcy of cementing peaceful