Managing Pakistan's failure

[RajeshA]

I do not believe that removal of Islam is practicable. The reason it exists is because there are some aspects of Islam that people find comforting or attractive - no matter how distasteful that may appear to you or me. Islam offers certain opportunities for humans under certain conditions that people seem to like. So the removal of Islam is an unrealistic goal.

I do not want to make a treatise here on Islam, as perhaps it is not the most appropriate thread, but mostly because my knowledge of it is still minimal..., but

If you want to attack Islam, then the best place to attack it is at its foundation.

La Ilaha Illa Allah.

Claim of Monotheism: Allah forbids that man worship any other God beside him. This is false Monotheism, because the Monotheism is based on singularity of target of worship and not on singularity of existence of God. Why would a God prohibit the worship of others, were he confident that there are no others. Allah is only making the case, that man should choose him over others.

It is actually Hinduism, which is the (perhaps the) oldest monotheistic religion. Krishna says in Bhagvadgita that all those who worship others, also worship him. He is confident there are no others. In Hinduism there is the concept of One God: Ishwar or Brahman, though Hindu allows many deities.

So one can always retort to a Muslim in a dismissive way, that Islam is not monotheistic. Only Hinduism can claim that. That way you pull the carpet from under his feet.

Now I don't know how far this argument would hold to theological scrutiny, but it is nevertheless an effective retort to put the Muslim on his back foot.

Just my 2 cents on the issue.

[shiv]

Why do Indians deal with Pakis at all?

Most Indians who deal with Pakis are ignorant of the indoctrination of hostility that Pakis receive and imagine that they may be dealing with a fellow human. Anyone who deals with Pakis and figures that out is justified in feeling as many do on BRF that there is no use dealing with Pakis. That they will never change. And that if you deal with hem they will ask for an inch and take a yard.

Ergo we must not deal with Pakis.

But this is a bit like the old "See no evil. Hear no evil. Speak no evil". The attitude has its merits, but is completely useless in allowing us an opening to play psy ops with Pakis. Just because simpleton Indians have been befooled by Paquis all these decades does not mean that we should now start avoiding them.

When their asses are on fire - Pakis are at their most vulnerable. They will be looking around to see who or what will save their burning asses. This is the time to deal with them. Of course they may not want to deal with us. Some may say "No use talking to India - we need to sort this out on our own". For them our attitude should be "Ok fine. Sort it out yourself, stew in your juices. That suits us fine"

Another set of Pakis may want us to help douse the fire in their backsides by giving Pakistan some "big brotherly" concessions that they can show to their jihadis as "victories" against India. This is where we can talk and tell them to stuff it. No concessions. No gifts. Only demands to wind down terror and quit indoctrination. In exchange we don't make their position even weaker - which is possible for India in various ways. Recall that our defence budget is equal to Pakistan's annual budget.

This in fact seems to be what is going on. Pakis are trying to claim that they have no control over the jihadis attacking India. This is a plain lie and their bluff needs to be called on this one. The Pakis biggest problem is that their army likes to pretend to fight India, but really makes the jihadis fight India. And for that reason they will not fight the jihadis.

But if they do not fight the jihadis - the jihadis will swallow up Pakistan - and Pakis seem to have gone into denial mode over this. They are desperately looking for ways out that do not involve going soft on India. But Pakis must be forced to make the choice. if they crack down on jihadis - there may be some future for them with trade etc with India so they can break out of the ICU drip feed they are on. If they do not crack down on jihadis and stop indoctrination - we don't care if the jihadis take over - we will deal with them as they need to be dealt with.

So what can Pakis do about i?

[shiv]

Rajesh, no need for theology-sheology. Islam without violence and coercion is all that is needed. Everything else will fall in place.

[partha]

Shivji,

Meddling inside Pakistan has lot of advantages I agree. I am all for it. Whatever it takes to silence the monster. However ignoring and not giving too much importance to Pakistan is an other option which can be explored further. More options better, no? The reason I felt it is a good idea -
The more India moves away from Pakistan and ignores it, the harder Pakistan tries to get India's attention. It means it wastes more and more of its resources on war and terror. This will push Pakistan deeper into the abyss. More economic and social problems which may widen the existing faultlines.

[derkonig]

Monotheism is hardly the problem. Buddhists & Jains are monotheists but they don't seem keen to wage war against the other. It is not the question of who you worship, it is the imperialist doctrine masquerading as religious practice that is the problem.

[RajeshA]

Rajesh, no need for theology-sheology. Islam without violence and coercion is all that is needed. Everything else will fall in place.

shiv ji,

Islam's vengeance is particularly hard on the kafirs. If the Hindus want to dull Islam's sword, it is useful to win or at least neutralize this argument.

The harder one pushes Hinduism's monotheistic pedigree, even to the point of questioning Islam's pedigree on the issue, the easier it would be to get the message across. The more it becomes a topic of contention, the more it becomes a topic of discussion.

If you tell somebody, I too believe in One God, you leave it to his discretion, to accept or reject your contention. If you go on the offensive, it is the Muslim that needs to defend his position, and would probably find some compromise with you. Only then would he accommodate you.

The Muslim would not sheath his sword as long as you remain a kafir according to him, regardless of your policies towards him. One has to get into an argument with him, that he is bigger kafir than you. We have been letting the Muslims define us, and then punish us. That needs to change. Don't let them define us, then probably they would not feel the need to punish us either. We need to define us in his language, so that he understands it, in his context.

The Barbarian only has his rhetoric and his sword. We have to neutralize both. We have to increase the din in the media so that his rhetoric does not get through, and we have to do something about the sword.

[RajeshA]

Monotheism is hardly the problem. Buddhists & Jains are monotheists but they don't seem keen to wage war against the other. It is not the question of who you worship, it is the imperialist doctrine masquerading as religious practice that is the problem.

The imperialist doctrine also needs foot soldiers, who are welded into a fighting force, into an army using clever religious rhetoric. So if one can weaken the religious imperative, the religious argument for waging war, one weakens the drive of the foot soldier and one weakens the glue keeping the army together.

All I'm saying is that this is another attack vector, and any strategy to be used against Pakistan has to be multi-pronged.

[shiv]

The more India moves away from Pakistan and ignores it, the harder Pakistan tries to get India's attention. It means it wastes more and more of its resources on war and terror. This will push Pakistan deeper into the abyss. More economic and social problems which may widen the existing faultlines.

Look at it this way. What you have stated will happen has already happened. The abyss has appeared. Now what?

[RajeshA]

Although some Pathans can have exceptional features, most Pakistanis have to make up in piety what they lack in the looks department.Check out the ones in Oslo-100%Pakistan from the pind. Now check out the jats from nearby Indian Punjab. Maybe it was only the homely Turks who felt the need to do the swooping down the Khyber (the better class were probably settled).

I too don't understand this whole bakwas about Pakistanis claiming to have Turkish and Arab ancestry and then posing themselves as fair, tall and good looking.

The Turks who came down to India were from Central Asia. They looked like Mongols, and they were hardly tall. The Turks of Turkey look different, but that is because of the mixing that went on in Anatolia with the tribes and Slavs living there. Those Turks did not come to India, not many anyway. The Arabs that came from Arabia, were and are dark. Saudi Arabian women are just as dark as Indian women from the South. I don't question their beauty, only the notion that they were fair.

If the Pakistanis are claiming that their ancestry was Persian, then the Pakistanis would mostly have been Shia today!

So what are they? Either they can claim that they are the haraamis of Turks, Arabs or Persians, or they can claim that they are tall and fair, but not both!

[derkonig]

RajeshA,
How do you explain the Shia Sunni divide, dont they worship the same deity? Logic is not something that the islamist doctrine is known for, its just the urge to hate. Its not about the worship per se, islamists are programmed to hate & more importantly wage war against the other, it doesn't matter who the other is. If they can't find the other, they will create one. The whole machinery is built for & sustained by hate & waging war. There is no cure but to eliminate this war machine.

[RajeshA]

raja ji,
Shia-Sunni divide, is an internal struggle in Islam, and that takes place despite a 90% overlap in the religious tenets. The 10% difference is unacceptable.

What I am speaking of is a move to build a relationship with the Muslims, something similar to the Muslim-Christian relationship, where the Muslims consider the Christians people of the book, and in a theological sense have a détente with them.

They have of course other issues like Crusades, Expulsion from Spain, Colonialism, Post WW-II Politics, Military Interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan, Propping of Unpopular Dictators in Muslim Countries, etc. These are political issues which the Dharmics don't have with the Muslims. Pakistanis can of course conjure up other political issues like - Kashmir, 1971 Break-Up, etc.

I believe the Dharmics should go on the offensive, to convince the Muslims, that their religion does not require them to attack the Dharmics, the Indians, simply for being Dharmics.

This may run contrary to what their Mullahs will tell them, but we have to reach the Muslim masses in Pakistan and convince them, that it is not Islam that demands attacking Indians, but rather the Pakistani Establishment, which does that in order to keep itself in power. The Pakistani Muslims should also learn, that 1971 debacle was the doing of their Army only. Kashmir would still remain as an emotive issue, but without the religious sanction of Jihad, it would also lose some of its potency.

What I want to say, is that we should minimize the reasons for the Pakistanis to want to attack India, we should be able to counter the propaganda of the Pakistani Establishment, the Army-Mullah combine, to motivate their foot-soldiers to attack India.

I am not saying we will succeed completely. All I am saying is that this is another attack vector, we should pursue.

If we want to do propaganda in Pakistan, then we should know what kind of propaganda can be done, and what is more effective. I find this tack a low cost proposition, not necessarily an alternative, as I am in favor of using all possible ways to strangle the beast.

A war is won, if you take away the will of the enemy to fight.

I would rather wish that they go at each other's throats than at our throats. So they can enjoy their Shia-Sunni divide.

[brihaspati]

shiv wrote
Ouch! That must have hurt. But even if what they said was 100% true - it means little. It only means Pakistanis of that era living abroad had a ready made insult to slap Indians who asked them questions that were designed to embarrass them. This is obviously such a practised response - it is clear that you were probably the latest of a long line of Indians who had tried to use the "Bollywood is popular" question to put Pakis in a dilemma and they were long past being trapped by that question.

Pakistanis have well thought out responses to almost any accusation you throw at them so they need to be approached with caution. There are two aspects here. One is the rhetoric of talking to Pakis - where insults or clever replies can be traded. The other of course is the reality of dealing with a nation that was formed from the same clever excuses.

This was in 2000, just 10 years back. I was outside intermittently from 94, but continuously from 1998. Apparently the whole Paki community of the township got to know of this "insult" since apparently no Hindu ch**** had dared reply in such manner before. So you have a point that they had practiced and perfected the "response", but were in mental shambles when given such a reply. Some of my Indian friends reported that there were less of such comments from the Pakis in mixed events subsequently.

What was more interesting was that one Paki who tried to keep in touch through an Indian female doctor [a common friend and who was then most interested in me] began to interact with me over Paki history and tenets of Islam. He was surprisingly knowledgeable in Indian history and philosophy. He began to lose interest when I began to dissect Islamic theology. I suspected that he was one of two possibilities (a) an educated Paki from a relatively affluent background, and aware of pre-Isalmic and Indic heritage of his family trying to explore common grounds - but that common ground could not challenge the "superiority" of Islam, and that it is the "Hindus" who must give more than half to arrive at the half (b) a plant working in close tandem with Paki security establishment to suss out a potential Hindu "loose cannon" - any non-Dhimmi behaviour would be alarming.

Exactly. But the cleaning up is going to be over an area that houses 170 million people (currently) of whom 120 million are in spread out rural communities. So it will be the biggest single Islamic clean up operation in history. If nothing else it will be slow (decades - it has already started and is nowhere near complete) and unless the cleaning up involves killing enough people to bring the birth rate to zero - the population is going to increase as the clean up proceeds.

And at least some of those people are going to want to come across the border to India - as I pointed out earlier in this thread. If people did not have to run from the clean up, a clean up is unnecessary. What I would like to see in Pakistan is a situation where these people, running from the clean up can continue to stay in Pakistan, with Indian aid if necessary. To that end a little propaganda that Indians are not bad people can only help.

The clean up is not going to take a massive killing operation, but the elimination of rival ideologues and potential centres of military resistance from among the population. It will be a massive fight to take over madrassahs and Islamic schools, and a strict imposition of Sharia as interpreted by the mullahs in power.

[Pranav]

The harder one pushes Hinduism's monotheistic pedigree, even to the point of questioning Islam's pedigree on the issue, the easier it would be to get the message across.

RajeshA ji, no need for abstract theological debates with criminally inclined Jihadists.

If someone really wanted to attack, there are much more effective ways of doing it - like Ali Sina of faithfreedom.org does.

Not for nothing is there the Persian proverb - "Say what you like about Allah, but be careful what you say about the Prophet".

[RajeshA]

The harder one pushes Hinduism's monotheistic pedigree, even to the point of questioning Islam's pedigree on the issue, the easier it would be to get the message across.

RajeshA ji, no need for abstract theological debates with criminally inclined Jihadists.

If someone really wanted to attack, there are much more effective ways of doing it - like Ali Sina of faithfreedom.org does.

Not for nothing is there the Persian proverb - "Say what you like about Allah, but be careful what you say about the Prophet".

The theological debates are not to be carried out with Jihadists, but rather through the Pakistani media with the general populace of Pakistan.

It is the general populace of Pakistan, that becomes the raw material for the jihadi factories of Pakistan. We should make it more difficult for the Islamists/Jihadists to fire up people to come and attack India.

Of course the money factor is there, but money is something with which India too can compete.

[RamaY]

Rajesh, no need for theology-sheology. Islam without violence and coercion is all that is needed. Everything else will fall in place.

Unless you are salami-slicing it, this solution will be short lived, 5-10 years at the most.

[shiv]

The clean up is not going to take a massive killing operation, but the elimination of rival ideologues and potential centres of military resistance from among the population. It will be a massive fight to take over madrassahs and Islamic schools, and a strict imposition of Sharia as interpreted by the mullahs in power.

The one complicating factor that Pakis do not admit and the media do not seem to highlight are 15 to 20 million firearms on the loose in Pakistan.

[brihaspati]

Islam does require attacking non-Muslims whenever the Muslims are militarily strong enough if they refuse to convert or accepts demands from Muslims. Muslims will only play "peace" when any violent action is likely to bring in retaliation of the order that can jeopardize the regeneration of Islamic strength in the future. Equation of Islam with such peaceful intentions results from non-aquaintance with the teachings, practice, texts and ongoing dissemination by Islamic theologians.

This propaganda to convince Muslims that Islam does not require them to attack Hindus will simply not work. Whenever we see Muslims not choosing to activate the option of violence, it means they do not feel that violence is not going to be retaliated to. Moreover the perception will have to be that the strength of the muslim community is not as high as to survive with regenerative strength in case of retaliation. I have had first hand experience of this psychology behind the facade of "peace" in Bihar-WB-Jharkhand area.

Hindus can be peaceful or violent or evil or whatever they choose to be - they stand open to attack whenever the opportunity for that will arise without fear of overwhelming retaliation back on Muslims. So propaganda to convince Paki's that Indians are basically "good" may not actually be of much value - it will only add to the perception that "Hindus" are weak, and ripe for the taking.

There are ways of propaganda that can weaken the Paki, but that will have the same problem as the "good Indian" propaganda. Anything that will weaken the Paki will not really reach the masses, whereas those that will reach will strengthen the inherent islamic mindset of hatred towards the Kafir.

[brihaspati]

Shivji,
I am aware of the firearms problem. I feel that it will actually lead to a welcoming of the Talebs by the commons as and when they approach the countryside. As far as I know, this is already taking place in western Pakjab. Those with firearms will simply join the new "regime" and retain their right to "firearms".

The single most effective propaganda that should be immediately effective is a call for land-reforms. In fact India could indirectly promise land-reforms and land redistribution if the Paki commons vote to become part of India.

[brihaspati]

There should be a radio station from Indian side, perhaps under private ownership to free GOI, that will reach out to the Paki commons. Radios are most consistently distributed, they run on batteries and are cheap to maintain - in a country with chronic power shortage. Most truckers keep radio on in their long journeys, radios are on in shops and berber shops. Anyway people are more likely to tune in in private to such a channel. There should be a programme on such a channel that raises teh issue of land-reforms and redistribution.

Forget education, healthcare - land is the burning question that can change all equations.

[shiv]

This propaganda to convince Muslims that Islam does not require them to attack Hindus will simply not work.

It will never work from a position of weakness. Try the same thing from a position of strength and the results are likely to be different.

I believe some of these things were discussed in the Islamism threads many moons ago. You cannot make a violent person abjure violence without having the power to eliminate him in case he does not comply. That is the same language that is used (and understood perfectly well) by the Taliban and LeT. That is the only language to speak and when the language is clearly understood -the demand to stop violence is placed on the table..or else.

That is the only way it works. No other way will work.

To say the same thing in different words - all disagreements must be settled by debate. if one party says that we will have the final say in this "debate" by eliminating you, then the only way to bring him back to the table is by developing the strength to eliminate him and then give him the choice of elimination or debate. Such a simple world.

[RajeshA]

Islam does require attacking non-Muslims whenever the Muslims are militarily strong enough if they refuse to convert or accepts demands from Muslims. Muslims will only play "peace" when any violent action is likely to bring in retaliation of the order that can jeopardize the regeneration of Islamic strength in the future. Equation of Islam with such peaceful intentions results from non-aquaintance with the teachings, practice, texts and ongoing dissemination by Islamic theologians.

brihaspati garu,

acid will remain acid, but it can be diluted somewhat with water. May be I am too optimistic, but I do believe that there are Muslims in Pakistan, who either still have not been baptised by the pure message of Islam or those who have vestiges of logical thinking in them, or those who are looking for excuses not to choose the path of violence.

If we do not put forth our message, than we are actually conceding that the Islamists are better and cleverer propagandists than chalaak SDRE Hindus. This is something I do not want to accept just like that.

Propaganda is battle of wits, resources & message, be it Islamist propaganda, Communist propaganda, EJ propaganda or Ori propaganda. I just don't believe Dharmics have to consider themselves defeatists also.

This propaganda to convince Muslims that Islam does not require them to attack Hindus will simply not work. Whenever we see Muslims not choosing to activate the option of violence, it means they do not feel that violence is not going to be retaliated to. Moreover the perception will have to be that the strength of the muslim community is not as high as to survive with regenerative strength in case of retaliation. I have had first hand experience of this psychology behind the facade of "peace" in Bihar-WB-Jharkhand area.

In the beginning of this Thread, I have proposed the strategy of Land-for-Terrorism. If the Pakistanis hit out to test their strength through Terror attacks or through an increase in secessionist passions in the Valley, India should retaliate by grabbing some land. They should understand that their adventures would have consequences.

Anyway, the whole idea of propaganda is to buy time. We need time for India to reach a higher orbit of possibilities, economically and militarily. We also need time, so that the process of Islamic violent fragmentation continues apace.

[Prem]

Hajaaro saal parre Ramayan ,Raam ko phir bhi bulayon
Kaun thaa Ravan , Kaun thee Sita, phir bhi yaad na aayo
Ek pehr me Lanka Sarree, Hanuman dhoot ban aayoo
Dusht daman ko, Malecch Dalan ko, aab aurr kya tujhe samjhayo.
IMHO, nothing can be done unless classic lines are drawn between good and evil, Dharmic and Adharmic and ideology and its practioner otherwise dilution causes hessitane act thus Duvida me donno gayye,Na Desh raha na Dharm,debate debate kar thukk gya, uttra na PS Bharam. Lines are being crossed everyday but majority Indics still keep pretending all honky dory.

[brihaspati]

I think the land-reforms issue can be a good propaganda item. It is a spanner in the works for all the dancers concerned - TSPA, feudals, talebs, militants, dawa-ists. And a radio station and channel is feasible - if the GOI of course doesnt act a Paki about it.

[surinder]

Some thing strikes me as odd in the whole discusson of using propaganda and psy ops. These are tactics and strategies to for winning a conflict or turning it in your favor. They don't exist in a vacuum. They are an addendum to an array of tactics/strategy. Indian state does not even pretend to confront TSP. What use are these tactics then?

I understand that these are low-cost techniques hence "why not try them" arguments have weight. But in the absence of even a pretence of fighting these techniques carry little significance.

[brihaspati]

surinder,
that was my whole point about this. These are effective tools only when you have the coercive power to enforce them. Rashtryia control over pak populations is necessary to carry all these out effectively. Shiv ji, however has a point in that "ideas" can be subversive and help prepare some fractures or grounds. But they will be ineffective, unless followed up by a solid military plan.

[ramana]

Am starting anew thread on MKG and his ideology. So please hold off till then.

[Kamboja]

The single most effective propaganda that should be immediately effective is a call for land-reforms. In fact India could indirectly promise land-reforms and land redistribution if the Paki commons vote to become part of India.

In the beginning of this Thread, I have proposed the strategy of Land-for-Terrorism. If the Pakistanis hit out to test their strength through Terror attacks or through an increase in secessionist passions in the Valley, India should retaliate by grabbing some land. They should understand that their adventures would have consequences.

So perhaps India's strategy should be:
Take land when TSPA orchestrates attacks on India (whether regular or irregular via their terrorist proxies).

Then, within the occupied land, undertake land reforms to redistribute land more fairly to peasants.

Two birds in one stone -- bloody the nose of the glorious defenders of TSP, the PA, and simultaneously light the fire of peasant rebellion by giving the aam abdul a taste of land ownership. Watch the fires spread.

[RajeshA]

surinder ji,

you are right.

Managing Pakistan, including its failure, would be a huge project and challenge.

Most dynamics which contribute to Pakistan's failure have only gotten more severe: the blatant extremism in the society, the gun culture, secessionist tendencies, economic collapse, governance failure, inflation, water shortage, industrial standstill, debt, foreign reserves situation, capital flight, power shortage, exploding population, feudal system entrenchment, land grab by military, etc. etc.

A third of the budget is for defense, a third is for debt repayment! That says something!

In the next few years, as Afghanistan curtain comes down, Pakistan is reaching the end of Western largesse, and Taliban checks.

So State failure is coming as clearly as the sun in the sky!

India would have to deal with the fallout, because no other country would deal with it. The enormity of the task of stabilizing a region of 250 million people, who would be hungry, thirsty, fundamentalist, nuclear armed, unleashed and our enemies, is something that is difficult to gauge. We are faced with contradictory strategies of intervention. Much is unclear.

We have to develop scenarios, we have to develop our responses, which would have to be multi-pronged. We have to prepare ourselves mentally for the foreseeable challenge, but also to develop administrative, military, para-military capacity. We have to develop the accompanying propaganda.

When the masses in Pakistan rise, they will plunder and punish the rich. They will destroy whatever little capacity Pakistan has to feed itself or to govern itself.

Somalia's population is 9 million. Pakistan's population is 170 million. In 2020 the population would be 220 million.

So if the system breaks down there, and Pakistan goes the Somalia route, which is the preferred route for it on BRF, we would be having a challenge of unimaginable scale.

[partha]

The more India moves away from Pakistan and ignores it, the harder Pakistan tries to get India's attention. It means it wastes more and more of its resources on war and terror. This will push Pakistan deeper into the abyss. More economic and social problems which may widen the existing faultlines.

Look at it this way. What you have stated will happen has already happened. The abyss has appeared. Now what?

I thought about both the strategies post your comment. Both can work but meddling in Pakistan will accelerate its decay.
(more conspiracy theories, more anti-India rhetoric, more radicalization of society). Very little hopes for Pakistan.

[SBajwa]

What is Dharma and What is Karma?

Is Dharam == Religion? no!! in all indian (non-muslims) mind Dharmic is the person who "speaks truth and stands for righteous things" Dharmic for Islamic (and rest of non-indic religion) mind could be their enshrined code (right hand possession, kafir, etc).

What is Karma? Is Karma == employment? NOPE!! Karma means Work!! work Ethic!! Dharmic work!!

so non-muslims in Indian subcontinent will continue to do what they have been doing from centuries which is to work hard to get educated, cut costs by raising small families, get wealthy!!

and muslims in Indian subcontinent will continue to do what they have been doing since 700 A.D. which is to possess the other people's wealth and women through violence and take pride in this!!

This battle has no end!!! If non-muslims continue to give away to muslims then non-muslims will all become muslims and eventually muslims of the Wahabi type!! at that time we will have what is called "QAyamat" according to Islam.

which is Purest Wahabis destroying whom they think are not so pure wahabis.

Meanwhile!! Government of India should at least follow the Dharmic and Karmic way of India to protect the lives of Indians!!

[RamaY]

^^^

RajeshA-ji!

Great post! Let us start analyzing each area and come up with possible solutions, anticipated responses, costs etc details. We can break the problem into pieces so we can quantify these variables. I would start with -

1. Defense - Disbanding TSPA and reconstruction of sound police and para-military forces. I wouldn't entrust Pakistani security with Paki-army any more. Instead Pakistan budget pays a just amount to India to secure it from external aggression.

2. Law&Order, Justice, Jails

3. Education - Primary, Secondary, Higher

4. Health

5. Food/Water Security

6. Civic Infrastructure

7. Industrial Infrastructure

8. Environment

9. Energy Security

10. Entertainment, Media and PR

[Pulikeshi]

Ok, did not get any brickbats for what I had written before.... must have been an outlier...

Here is what is missing from all the conversations thus far:

Pakistan is too big to fail!

Now the jingos can hop up and down and plan its demise, but it remains standing like the proverbial Thanjavur doll...

So we can plan for TSP's failure all we want - much like Mushy planning to get Nobel prize next year!
What would be interesting to see is one small step India has taken to re-architect the Indian sub-continent since Bangladesh. Chai-biskoot and pani flow plenty and may I remain fat and happy and waiting brickbats

[ramana]

Dont worry PC will be appraised of such matters.

[RamaY]

Pulikeshi garu,

While chai-biskut jugalbandi continues by dilli-billis; there is nothing wrong in few mirchi-bajjis down south-naa?

acid will remain acid, but it can be diluted somewhat with water.

RajeshA garu,

The shields may be able to handle the diluted-acid, but not the internal organs of the society. It will become dharmic when it is diluted enough for internal consumption

[Karna_A]

What I am speaking of is a move to build a relationship with the Muslims, something similar to the Muslim-Christian relationship, where the Muslims consider the Christians people of the book, and in a theological sense have a détente with them.

What I want to say, is that we should minimize the reasons for the Pakistanis to want to attack India, we should be able to counter the propaganda of the Pakistani Establishment, the Army-Mullah combine, to motivate their foot-soldiers to attack India.

In pure terms, TSP India conflict is nothing to do with Islam or TSP would be fighting with China as Communists are at least 1000% more unIslamic than Indics. The irony of Islamic TSP asking for nookes from Godless Communists to be used against a population that is 15% Islamic, itself is a straight giveaway. Kashmir is also not an Islamic issue as otherwise why would TSP give a part of Kashmir to Godless Communists.
However, TSP establishment has created this connection of Islam with Indian rivalry which is actually mostly jealousy and nostalgia.
This is one reason why TSP never allowed India to become member of OIC even when it had more muslims.

What is needed for India is to create a mirror terror org to TSP terror org. If they have LET, India should have iLET, iHUM for HUM. If TSP has sunni terror, India should put its Shia terror on them. That's the only thing that'll stop TSP.
TSP should be invited to have a joint battle against Godless Chinks, or else let Indian Islamic sword fights against TSP Islamic sword.
Kashmir is an example where this actually happens where Indian Ikhwans fought against TSP albhabet soup(LET, HUM etc)

[brihaspati]

Even if western pay-packets are drying up for the moment, the Panda still is capable of buying up and staving the resource crunch of Islamabad. There is another factor we typically miss out - which is one possible motivation for Pak to have a hold on southern AFG - the drugs industry of southern AFG. This will generate a potential source of money for Pak to utilize.

So the regime, in its current form, or in the transformed transitional Islamist state of Talebjabi combine - can still survive for another 10-20 years easily. The state on the other hand, its macro socio-economic indicators may not compare well with western modern standards and can give rise to the claim of "failure".

I think Shiv ji might have started the thread with the second type of "failure" in mind, where the commons get affected increasingly, and can be led to the trap of the regime to serve as fuel and cannon fodder for violence against India.

For every social-fabric weakness that I have so far explored in Pak, land-ownership is the single most divisive and potentially explosive factor. For all other factors, you have to wait for infrastructural inputs to first raise the relevant level of consciousness [education/health/etc] for the public to feel that they are missing something [the so-called expectations mismatch problem], and that they have a lot to gain from the friendship of India.

India can promise land redistribution, but it should not come without a price.

[yogi]

Pakistan is too big to fail!

What would be interesting to see is one small step India has taken to re-architect the Indian sub-continent since Bangladesh.

That would be a more practical strategy. There still are large parts in Pakistan, which are sparsely populated (Baluchistan, Northern Areas, Eastern Sindh, etc.) Capturing, Cleaning, and Developing these territories should be done before Pakjab is touched. Its better to further compress the living space available in Pakistan, so that resources are diminished, and the resulting collapse can be handled better.

[A_Gupta]

Back in 1940, nobody really thought that Pakistan was possible, except a few crazies.

Now in 2010, nobody thinks Pakistan is impossible, except a few crazies.

[asprinzl]

Just a couple of observations here:
1) If a war comes next...India must wage this was for territorial gain minus the population.
2) At one time the whole land from Iran to Japan had no Muslims nor Islam. Today, in the Indian sub-continent alone about 40 percent of the population is Muslim. In the beginning one would have thought that it would be impossible to bring Islam into this region. History has proven otherwise. Why shouldn't it be proven that in the future the reverse is also possible? The problem is...Hindu organizations are not actively engaging in converting the Muslims. While rich Muslims and middle class Muslims the world over actually contribute money and in some instance personal effort or volunteer in missionary efforts there is no such undertaking among Hindus. Zakir Naik has a TV station that continously airs programs that are blasphemeus to Hinduisn.....there are no mass protest..but all I hear is cricketc chirrping. Rich Hindus are very shy about making effort or contribute towards Hindu evangelizations directed at the Muslims. While this retardness goes on, the Muslim population is slowly making gains even if at miniscule rate that is hardly visible on the radar and the Hindu population if taking a dive also on scale that is hardly on the radar. Two hundred years from now....where would this end?
Unless there begins a realization towards this need to have Hindu evangelization effort directed at the Muslims in the same caliber as Zakir Naik....the distant future dont look too promising.
Avram.

[shiv]

For every social-fabric weakness that I have so far explored in Pak, land-ownership is the single most divisive and potentially explosive factor. For all other factors, you have to wait for infrastructural inputs to first raise the relevant level of consciousness [education/health/etc] for the public to feel that they are missing something [the so-called expectations mismatch problem], and that they have a lot to gain from the friendship of India.

This is absolutely correct. A few observations in this regard based on Pakistan's history

Pakistan was created out of an area of land that already had a feudal society. Being beholden to the feudal lord was normal for the people in that land. They were/are in a feudal trap like millions of others in other lands through the last ten centuries.

The government that was superimposed on this feudal land was ostensibly a "democratic" one. In actuality the "government" consisted of feudal lords (who were not particularly literate) and the government machinery was manned by mohajirs - migrants from India who had the training and literacy to run the bureaucracy. These mohajirs had zero chance of winning any elections. They were outsiders and did not want elections to come in the way of their power. The feudals did not want elections to come in the way of their wealth and clout. To this mix was added the army that somewhere along the way gained an appetite for political power.

All these have ensured that there is a fairly high degree of misery among the people of Pakistan (as per opinion polls and publication). All this has been kept in check by an artificially imposed "fear of India". If the fear of India did not exist - the people would then ask why prices are so high and why there is corruption and (Allah forbid) ask how much money is going into army coffers and how the Army houses have power and water while they don't.

At least some of the Islamist groups attacking inside Pakistan have already threatened the feudal pattern and have promised redistribution of land after their Islamic revolution. I saw at least one news item about this recently. I will try and locate it.

In fact this is exactly what is worrying the Pakistani leadership. Nothing is more threatening to Paki leadership than this. Certainly not India. India cannot directly redistribute land without capturing it - but the least we must do is as you suggested - make a strong push for supporting land reform using an appropriate propaganda apparatus.

Technically - an India that suggests land reform is an India that supports the Taliiban/Islamist groups against the "democratically elected government" of Pakistan. This is the allegation that is sure to be made - but India must not be fobbed off by allegations. We must "support anyone who will bring land reforms to Pakistan". Have you noticed how the US and China never ever speak of land reform in Pakistan? They do not want to upset their whores in Pakistan - the Army and the feudal political leaders.

Currently the Paki leadership is caught between several pincers. This is the time to put pressure on them. The poorer and more populous Pakistan gets, the more ripe it will be for some violent revolution. I believe that revolution has already started and we need to step in to get a hand in there to gain something from it at some time in the future.

The interesting thing about what China and the US have done is to support the rich corrupt leadership to retain their power. That is cheap. Supporting and developing an entire land of 170 million people is not something either the US or China will do. Nobody is that rich or philanthropic. They will get little in return for feeding serfs who reproduce like rabbits. That is where revolution must come from and the worse it gets the greater the chance of revolution.

In the meantime India must (as India has done) keep trade to a minimum and keep its armed forces threatening enough for Pakistanis to keep on spending on their armed forces leaving little for development. And as Pakis move towards failure - start calling for democracy, land reforms, freedom etc and blast them with TV propaganda about India being a land of milk and honey.