Pak Occupied Kashmir News and Discussion

[Johann]

Some background on the proposed Sino-Pakistani Karakorum Railway;

Pakistan and China to Form Joint Venture Railway Consortium
18 November 2009

Pakistan's Ministry of Railways and the Government of China have agreed in principle to form a consortium to carry out the feasibility study of the planned joint venture rail service between the two countries, Pakistan's railways minister has said.

The study will cover a 750km section from Havelian, which is already linked to Pakistan's rail network, to Khunjrab, crossing over the Mansehra district and the Karakoram Highway.

A new 350km track from China's Kashgar terminus to Pakistan's Khunjerab Pass will link the two countries.

The railway would initially provide freight service and would be later upgraded to carry passengers as well.

The countries are also seeking a loan from international organisations for the project.

A bit more on costs and the semi-official Chinese perspective on the project

PAKISTAN – CHINA Kashgar Gwadar railway line would give Beijing a window on the Persian Gulf
Monday, July 12, 2010

Beijing – Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari and Chinese President Hu Jintao met last Wednesday during an official visit of the Pakistani leader to the mainland. They discussed plans to build a railway line from Kashgar in China’s Xinjiang province to the Pakistani port of Gwadar. This could give China direct access to the Persian Gulf and make Pakistan an alternative route for Chinese goods and Middle East and African oil, which currently have to go around India.

...Now the railway, which until recently appeared to be technically impossible because of the difficult terrain, at 5,000 metres above sea level, could be built thanks to the experience and knowledge China has accumulated during the construction of the Qinghai-Tibet railway.


However, Professor Wang Mengshu, a rail expert at Beijing Jiaotong University, said that the Kashgar-Gwadar project would be "more difficult than the one in Tibet" because Chinese surveyors and mappers will not have as good an understanding of the local terrain as they did in Tibet.

This would also create uncertainties about the cost, which Wang estimates would be around 200 million yuan (US$ 30 million) per kilometre, a bill too great even for Beijing.

In addition, India is not going to look favourably at closer Sino-Pakistani relations. New Delhi has always regarded Islamabad as its main adversary and Beijing as its main rival.

In fact, the proposed railway would have to pass through Pakistan-administered Kashmir, a territory claimed by India, and would thus undermine the latter’s its claim. Indeed, important Indian newspapers have described the project as a serious threat to India's security.

However, the idea still has many supporters in China and many see its completion as only a matter of time.

People's Liberation Army Navy Rear Admiral Yin Zhuo said China relied too heavily on sea transportation for its oil imports. Hence, "We must either build a much more powerful navy or find alternative transportation channels."

Given the severe disruptions to the KKH by landslides this year, and disruption by snow in the winter you have to wonder how much tunneling would be needed, and just how economical / reliable this line would be whatever route was chosen.

If this line ever actually gets built it will be a testament to the magnitude of strategic importance China places on both Pakistan and access to the Indian Ocean, Afghanistan and Baluchistan.

[Muppalla]

If this line ever actually gets built it will be a testament to the magnitude of strategic importance China places on both Pakistan and access to the Indian Ocean, Afghanistan and Baluchistan.

That is such a future vision for China. Compare and contrast this to a person who said "not a blade of grass grows there" after losing territory.

[ramana]

Muppalla there was Dutch scholar Willem van Kemenade who was writing a book who said that PRC being boxed in the Pacific coast by US naval supremacy is trying to seek sea ports to the west via the POK area. And the corollary was they were not going to allow the TSP to nuke POk! We need to take that into account in our plans.

GOI is not stupid. They allow things they can't control, to happen. Thats the strategy of weaker power.

http://www.willemvk.org/books.php

Download the detente pdf.

[Gagan]

If this line ever actually gets built it will be a testament to the magnitude of strategic importance China places on both Pakistan and access to the Indian Ocean, Afghanistan and Baluchistan.

And Pakistan has proven several times that it is a strategic 'Khota sikka', a strategic dud, a sinkhole where both money and reputations disappear.
It has to do with the huge corruption that the elite in that country live by, they consistantly flip flop and turn over to the highest bidder.

IOW Pakistan is not worthy or worth that strategic risk.

And it would help if a GoI came along which actually did more to hasten that impression.

[Kanson]

^^^^ One of the reasons why India continues to loose ground, both within and outside, is that it is unable and unwilling to stand up for those in need. While we delude outselves that we are a moralistic nation with a moralistic foreign policy, we are infact an inactive lethargic nation, unwilling to even do what is right.

Nobody likes the weak; they are held in abomination and utter contempt. That is how we have lost allies and respect.

Could be. You opinion is like viewing the same image from opposite direction. It has value. If you take a list every nation has their share. When Pak needed it most, China kept quiet. US could have allowed Israel and Saudi to attack Iran by now with their support. They all together are capable and could have taken Iran to task. But so far it didn't happen. There are many examples we can add. Part of reasons it is inactive and other part of the reason not ready to punch beyond its weight.

We should have started humanitarian flights and relief without asking for TSP's permission, and if there is w@r, then so be it on this issue. Soviets had threatened to shoot humanitarian flights into Berlin, but eventually backed down. India should do have forced humanitarian access to the Balwaristan area.

When India is hesitant to retaliate even for Mumabi 26/11, you are asking to risk a war for such a trivial issue.

[krisna]

Kashmir an India-Pak issue, says China

China on Thursday reiterated its position on the Kashmir issue by saying that the matter should be resolved between India and Pakistan, but made it clear that there would be no change in its policy of issuing stapled visas to residents of Kashmir. Beijing also dismissed as “groundless” reports that nearly 11,000 People Liberation Army (PLA) troops have been deployed in Gilgit-Baltistan.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson said Kashmir is an issue “left over from history” between India and Pakistan. “As a neighbour and friend of neighbour countries, China believes this issue should be left to the two countries and should be properly handled through dialogue and consultations.

However, the spokesperson described reports that the Northern Army Commander Lt Gen B S Jaswal had been denied a visa for an official military visit as “not true”.
China has also rejected reports that PLA troops have been deployed in Northern Kashmir to provide protection to infrastructure projects after threats by extremist groups.

1) china saying kashmir is a India Pakistan issue. whether it is only Kashmir or the whole of J&K. chinese are playing clever here because the visa issue is of only kashmir(Indian side). chinese are saying that POK is legally with pakistan and only Indian side is an issue.
2) the spokesperson is denying that visa rejection is "not true" to Lt Gen bS Jaswal. blowing hot and cold at the same time.

Something is not right here.

[Bade]

^^^It is called speaking with the forked tongue...but not as clever as the culture this attribute is usually associated with. Some real tiger claws and tooth needs to be show pieced before the Panda will make a retreat.

[anupmisra]

^ Anup Ji you made me shiver 6% for PorXnistan is too much more like 2-3%.


Link: http://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&source ... Xhr7Y2dlbg

and after flood's any number prefixed with '-' will do.

6% would be the rate of inflation at which the Indian subsidy to kashmiris would grow annually. Does anyone have this subsidy amount available?

[Gagan]

There is a CT regarding presence of Chinese troops. There is a school of thought that a secret bunker hosting secret chinese military hardware is flooded and not reachable. Perhaps Gaganullah can backtrace possible location if this CT has an iota of truth.

In all honesty, google earth images are not updated to the year 2010 over the entire area. I am sure a lot of things will be visible if we have updated images. But google has to bend to pressure sometimes.

But the theory about the chinese trying to extract minerals from below the glacier got me thinking. The image of the tunnel visible does show a pipeline with a lot of water discharge. One possibility is this:

[Pratyush]

Muppalla there was Dutch scholar who was writing a book who said that PRC being boxed in the Pacific coast by US naval supremacy is trying to seek sea ports to the west via the POK area. And the corollary was they were not going to allow the TSP to nuke POk! We need to take that into account in our plans.

GOI is not stupid. They allow things they can't control, to happen. Thats the strategy of weaker power.

Even if the GOI is weaker power, this still leaves the PRC with an exploiatable weakness. In terms of giving India the capability to intradict the PRC lines of communication on land at leasure. When none existed.

Some times I fail to understand who is a bigger fool. The GOI or the PRC. Goi for seemingly allowing things to get out of hand. Or the PRC for creating conflict and weakness where none existed. Just in to show that it is a strong power.

[shiv]

Some times I fail to understand who is a bigger fool. The GOI or the PRC. Goi for seemingly allowing things to get out of hand. Or the PRC for creating conflict and weakness where none existed. Just in to show that it is a strong power.

A third possibility exists. Neither of the above postulates may be correct. But a belief in Chinese power and a belief in equal measure of Indian weakness and incompetence makes the first two postulates credible and the third possibility is given the go by.

[Pratyush]

Shiv, what you suggest is correct, which is why I used the word Seemingly when refering to the actions of GOI. When I called it foolish. An act of == with the PRC if you will.

But, I stand by my asertion that the Chinies are acting foolishly when they create conflicts. Where an act of accomodation from PRC will win them a productive and stable relationship with India and ROW.

Just so they can save face.

JMT

[krisna]

Chinese response on Gilgit issue missing from official transcript

Chinese response to the presence of its troops in Gilgit-Baltistan, an area described by its foreign ministry as "northern part of Pakistan", was curiously omitted in the official transcript, a day after it created a flutter in New Delhi.

However, when the ministry posted the official transcript of the briefing on its website, hours after the meeting between Indian ambassador S Jaishankar and Chinese vice minister of foreign affairs where India conveyed its concerns over the Chinese "activities and presence" in PoK, the related question and answer were surprisingly missing.

The transcript on the website, which is regarded as the most accurate version of the briefings for Beijing-based diplomats and foreign media, however carried her other remark terming Jammu and Kashmir as "Indian-held Kashmir".
Though awaited with renewed interest as it was expected to provide more clarity on China's stand on these critical bilateral issues, the absence of the reference to PoK once again brought to fore ambiguity to China's official stand on the Kashmir issue.

This is pretty consistent from chinese POV- that is
1) Indian side of J&K is disputed.
2) POK is legal.
3) it can do whatever it wants in POK with pakis permission.

India should not look at moral ethical etc issues. India should do the same and maintain the disputed status of Tibet and taiwan. Give stapled visas to these regions.
make noises about POK saying it is Indian region.
There are some noises from Indian side regarding issuing visas to Tibetans and the status( mentioned in BRF and was from India today online). hope it is carried to fruition.

[shiv]

But, I stand by my asertion that the Chinies are acting foolishly when they create conflicts. Where an act of accomodation from PRC will win them a productive and stable relationship with India and ROW.

No disagreement there.

Building a mountain road though the Himalayas to Gwadar may not be a bad idea at all for China in its own right. It certainly may be in China's interest to attempt such a thing. It is also a great place for India to block supplies if needed. China is not a moronic nation. Whether it gets its oil via Gwadar or via the straits of Malacca it will have to depend to some extent on the goodwill of india or the US or both. Antagonizing both is OK in pakiesque sense but the more the number of powerful countries you antagonise the more costly things get and that is where I doubt if the Chinese will be stupid enough to bite off more they can chew. But we certainly need to ask if they might be wanting to do that.

I suspect that we on the forum are more prone to read lay news media about Chinese moves in PoK - get our chaddis in a twist and pat ourselves on the back while simultaneosly slapping GoI by saying "Hey we are so concerned about this but GoI isn't". And if GoI responds to "public anxiety" we accuse the GoI of being reactive. That is a specious argument but since it lowers our own echandee we will not swallow this accusation easily.

If China build a highway through Pakistan Northern territories exactly what is India going to do about it? The two extreme choices we have is to go to war with China on the one hand, or to sit back, swallow it with diplomatic protests, get ready to hit back indirectly to keep China busy in various places even as we ready ourselves to cause China pain both on the sea lanes as well as on the land route. What other choices are there? Ultimately we need to do what is in our best long term interest.

[Gagan]

India should demonstrate to the Chinese, Pakistanis and the rest of the world, that POK is Indian territory and India disapproves of a china-pak nexus trying to prove otherwise.
This will have to be done BOTH verbally and with action on the ground.
The chinese should be under no illusions that attempts at bullying will be responded to. The chinese dragon needs to be trained, tamed, and domesticated if Asia ever expects to live in peace.

[chaanakya]

India should demonstrate to the Chinese, Pakistanis and the rest of the world, that POK is Indian territory and India disapproves of a china-pak nexus trying to prove otherwise.
This will have to be done BOTH verbally and with action on the ground.
The chinese should be under no illusions that attempts at bullying will be responded to. The chinese dragon needs to be trained, tamed, and domesticated if Asia ever expects to live in peace.

While in the midst of Kargil, Chinese establishment in POK could have been targeted. What prevented India to adopt such posturing?? Escalation of conflict??

[thayilv]

IMHO, I think if India escalated at that point, it would have been motivation enough for the west to harp of the 'Nuclear Flashpoint' issue. Economic embargoes would follow suit. An internal lobby against escalation would have been whipped up to avoid the economic impact caused to those companies that would be affected by the embargo.

Besides, I'm sure the US would have provided some intel as a heads up to the pakis.

[Gagan]

Guys, no politician in India is giving up J&K to Pakistan. Let us not even visit that issue.
The netas are willing to keep things in status quo, till the time that one of the following happens:
1. Pakistan destroys itself, and then India can simply walk in.
2. The people of India and Pakistan out of mutual love, decide to settle the matter.

Until very recently, the powers that be in India still considered the people of Pakistan as sort of lost fellow citizens, humans even brothers, even though they have accepted an independent Pakistan from the word go. That feeling of love for the ordinary people of Pakistan has diminished in direct proportion to the radicalization that has occured there, to the dirty games that the civil-military establishment has played.

My sense is, that India doesn't want to give Pakistan a platform where it can in any way damage India's race to developed nation status - the powers that be perhaps feel that Pakistan is not a trustworthy compatriot or worthy enough adversary. That pedestal is reserved for the Chinese these days.

But what India can and perhaps will do is to clap in glee and with as straight face as is possible, and from the sidelines, as the Pakistanis kill each other and sink. I am sure the establishment in New Delhi thoroughly enjoyed giving first $5 million to the Pakistanis as alms, and then raised it to $20 million when they got uppity - it demonstrates to the Pakistanis what the establishment in Nai Dilli thinks of them. All the H&D of Pakistan goes down the drain, because they prance around like roosters when India goes to meet them halfway, while their actual aukaad is to accept aid from India.

JMT

[shiv]

I ask you....is the present status quo really in our "best long term interest"? (ii) Can't we plan our future tactics which are more proactive in nature (rather than reactive)?

What we have is a situation in which we don't know if the GoI is doing anything or not
a) Perhaps they they are doing things we don't know about that are in our interests
b) Perhaps they are doing absolutely nothing

If the above statement is correct, as it seems to be to me, we, who like to discuss these things in the name of patriotism have to take both possibilities into account.

It is not enough to merely curse and say "GoI is doing nothing. Apart from being boring and requiring no further elaboration or discussion, it is only half he story. The other half is the possibility that something is being done which is not obvious to us. Would it be in our best interests to say exactly what we are doing out in the open? For example China does not publish what it is doing in PoK. The US says one thing about Pakistan and does things that it does not say.

So what do we do about this, given our penchant for wanting to talk about it in the name of patriotism?

1) We can try and force information out from various people to try and reassure ourselves that something clever is being done in national interest and feel better for doing that
2) We can fail in the above quest and whine and cry that nothing is being done.
3) We can try and act like a think tank that has a holistic picture of India and its interests and then develop a scenario of what is in our best interest.

Unfortunately point 3 is the most difficult and we are stuck at point 2 most of the time.

For example (just one of a million examples that can be developed). We can fill several books with this kind of stuff if you start studying "Indian Interests" as a whole.

Why don't we quickly arm ourselves to defeat our enemies?

Because we have to import most of those arms.

Why not import them quickly? People are willing to supply us with those arms quickly. We have the money.

Because the deals are so big, there is a lot of money involved and all arms dealers are ready for kickbacks and are ready to promise the world but deliver much less. Since many of the people involved in signing agreements today will be retired or dead in 20 or 30 years when we are still depending on the same arms and supplier, it is possible for a group to accept kickbacks today and we will discover that the country was cheated only 20 years from now, or in the middle of a war which you want to prepare for with great urgency. So we have to prepare a system of importing and signing deals that absolutely ensures that there are no short-cuts and kick backs and incorporate safety mechanisms that ensure that the seller delivers what he promises to deliver for the full period of 20 or 30 or 40 years. We have to be sure the seller company is still there in 20 years. Naturally the seller is interested in profits now and is willing to pay bribes now. Neither is in our interest. So these deals take time to tie up all loose ends.

Yes yes I know all that but how can we allow our defence preparedness to go down?

In such instances we have to do urgent deals for the supply of vital equipment to tide over a crisis. Typically we pay a high price for that but in a conflict there would be no other option. How ever we do have the option of avoiding conflict if possible, unless it is imposed on us.

..and so on.
No more. It is OT

[Pratyush]

Guys, no politician in India is giving up J&K to Pakistan. Let us not even visit that issue.
The netas are willing to keep things in status quo, till the time that one of the following happens:
1. Pakistan destroys itself, and then India can simply walk in.
2. The people of India and Pakistan out of mutual love, decide to settle the matter.

SNIP
JMT

Gagan,

Well said, no point in India getting sidetracked from the long term goals set for ourselves. Currently the defece preparedness is sufficient to meet the current and near term challanges as faced by the nation. Also, the defence raod map as visible is also looking towards taking care of the future threats against the nation.

What is needed at the moment is to be confident and not needlessly berate the GOI and show anxity. Build capability, and when any opportunity presents it self use it.

That ought to be our long term goal.

JMT.

PS I am for a teach a lession war against the PRC or TSP if the opportunity presents it self. In areas where we control the escalation dominance.

[Altair]

Gagan
Thanks for the reply.With your experience,Can you tell if there could be a bunker or such a thing from GoogleEarth?

Guys, no politician in India is giving up J&K to Pakistan. Let us not even visit that issue.
The netas are willing to keep things in status quo, till the time that one of the following happens:
1. Pakistan destroys itself, and then India can simply walk in.
2. The people of India and Pakistan out of mutual love, decide to settle the matter.

"Pakistan destroys itself" has been happening since inception.Its only a matter of time. But, Pakistanis are psychopaths. If they realize they are going down the drain,they would certainly try to drag India along. Lets not fool around that they will not try. We need to be absolutely clear how to deal with a situation where they would try to drag us in a trap. I guess they are already trying by roping China in POK and GOI is dragging its feet.

[Sanjay M]

More than troops, Chinese projects in PoK worry India

India needs to step up funding for Uighurs and help them make themselves at home in PoK.

[shiv]

We talk so much about victory in a war and how good that might feel for us. But no one ever talks about how it might feel for a person or group that has decided that they refuse to lose in war no matter how high the cost or how great the losses.

I think it is important not to ignore this because it is very real and often ignored.

I have often seen the comment that the Americans killed so many Vietnamese and a few people have commented on one of my YouTube Vietnam videos "We won because we killed more Vietnamese" Clearly this is nonsense. For the Viet Cong the number of dead was not the issue. The same comment has been made about the Mogadishu incident - i.e that the Americans killed hajaar Somalis. But it was the Americans that went. Failure of Somalia is not defeat of Somalia. It is a pyrrhic victory.

Pakistanis have set themselves up so that they will not lose. Military defeat will not be defeat of Pakistaniyat. In fact the Pakistani army is at the core of this tactic. They are far from stupid. They know their strengths exactly, and they are smart students of history and military history. We constantly laugh and mock the Pakistani army's "tactical brilliance but strategic stupidity"

But the joke is on us. The Pakistani army shows strategic brilliance because it starts wars that it cannot win and either backs out or keeps the wars deniable - so the army does not get hit. This is not stupidity. It is smart. The army survives - tactical defeat or not. I mean just look at us jingos on this forum. We are all so bloody knowledgeable - Orbat, weapons capabilities bla bla bla. We know just what we need to whup Paki backside. Does anyone seriously think that the Paki army does not know all that we do and more? They are far beyond where we are. Their level of calculation and gambling is a generation or two ahead -but it is recognized by the Indian armed forces and others in India. Not by us generally.

The Paki army cannot be defeated easily by war. They have made enough allies who have been told that the biggest threat to the Pakistani army is India and that the Paki army will sacrifice Pakistan for its allies as long as those allies protect against India. The Pakis are cleverer than the level of cleverness we are able to reach on here - we are babes in the wood. IMO.

A very clever game has gone on between India and Pakistan. Pakistan initially armed itself to defeat India. India countered that by arming itself just enough to avoid defeat. Pakistan is paying us in the same coin now. They are arming themselves just enough to avoid defeat by India. So when we talk of military takeover of PoK we must first ask if Pakistanis are stupid and have not been reading the writing on the wall. After all the Pakistan army has been in this game for 63 years - that is older than most of us. Me included.

Any reoccupation has to come in a way that the Pakis are not prepared for and cannot stop India from doing. Thinking of what that involves is the difficult trick.

[Sanjay M]

Fine, fine, the Mohammad-Ghauri-vs-Prithviraj-Chauhan stuff. They initiate conflicts willy-nilly, get defeated, but get to keep coming back because we refuse to take them out decisively. Eventually, that type of opponent would score a win, even by statistical chance, and when they do they would eliminate us decisively. We all know it, but our political leadership could care less - they choose to be willfully blind and not learn the lessons of history.

Americans did indeed defeat Vietnam, not because they killed more Vietnamese during their reunification war, but because they partnered with China after their withdrawal, and made the Khmer Rouge to be even more ruthless guerrilla fighters than the Vietnamese were. So it didn't matter that the Vietnamese initially won against the Americans by taking more casualties, because in the end the Americans were able to contain them with the help of China. Clearly Vietnam's rise was quickly checkmated by Sino-American partnership, and there was no domino effect across the region. These types of daring bold moves were only possible because the Atlanticists on the Western side were willing to take things farther - ie. the Brzezinski types who were still motivated as ever by the Soviet occupation of their motherland.

But now China, Islamists, etc are rapidly increasing their power, and the Americans have no committed ideologues willing to confront these new threats, because there is no Atlantic consensus against these threats. On the contrary, the Brzezinski types see the Islamists and the Chinese as invaluable allies to continue to fighting the Russians, and won't give them up.
Without any Atlantic consensus emerging, then the Western nationalists/conservatives would be unable to develop/generate the necessary political will to turn the tide against these threats. China's economic expansion over the US will continue, as will Islam's cultural expansion against the US.
Because the Atlanticists are stubbornly siding with China and Islam, they will continue to mobilize the Left against Western nationalists and conservatives who wish to confront these threats. Today you can see the Atlanticists marshalling the Left against the US Republicans, against France's Sarkozy, etc.

So China and Pak will be able to keep playing their games for quite some time to come. Things will have to get very dire for the West before they're willing to make a decisive break with the Atlanticists and turn towards the Russians and Indians for closer partnership in dealing with the Sino-Islamic alliance.

[RajeshA]

So what do we do about this, given our penchant for wanting to talk about it in the name of patriotism?

1. We can try and force information out from various people to try and reassure ourselves that something clever is being done in national interest and feel better for doing that
2. We can fail in the above quest and whine and cry that nothing is being done.
3. We can try and act like a think tank that has a holistic picture of India and its interests and then develop a scenario of what is in our best interest.

Usually only that much information would be allowed in the public sphere, which does not endanger national interest. The information available to BRF comes usually from articles written by strategists, and other thinkers or that what we piece together from news sources.

BRF is more than a think-tank, has to be more than a think-tank. BRF needs to also be a pressure group. BRF needs to define not only what national interest is, but also to underline how important that national interest is - by both shaping public opinion, but also expressing public opinion.

The whines too are important. At the cost of some despondency to self, it exerts pressure on the government, on office holders, that they should not allow the ball to fall, as it affects public mood, and if public mood shifts so too can the holders from their respective offices.

Regarding whines, they should of course be in the right discussion thread and should not dilute the message of the some other thread.

JMTs

[Pratyush]

Shiv,

Fine the TSP cannot be occupied and defeated by us. OK Next? Should the TSP not feel comforted by the thought that India cannot occupy it. Instead, we are seening a fatricidial (very pure vs pure) conflict in TSP. The only way it can be reduced and eliminited is for the TSP governance to improve to the point of telling its constitutents that TSP is home for Sub continents muslims. But they cant do so. Why??

IMO, the military strength of TSP has no bearing on the security of TSP. It can only secure it self if it is able to improve its governance and social development indicators. Unless it is able to do so, its military strength will remain hollow.

Till then it is on borrowed time & money.

JMT

[brihaspati]

The fundamental problem is the confusion in India's elite and political establishment since 1947 - about what Pakistan is and what should be done with it.

Forget the political failure that went on before - solidly connected with a paranoid obsession about regional dominance over "national" power. But post Partition the policy towards Pak appears to be best explained as being primarily driven by two constructed myths :

(1) any hostile action against Pak, aimed at dismemberment or dissolution of Pak will consolidate Musilms inside India against India, and all the worlds powers will come to Pak's aid. India will have to fight Muslims both inside India as well as in Pak.

(2) It is better to keep out the mentality represented by the Paki populations. The best option is to keep those populations out from contaminating the remaining Muslims inside, and therefore preserving Pak is a way of preserving India.

There are actually many assumptions here, and all of which have proved wrong one way or the another.
(1) hostile actions have been undertaken against Pak, and some of the world powers threatened but never actually concretely mounted any action to aid Pak
(2) Muslims inside India still stayed with the party under which such hostile actions were undertaken [before Kargil]
(3) Keeping Pak "out" has not prevented "contamination" with home-grown Islamic terror aiming for establishment of Islamiat all over India - obvious - even though the evidence consistently falls flat consistently in Indian courts of law only if the accused Muslim is of Indian citizenship.
(4) Islamiat over and above Indian-ness has not vanished within India. Instead it has grown - with Indian Muslims strongly and visibly expressing their solidarity with pet obsessions of Islamism globally, like Palestine. It has shown itself capable of enforcing Islamist action by India against standard targets of Islamism - such as literary or ideological criticism of any aspect of Islamist practice, as with Rushdie and Tasleema. Such violent behaviour on street by the Indian Muslims are never ever seen protesting Pak role in terror in India, or the ruthless exploitation and genocide against Hindus or Sikhs in Pak or BD [In fact Tasleema's expulsion from BD primarily came becuase of her revelations about abuse of Hindus in BD at the hands of Islamists]

Perceptions of Pakistan's strategic brilliance or their supposed mastery and being ahead is perhaps a reflection of our failing to realize that the error has been political and a result of stupid interpretations of historical experiences. Preservation of Pakistan has only increased the Islamist problem, and spread out the ideological trends and institutions that were originally used by the islamist leadership to build up to the very Partition.

Looking at this or that examples of failure in economic terms can be gratifying. But Islamist domains have never been known for sustained economic growth and innovation. The very nature of the theology prevents it from questioning and exploration and therefore leads to economic stagnation. It only survives by exploiting the natural resources it possesses as relevant for the economy of the period, and controlling trade flow through their lands. They ultimately always live off the labour of "others", either by threatening nuisance value or by direct aggression and looting. So it periodically needs to go out and loot.

After exhausting the potential from the resources afforded by the territory of Pak, Pak will now need to go and out and loot and India is the next richest plum to bite into. So what it is doing is consistent with all of historical islamist practice. But teh problem that India has compounded by letting Pak stay alive is the increasing political clout of Islamism inside India which also now wants to consolidate its separate and exclusive hold on Indian Muslims. The combined force of this Islamist trend of demanding a free-ride from the efforts and products of neighbours and others - both inside and outside of India - is a force to reckon with.

The key is not to wait further that the whole region consolidates and intensifies this trend. All the patriotic Indian muslim we hear about during the partition who stayed behind in India, however did not go out to kill the Islamist rioters marauding over Hindus or Sikhs. With a few rare exceptions the Muslim populations in Muslim majority areas remained largely passive and watched their neighbouring Hindus or Sikhs being butchered. it is also well-known that most of the areas where rioting took place were activated by the ML's trained goons months before the actual Partition and they were mainly "outsiders" to the region they were placed into. On the day of "action" they had perfect information about their targets whcih could only have been provided by the local Muslim community. But these are the historical experiences we choose to ignore.

What specific missile or what brilliant tactical move needs to be made to dissolve Pak is important definitely, but before that comes the crucial recognition that,

(1) it is for India's own continued existence and growth and preservation of its liberal framework that Pak needs to be dissolved as early as possible
(2) the entire subcontinent needs to be properly sanitized of all Islamist influences and this can only be done by weakening and removing all Islamist institutions and structures of propagation. This in turn can only be done under full rashtryia control over all of Pak territories.

This applies to POK too. The political will and perception is the first crucial step. Application and implementation can be left to the experts.

[Manishw]

^ Another Excellent post Brihaspati Ji, Just a point.Arun Shourie an ex cabinet minister said that by the partitioning India and creating Pakistan we have bought ourselves nothing more than some breathing space.
You are talking of reversing a trend which is growing secularly (with of course some hiccup's) over a period greater than 1000 Yrs. Most people (IMO) will agree with your post, but

Application and implementation can be left to the experts.

I guess the devil lies in the detail's, at least for many of us and if we don't have a clear understanding of the end points and the way to go about I am afraid only confusion is generated to no end.
JMT.

[shiv]

explained as being primarily driven by two constructed myths :

(1) any hostile action against Pak, aimed at dismemberment or dissolution of Pak will consolidate Musilms inside India against India, and all the worlds powers will come to Pak's aid. India will have to fight Muslims both inside India as well as in Pak.

This is a reading of the supposed Indian mindset regarding Indian Muslims and I do not disagree with it - it is likely to be true and fits in with what I proposed in an article I wrote. To be terminologically accurate this was the unspoken majority view of the expected reaction from Indian Muslims. I don't know if anyone has specifically documented this point per se - but obviously the thought occurred to me (from events in the past that I personally experienced) as well as form the writings of some others - including Sarila.

But this viewpoint represents a rare area of agreement between Indian beliefs and Pakistani establishment beliefs. The Pakistani establishment too, apart from speaking for Indian Muslims, expected that they would soon rise in revolt. This was expected in 1965 when the infiltrators were sent in to create mayhem, to be joined by locals and the capture of the Srinagar Radio station that was to announce the liberation of Kashmir. This of course was Ayub's failed "Operation Gibralter" (sic) as it was described in 1965.

So what happened was that both the Pakistani establishment and a dominant Indian view expected that Indian Muslims could/would revolt or be unfaithful or treasonous. In a sense the "ball was in the Indian Muslim court". It is now possible to judge them with positives and negatives. Each person is free to reach his judgement on their loyalty or lack of it.

After that Pakistan backed Sikh militancy in India and when that was crushed they stoked terrorism in Kashmir. When that started to be conquered, terrorism was successfully spread all over India for over a decade. It can be argued (as Pakistan has done) that this terrorism all over India represents the support Pakistan has from Indian Muslims - for we know that Indians were involved and Pakistanis claim that all this terrorism was totally Indian with no Pakistan inputs. As per the Pakistani narrative, Indian Muslims, Sikhs , "dalits" and "Tamils" are all waiting to break away from India and are waiting for a signal from Pakistan. But I think terrorism all over India was not designed to cause a Muslim revolt so much as to cause a majority reaction against Muslims. What the Paki establishment and its Jamat ud Dawa prostitutes would probably have liked to see most is the sort of attacks and revenge killings that are going on between Shias and Sunnis in Pakistan. The fact that these did not occur by and large goes to India's credit. Note that we have had some trying times where we have had terrorism in India with a blatant Islamic extremist signature combined with mindless Muslim agitation over unconnected global Islamist Issues like Palestine and cartoons and not a cheep about Islamist massacres in India, Iraq and Afghanistan. But for a nation that allegedly suspected its own Muslim community - that same community was given immunity from blame despite this by the likes of Mulayam who actually supported a terrorist against lawmakers.

It is only after Pakistan started going downhill - literally after 26-11 that there seems to be a much greater chance of being open about what Islam is is and what it should be. Chaos in Pakistan is to India's benefit. A stable Pakistan will be a constant threat. I lack geographical knowledge of Pakistan occupied Kashmir and have no sentimental attachment to its boundaries as drawn in maps. Perhaps the boundaries do have geographical, militarily defensible basis. All I am interested in is blasting a way through Pakistan into Afghanistan. The rest of Pakistan needs to be sorted out a small bit at a a time.

[Altair]

All I am interested in is blasting a way through Pakistan into Afghanistan. The rest of Pakistan needs to be sorted out a small bit at a a time.

You must have had a great Sunday!

[shiv]

. but calculation a generation or two ahead?

Please could you, also, slightly expand on who are the “others” you are referring to? And what makes you conclude “Not by us generally”?

Let me just quote 3 sentences that you have posted that is typical of the viewpoints of many

1) Our politcians are not good enough:

or, alternatively, time we finally accepted the fact that our politicians may just not be capable of long term vision/planning and perhaps, just let things drift along ("chalta hain" attitude) without any urgency in defence planning unless a clear crisis stares them at the face.

2) Pakistanis are not so clever

you are, perhaps, giving them far more credit for their intelligence than what is necessarily due....

I take these sentences to imply that you personally belong to some class of person who is more capable than the Indian politician and more intelligent than the Pakistani.

But you ask:

Is this the only logical follow up to the (1) above?

In other words:
3) You don't have the answer yourself just like Indian politicians.

If you know you should answer the question yourself. But in two posts you have said nothing. Apart from making claims about the incapability of the government and the lesser than advertised intelligence of the Pakistani you have only displayed ignorance of any answers yourself.

Our country has a lot of people who hold opinions such as you have posted. Contempt for government. Contempt for Pakis. But absolutely no answers. Where is that extra spark that reveals that this thinking is at least equal to that shown by Pakistanis? It does not appear anywhere other than an ability to deride someone else's capability and ask questions.

I have stated my view and if you disagree that is your prerogative - but please take time out to actually provide answers rather than asking more questions. You should have the answers no? Your opinion of a wide group of people is that they are incapable. You have clear opinions about other people's capabilities. But not of how to solve problems. How does that make you different from the Indian government in problem solving capability? Could it perhaps indicate that the government may be doing better than you claim? And the Pakis may be cleverer than you claim?

Criticism of the other groups capabilities and the implication that you know better should translate to an indicator of what you know that is so much better and will solve problems that others have not been able to do. Please say what you know.

[anupmisra]

Apologies if these videos are repeats.

Protests against Pakistans Gilgit Package
Women in Gilgit Protest Atrocities of Pakistani Army
Joblesness drives GILGIT YOUTHS to SUICIDE
Islamabad tightens its stranglehold on Gilgit Baltistan

[shiv]

A great and relevant article on SRR from 2006
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/SRR/2006/02/52.html

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/SRR/2006/02/52.html

The creation of Pakistan was an exercise in the preservation of imperial interests in the region. At that the time, (in the early years of the war when the British did not anticipate they would have to quit India so soon) the main perceived threat to British interests, was the growing might of the Soviet Union, and Britain was worried about a possible Soviet thrust into Chitral, Gilgit and Swat. China did not figure in imperial calculations at that time because Chiang Kai Shek was an ally. It was argued, that a friendly Muslim Pakistan, would be a better bet at handling the expanding Russian Empire, and more likely to co-operate with British military and foreign policy matters, rather than a Hindu India sitting far way from the actual scene of action. British withdrawal would severely impair that country’s ability to protect its interests in the Middle East and the Indian Ocean region – the vital sea and trade routes—and this breach could be filled by a pliant new Muslim state. The Indus valley, western Punjab and Balochistan were vital to the preservation of British security interests in the region. Besides, after Pakistan was created, the British did not want to be seen doing anything anti-Muslim, lest it further exacerbated the wrath of the Arab Muslim world, which was already angered by the creation of Israel.

From then on, it was a familiar story repeated on each occasion – Pakistan became intransigent and we know the reactions in 1965, 1971, 1999 and even in 2001. Each time there was a reluctance to blame Pakistan, and each time there was pressure on India to show restraint. We must also remember that in 1965 and 1971, neither country was a nuclear power, and so there was no question of there being a nuclear powder keg. Cold War interests reigned. Later, interests emanating from a desire for global dominance meant that the West turned a blind eye to Gen Zia ul Haq’s feverish and clandestine schemes to acquire the nuclear weapon in the 80s because Pakistan was the base country for the jehad against the Soviet Union. Then later, the AQ Khan nuclear sales have been sought to be underplayed because Pakistan is a vital ally in the war against terror. In essence, the situation today is very much the same as it was 60 years ago. Pakistan has continued its well organised and carefully calibrated war against India, with the West trying to shackle India in various ways, insisting that concessions should come from India, the bigger country. It was Attlee who urged India to exercise restraint in 1947 and it was Blair who made similar requests in 1999 and 2001. All this is history that may not have fully played itself out and likely to be repeated as the New Great Game warms up.

We need to pay more attention to this area of “Pak Occupied Gilgit and Baltistan,” as the Chairman of the Balawaristan National Front (BNF), refers to his land. The people of Baltistan (Skardu and Astore) have had close ethnic, religious ties with people of Ladakh; the Shias and Ismailis of Gilgit and Baltistan have had close ties with the Shias of Kargil and have been oppressed by the Sunnis of Pakistan. The Shias were 85 percent of the population in 1948 but are now down to 50 percent. Pakistani authorities have systematically settled Sunni Wahabbis in Gilgit and Baltistan through unfair land allocations or employment. Shias resent the education syllabus thrust on them.

[ManuT]

We constantly laugh and mock the Pakistani army's "tactical brilliance but strategic stupidity"

But the joke is on us. The Pakistani army shows strategic brilliance because it starts wars that it cannot win and either backs out or keeps the wars deniable - so the army does not get hit. This is not stupidity. It is smart. The army survives - tactical defeat or not. I mean just look at us jingos on this forum. We are all so bloody knowledgeable - Orbat, weapons capabilities bla bla bla. We know just what we need to whup Paki backside. Does anyone seriously think that the Paki army does not know all that we do and more? They are far beyond where we are. Their level of calculation and gambling is a generation or two ahead -but it is recognized by the Indian armed forces and others in India. Not by us generally.

The TSPA attempts in J&K are so far nothing but a variation of the 'kabailees'. From 1947, 1965, 1999 were more of the same. The 'brilliant' part in 1999 (apart from the IA hijacking) were its attempts to create a diversion in kutch, which was called as such.

Their level of 'cleverness' is reflected in its choosing of what ISI considers is stragic assets w.r.t India. It will continue to reflect this 'wisdom', it so appears.

After that Pakistan backed Sikh militancy in India and when that was crushed they stoked terrorism in Kashmir. When that started to be conquered, terrorism was successfully spread all over India for over a decade.

That was 'K2'. (slipped out from the Zia's speach, IIRC in 1983, in POK). As the name suggests, it was run in parallel. Insurgency in Punjab lasted till 1994, Muj style pattern was implemented in J&K in 1990 (Afghans started showing up in 1991). It was known, last stage of K2 was War. This turned out to be Kargil. I remember, a mid level IA guy, shaking his head, post Kargil, as to what a disappointment K2 was. IMO, Kargil was the terminating point of this Zia line of thinking, implemented by Mush. Mush became dangerous only after the coup.

Then I do not think TSPA had any inkling of Pokhran-II in 1998, out of ideas, it reacted as its whole defensive doctrine was falling apart. It only proved India's argument. It would not call TSP's reaction stratigically brillant.

Also, TSPA had not accounted for Op Parakram, Mush had to go on TV to give commitments (which of course it never kept, point is, TSPA totally misjudged potential of random acts of terror escalating beyond control)

The terrorism that India has faced Kargil is because of TSP's position in the GWOT post 9/11, but it is at an end, IMO. What started off as deendar-e-anjuman blasts on Churches has gained strength because of it and culminated as 26/11. But this is not 2001, and 2010 and I guess, USofA is a little bit wiser today.


Overall, I agree, choas in TSP is better for India.

[shiv]

The TSPA attempts in J&K are so far nothing but a variation of the 'kabailees'. From 1947, 1965, 1999 were more of the same. The 'brilliant' part in 1999 (apart from the IA hijacking) were its attempts to create a diversion in kutch, which was called as such.

Their level of 'cleverness' is reflected in its choosing of what ISI considers is stragic assets w.r.t India. It will continue to reflect this 'wisdom', it so appears.

There are many groups dependent on keeping the Kashmir question alive
1) The main ethos of the Pakistani army and Pakistani people's support for the army's exalted position and inflated budget are dependent on the twin pillars of Muslim grievance and "oppression" in Kashmir. A settled Kashmir is dangerous to the survival of the Pakistani army.

2) Extra funding and support from the allies the Pak army have cultivated for decades rest on the shaky legs of Pakistan's Kashmir policy. The quid pro quo with China and the US has been - "We the Pakistan army, who claim to do jihad in the name of Allah will gladly prostitute ourselves and put China and the US ahead of Allah as long as you support us on Kashmir"

3) The Islamist groups whom the Pakistan army and polity cultivated to whip up an Islamic grievance against India again need the Kashmir issue to be burning. After the cold war - Kashmir was the closes and most convenient pint to do jihad. It still remains that way as other nations clamp down on the movement of Pakis.

Note that the Islamist groups and the Paki army have survived with reputation intact despite Pakistan going downhill. And apart from western blindness (deliberate or pretend) to this, the most mind bogglingly irritating thing is to read a news item (posted today) on BR that asks "Is the Pakistan army in charge"

Yes of course it is. Does one have to ask the question? The only caveat is that the Pakistan army's control has declined. Wars and defeats have not brought down the Pakistan army because their survival is not linked to military defeat. Their survival is linked to goodwill from Pakistanis, aid from 3.5, the success of jihadis (the proxies of the Paki army), and teh continued wearing of blinkers by a large proportion of Indians and others who think that the Pakistani army is ever "out of power" in Pakistan.

The way to bring the Paki army down is to
1) Defeat jihad against India
2) Ensure that jihad is directed at China and the US
3) Try and achieve a reduction in popularity of the Pakistan army in Pakistan by showing them up. A scandal like the cricket scandal would be good. I wonder if we can dig up facts about the Paki army's kickbacks and assets of jernails.

[RajeshA]

All I am interested in is blasting a way through Pakistan into Afghanistan. The rest of Pakistan needs to be sorted out a small bit at a a time.

The corollary is that the direct route between China and Pakistan would end. In our scenarios that Pakistan will fail, collapse, and break-up, we forget that even if Pakjab is cut off from Pushtunistan, Sindh, Baluchistan etc. it will remain connected to China, making Pakjab with nuclear weapons even more dependent on the Chinese and even more subservient.

Chinese occupation of PoK would ensure that the collapse of Pakistan does not mean its loss of an ally useful for creating problems for India.

PoK has to be brought under Indian control if India has to have a chance of breaking out of our prison in South Asia.

With the Chinese having increased their involvement in PoK, it means India cannot afford to lose time.

Pakistan needs to be brought down not in 20 years but in the next 4-5 years. Opening a proxy war with Pakistan from Afghanistan would be the fastest way.

[shiv]

Well Dr. Shiv, you were the one who initially made certain claims about capability of Pakistanis. First please go ahead and clarify why you think so before expecting the same from others.

Saar. You do not want to read what I have writtten. I have already spoken of what I believe is the Pakistan army's capability. You need to go back and read if you are really so interested in my viewpoint.

The way to bring the Paki army down is to
1) Defeat jihad against India
2) Ensure that jihad is directed at China and the US
3) Try and achieve a reduction in popularity of the Pakistan army in Pakistan by showing them up. A scandal like the cricket scandal would be good. I wonder if we can dig up facts about the Paki army's kickbacks and assets of jernails.

But at the same time we must also remember “But no one ever talks about how it might feel for a person or group that has decided that they refuse to lose in war no matter how high the cost or how great the losses” as “They are far from stupid” and “Their level of calculation and gambling is a generation or two ahead”.

Absolutely saar. Selective quoting and selective blindness is what you have used here. Good for rhetorical beating about the bush and carrying on the pretence of a discussion without ever committing anything of note other than a criticism of someone else's actions or views. Please go back to the same post that you have painstakingly quoted and read the last line. This is the link
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 42#p935342

The Pakistan army is not going to be defeated militarily. Therefore - regarding PoK

Any reoccupation has to come in a way that the Pakis are not prepared for and cannot stop India from doing. Thinking of what that involves is the difficult trick.

And MY thoughts in that regard are:

The way to bring the Paki army down is to
1) Defeat jihad against India
2) Ensure that jihad is directed at China and the US
3) Try and achieve a reduction in popularity of the Pakistan army in Pakistan by showing them up. A scandal like the cricket scandal would be good. I wonder if we can dig up facts about the Paki army's kickbacks and assets of jernails.

Have you anything of note to say apart from saying what you have already indicated
1) GoI is useless
2) Pakis are not clever
3) You have failed to read what I have written earlier and keep asking me to repeat what I have already said.

[brihaspati]

All I am interested in is blasting a way through Pakistan into Afghanistan. The rest of Pakistan needs to be sorted out a small bit at a a time.

The corollary is that the direct route between China and Pakistan would end. In our scenarios that Pakistan will fail, collapse, and break-up, we forget that even if Pakjab is cut off from Pushtunistan, Sindh, Baluchistan etc. it will remain connected to China, making Pakjab with nuclear weapons even more dependent on the Chinese and even more subservient.

Chinese occupation of PoK would ensure that the collapse of Pakistan does not mean its loss of an ally useful for creating problems for India.

PoK has to be brought under Indian control if India has to have a chance of breaking out of our prison in South Asia.

With the Chinese having increased their involvement in PoK, it means India cannot afford to lose time.

Pakistan needs to be brought down not in 20 years but in the next 4-5 years. Opening a proxy war with Pakistan from Afghanistan would be the fastest way.

In the previous version of the "strategic scenarios" thread, I think we had discussed elaborately about the need to re-occupy POK and cease control of KKH.This was explicitly discussed both as a standalone as well as part of comprehensive reoccupation of the entire region currently under formal Paki government control. It was specifically discussed to block PRC access to Arabian Sea and India to link up with Afghan territory on borders.

Recently we have also discussed the possibility that the rump state of Islamabad finds expansion into "Kashmir" more a necessity to preserve its power in at least a consolidated "northern area" with the backup of the PLA through the KKH.

The question about all this is that we do game these scenarios long before they actually happen or tend to happen. However, we are not in a position to implement appropriate reactions in the bodies that need to take action.

[RajeshA]

The question about all this is that we do game these scenarios long before they actually happen or tend to happen. However, we are not in a position to implement appropriate reactions in the bodies that need to take action.

brihaspati garu,

The implementation part becomes all the more urgent, and starting the proxy war against Pakistan in earnest would cut the time-frame needed to effect the change.

[shiv]

Have you anything of note to say apart from saying what you have already indicated
1) GoI is useless
2) Pakis are not clever

Purely your selective interpretation to suit your agenda....

"My agenda"? You are attributing an agenda to me when you have failed to take into account the possibility that you may not have meant what you wrote, or you may have written what you did not mean or that I may have misunderstood what you meant.

Which is it? You did point out how you believed that we may have to assume the GoI is incapable and that the Pakistanis are not as clever as you think that i am making them out to be. You also wrote a Hindi sentence in English script but I did not understand that. Perhaps if your revelation was hidden in there you might want to translate? Do you need me to search for your post and link it here?

Selective interpretation is a game that more than one person can play. If you agree with me fine. If you disagree say so. if you have not understood, please say so. And if you do not wish to explain what you have written please say so.