Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 2011

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 17 May 2011 22:59

Groper visits Beijing to sign a MUTUAL DEFENCE PACT. Which means anyone who attacks Pak also attacks PRC! Serious stuff.

Gilani’s Beijing visit to herald ‘Look China’ era

By: Salim Bokhari | Published: May 16, 2011

LAHORE - Pakistan and China would be entering a historic phase of bilateral relations when the leaderships of both the countries would meet in Beijing to restructure their mutual bonds that have withstood all the tests of time.
The new chapter is being added to further cement existing excellent ties, the focus of which would be to ensure mutual defence against all forms of foreign aggression.
This may be remembered that bilateral relations between Islamabad and Beijing have had many peaks but no troughs, and have attained new heights in many areas.
To ink solidification of ties, besides several agreements, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani would embark on a journey to the Chinese capital on May 17 (Tuesday) to apprise Beijing’s top leadership of his country’s experience and lessons learnt from America’s deep penetration inside Pakistani territory to kill Osama bin Laden, the secret operation that has made Pakistan vulnerable to such adventures in the future.
The military top brass and defence think tanks of both the countries have been in close contact since the incident of May 2 and have been working out a joint defence mechanism. A military delegation would also visit Beijing soon to brainstorm future strategy to deal with a repeat of such an eventuality. A Chinese military delegation has recently concluded a visit to Islamabad.
What stitches Pakistan and China together is the fact that they have two common enemies, the United States and India. Beijing grudges Western Europe and America joining hands to prop up New Delhi as a counterweight to China in the region. China is also fully aware that conspiracies are being hatched at the behest of Washington and other European capitals to curtail Beijing’s fast emergence as a superpower of the world.

PM Gilani is understood to be carrying in his briefcase a blueprint for sharing it with his Chinese counterpart how best the two sides together thwart all nefarious designs aimed at harming either Pakistan or China. Prime Minister Gilani would also carry with him a message of goodwill and gratitude for China’s unflinching support to Pakistan at a very trying moment in the history of Pakistan when it was facing near-isolation at the international level.
China was the first country, followed only by Iran, which said the manner in which the CIA carried the OBL kill mission was violation of Pakistan’s sovereignty and that Islamabad’s contribution in the international war on terror was second to none. Prime Minister Gilani will be meeting Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao on May 18 (Wednesday). They would give a final shape to the proposals that the Pakistan leader would table before Premier Jiabao before the same could be presented to Chinese President Hu Jintao whom Premier Gilani would be meeting on May 20 (Friday).
The Sino-Pak relationship in 2011 and beyond is bound to get stronger as a result of high-level civil and military exchanges. China and Pakistan armed forces would continue to hold joint exercises, pursue programmes of training and collaborate in joint defence production.
It may be recalled that during Premier Wen Jiabao’s last visit to Pakistan, the two sides decided to establish an Energy Cooperation Mechanism, open branches of the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China in Pakistan, conclude Currency Swap Arrangements and start Agriculture Demonstration Zones in Pakistan.
Diplomatic observers whom The Nation contacted expressed their optimism regarding the outcome of Premier Gilani’s upcoming visit to China. Most of them were of the view that announcement of this visit must have sent ripples amongst the policymakers and the military top brass in New Delhi and Washington since they were not anticipating it.
These observers further argue that the manner in which the American CIA and Pentagon had let Pakistani counterparts down, they should expect that Islamabad would also explore all its options to ensure no such misadventure is attempted again.
In their opinion, the timing of President Asif Ali Zardari’s visit to Moscow could not have been better and the issues discussed by him with his Russian counterpart had also sent strong signals to Washington and New Delhi because the discussion in Moscow also had a reference of Russian desire to have access to warm waters.
Pakistan and China are all-weather and time-tested friends. Both the countries enjoy geographical contiguity and strong political solidarity. There are natural complementarities between their economies. What is most important is that the hearts of the two people beat together. In the past decade, Sino-Pak economic and cultural relations had also developed rapidly. The bilateral trade currently is about $7 billion, but with the signing of the Free Trade Agreements on goods, services and investment, the trade is likely to grow further. This trend was evident when Pakistan’s exports to China increased by 25 per cent in 2009; and the growth in two-way trade in the first two quarters of 2010 had been steady.

Need of the hour is to check mate PRC move by signing a dharmic alliance with ASEAN, Nepal, Bhutan. Aus, Jap. PRC would not be able to make a damn move.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 17 May 2011 23:13

^ Are pakis trying to do a 1971 on Bharat in Kashmir?

I like the Dharmic Alliance idea. This is where Unkil should enter the picture albeit discreetly.

Nandu · Post by **Nandu** » 17 May 2011 23:21

RamaY wrote:^ Are pakis trying to do a 1971 on Bharat in Kashmir?

Haven't they been trying that since 1947?

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 17 May 2011 23:22

India will do it. its just a question of time. PRC has real Nazi like ideologies. Everyone is running to India's arms in the region. Time will bring us all together. India just needs to ink it and establish an alliance. PRC won't be able to do much. We need to expand the factories for our Navy, Missile production facilities etc to be able to cope with selling Indian defence products to our allies and arming them adequately.

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 17 May 2011 23:35

RamaY wrote:^ Are pakis trying to do a 1971 on Bharat in Kashmir?

I like the Dharmic Alliance idea. This is where Unkil should enter the picture albeit discreetly.

Unkil has bigger problems with PRC and he did not do anything. I wouldn't count on Unkil, and we shouldn't. PRC will abandon Pakis just as they did in 65,71 and 99, if Unkil stays away. PRC would love to see India tied down in a guerrilla war for a decade but they would not involve in a Paki tactical brilliance unless it is what they want.
IMO,it is India Pakistan semi final and history tells how it ends..

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 17 May 2011 23:37

http://nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-news ... -in-Quetta
5 killed as suicide bombers hit check post in Quetta

At least five people were killed and some others wounded Tuesday when some suicide bombers targeted a check post in the outskirts of Quetta, local sources said. A bomber detonated and killed himself and two others, while another two female bombers were shot dead by the security forces. Along with the suicide attacks, some unknown militants also fired at the check post of the paramilitary Frontier Corps and exchange of fire was heard between the security forces and the militants.

krithivas · Post by **krithivas** » 17 May 2011 23:47

More clarity -
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/us-helico ... d=13621329

A U.S. helicopter exchanged fire with Pakistani troops near the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan today, resulting in injuries for two Pakistani soldiers, U.S. and Pakistani officials said.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 17 May 2011 23:49

Altair wrote:
RamaY wrote:^ Are pakis trying to do a 1971 on Bharat in Kashmir?

I like the Dharmic Alliance idea. This is where Unkil should enter the picture albeit discreetly.
Unkil has bigger problems with PRC and he did not do anything. I wouldn't count on Unkil, and we shouldn't. PRC will abandon Pakis just as they did in 65,71 and 99, if Unkil stays away. PRC would love to see India tied down in a guerrilla war for a decade but they would not involve in a Paki tactical brilliance unless it is what they want.
IMO,it is India Pakistan semi final and history tells how it ends..

I am not expecting unkil to do anything overt; except to encourage others in ASEAN to take Bharat's lead.

It is all posturing. Not that it makes much difference for Bharat. My interest is that we break pakistan with as little life-loss to Bharat as possible.

Rahul Shukla · Post by **Rahul Shukla** » 17 May 2011 23:59

As revealed to me by the spirits after extensive ISO 9001 quality testing of local booze stock and subsequent staring into a sink full of water for long durations until I lose conciousness:

Pakistan has two stockpiles of nuclear weapons: 1). imported/assembled and disclosed to uncle (85%) and, 2). imported/assembled and not disclosed (but known) to uncle (15%). Further, contingency plans exist for expedited import/assembly of a few devices of radically different configuration vs. existing stockpile(s) from the northeastern holy lands of Xinjiang, subject to the approval of the stewards of Lanzhou military region.

Approximately half of the nuclear weapons stockpile (category 1) is stored in disassembled form at major fizzle-ya/army bases. These include some prime locations (e.g. Sargodha) which have the entire gamut of infrastructure needed to: assemble a nuclear warhead, mate it with a missile, fuel said armed missle, and launch at India. The remaining locations store nuclear weapons (category 1) in disassembled format, but no single location stores all components of a nuclear weapon. So an attack on one of these locations will not lead to a "Broken Arrow" situation.

Uncle, well versed in matters and protocols related to pre/post nuclear weapons launch, monitors Sargodha type locations 24/7 for any sign of heightened activity and relays this information to New Delhi if necessary, while calling every red phone in GHQ Pindi to seek an explanation. Uncle monitors (and Beijing too) western Indian military bases for any sign of excessive (pre-war/surprise attack) incense burning/chanting and relays this information to Pindi whether it is necessary or not. Uncle is aware of almost all of the locations where disassembled components of (category 1) nuclear warheads are stored since Uncle tracks the supporting infrastructure required to operate and safeguard these facilities, in addition to communication channels to/from these facilities.

Uncle's biggest worry and Pakistan's biggest strategic asset, are (category 2) nuclear weapons, which are different in nature and yield from category 1 stockpile, and stored and maintained with active assistance from China. When queried, Pakistan says these are Chinese military facilities and off-limits to Pakistan (a la Shamsi) and when Chinese are queried, they say either: 1). noh kom ant, or 2). noh exist facility, or 3). facility is for non-nuclear peaceful bilateral cooperation i.e. goat genome project.

Anyway, in regards to fissile material both Uncle and India have clearly defined red-lines duly communicated to Pakistan which, if crossed, would result in specific economic and military consequences for Pakistan. Pakistan's red-lines are mostly India specific but existential threat from Uncle has recently been added to the list.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 18 May 2011 00:07

The way to put the nuclear genie back into the bottle in Pakistan, is

to ensure an ever decreasing area for the Pakjabi Army to operate (break up Pakistan, Pakjab consists of only non-Seraiki Pakjab),
to remove the various access routes for sustenance (no access to Arabian Sea or China or Iran),
to make "Pakistan" dependent on Indian benevolence (trade, access), and
to revert the ideology from Islamism to ethnicity-based (Punjabi Pride).

Once the ambitions of Pakjab have been contained, considering the cost of maintaining a nuclear deterrence, the nuclear arsenal can be decommissioned in due time.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 18 May 2011 00:15

RajeshA wrote:The way to put the nuclear genie back into the bottle in Pakistan, is

to ensure an ever decreasing area for the Pakjabi Army to operate (break up Pakistan, Pakjab consists of only non-Seraiki Pakjab),

to remove the various access routes for sustenance (no access to Arabian Sea or China or Iran),

to make "Pakistan" dependent on Indian benevolence (trade, access), and

to revert the ideology from Islamism to ethnicity-based (Punjabi Pride).
Once the ambitions of Pakjab have been contained, considering the cost of maintaining a nuclear deterrence, the nuclear arsenal can be decommissioned in due time.

Not practical and too simplistic.
The Islamic radical ruling group has a nuclear weapon and in the history of Islam this is the first time they have something to destroy large nations, infidels etc. This is the coming of mahdi and the history of Islam and its future is very important to them. This has been exploited by US and the west for the last 30 years and Indians have been oblivious of this. Need to understand how Pakistan views the history of Islam and role of Pakistan and its people in this history and coming future

This ambition is not going to go away. This needs a serious approach and US is showing signs of being serious now.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 18 May 2011 00:15

RamaY wrote:^ Are pakis trying to do a 1971 on Bharat in Kashmir?

I like the Dharmic Alliance idea. This is where Unkil should enter the picture albeit discreetly.

The article is a wet dream spill from nutty Nation.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 18 May 2011 00:24

shyamd wrote:Groper visits Beijing to sign a MUTUAL DEFENCE PACT. Which means anyone who attacks Pak also attacks PRC! Serious stuff.Gilani’s Beijing visit to herald ‘Look China’ era

Mutual Defence Pact, eh? It doesn't get better than this. Now some hard questions.

If pa'astan is attacked, PRC would consider that as an attack on to itself. If so, I trust it also works the other way. If PRC is attacked (by, say, Vietnam, Taiwan, Japan, Korea or Indonesia), will the pakis consider that an attack on its so-virginity? I take it that PRC would rush its gallant forces to the defence of the soon-to-be-clobbered mard-e-momeens. Will the Pakis do the same in return if PRC were under attack? Secondly, what if the Uighurs under a unified Turkman command were to attack the PLA? Would the mards from PA get into a menage-a-trois with their co-religionists and peeve off the inhouse purer-than-the-pure mard-e-momeens? That will be pop corn and beer time for the rest of us.

So, now lets move away from the overly imaginative battlefields and on to the boardrooms of the UNSC and other global monitoring agencies. Will PRC and pa'astan come to each other's aid and support for any and all issues? Lets say, PRC attacks Vietnam. Will the pakis support that action in the UN (and risk world wide condemnation)? Better yet, will the Chinese jump in to protect the paki rear ends if the remaining AQ leadership is found alive and kicking in LaWhore? I believe a typical MDP would require one to do so.

Did the pakis think this one through? Apparently not. This seems to be a knee jerk reaction by the paki leadership. Mutual defence pacts are a thing of the past. Reminiscent of Warsaw and Cento pacts. There are so many cross economic issues and conflicting interests in this globalized world, there is no need for a pure mutual defence pact any more.

Mahendra · Post by **Mahendra** » 18 May 2011 01:34

LOL, I think the Chinese need the Pawkis more than the Pawkis need the Chinese. The Chinese have screwed themselves by following the one child policy. There simply aren't enough Chinese people to fill up the tall, erect and Shiny buildings which have grown all over China like mushrooms in a swamp. The Pawkis will fill up the buildings in a jiffy and will create a shortage of tall shiny and erect buildings within half a decade. A few enterprising Pawkis will also manage to smuggle in a few 'soot'cases into those tall, shiny and erect buildings. Pakistan will become China and China will become Pakistan. The momeen will conquer China without firing a shot and it will become Darul-Herb Pork Soup. The sky is the limit for an imaginative PAwki without a brain

shaardula · Post by **shaardula** » 18 May 2011 01:39

separation of components eliminates easy access to WMDs aka efficient means of mass killing. but terror is more about creating a morbid spectacle than it is about killing a large number of people. the nuisance factor of exposed radioactive material is all that is necessary and sufficient for the purpose. so for terror purposes, CJ = radioactive material, and the question therefore still is how do they guard it?

now about the possibility of losing a CJ. i agree that rationally, tspian state actors have no incentive to lose even one of the CJs. also, realistically, it is not possible for a truly non-state actor to steal it and get away with it. if a CJ is stolen, assuming tspian-state actors remain rational, then it has to be either some 'rogue elements' within the tspa, acting alone or with non-state actors, who stole it.

next, are there such rogues in the tspa? well kiyani et al have been saying there are and these unyielding islamist seem to magically thrive across the spectrum of pakistani life - in military, religion, lawyers, artistes etc etc. all islamists - ferociously independent and self sufficient, with state actors barely managing to control them. we are told that islamists exist without a care for the normal mores that afflict the common people in the rest of the world. we are to believe that natural laws of fear of punishment, rule of law, self preservation, betterment, familial bonds, economics etc are meaningless to them and all that matters to common pakistan is junoon, jasba and geopolitics. But that is all for another day.

if it is true that there exist rogue elements in tspa, then scattering the CJs makes it that much harder to protect. One issue is number of rogues who are waiting to steal a CJ. The other issue is for tspa to identify sufficient number of non-rogues to protect the CJs. Does TSPA have the required number of non-rogues to guard its CJ? and how does tspa keep a lid on the on the attrition of non-rogues to rogue-dom?

After all, we know that within TSP, whether rogue or not, there is a general consensus about the general world view and nature of things - understanding of grievances, history and destiny. all same. what differentiates a rogue from non-rogue is what one is willing to do about it in personal capacity. i.e., strategically, rogue and non-rogue are the same. where they differ is in tactics. i dont think it is an exaggeration to state that the geopolitical world view of tspian state actors is much closer to islamists than it is to anybody else. if you ask them to draw up a list of favourable outcomes, both parties will draw the same list.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 May 2011 01:44

Shaardula, Post in this thread:

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... f=1&t=5936

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 18 May 2011 01:45

How much proliferation risk is a uranium mill?

The US has for years worried about terrorists getting their hand on fissile material, and then trying to jerry rig a dirty weapon. India's own NSA is on record saying that these terrorists have sufficient physics to be able to do so, once they get their hands on fissile material.

I had written about two possible locations that Raymond Davis was looking into both on the outskirts on Lahore:
1. The LET HQ at Muridke.
2. The Atomic Energy Minerals Center at Kala Shah Kaku.

There are valid reasons for keeping an eye on the former. OBL has build a resthouse in that campus with his money, he himself has stayed there from time to time (until pakistan formally asked him not to come there - but who knows), his Al Qaida associates have sought refuge there, and finally all manner of pakistanis who have indulged in terrorist activities abroad have hidden there from time to time.

But there is a greater danger that we might have been ignoring all this while. I am talking about the Atomic Energy Minerals Center, which is a pilot scale uranium milling plant located outside lahore in Kala Shah Kaku, and is very very close to LET's Muridke HQ. Its location this close to the LET HQ, its co-location with a civilian plant means that it is frequented by a lot of people, and very possibly unsavoury individuals.

There is a story that OBL had actually shown some Journalist a couple of small cans which he claimed had fissile material in them, AAZ was also supposedly present there. The Journalist had asked where this stuff had been sourced from, to which OBL only smiled in return. I don't know how true this story is, but the indisputable fact is that AQ has actively sought fissile material to try and do a Faisal Shahzad type of operation.

This is the reason the US expressed zero tolerance after the Times Square incident, with Hillary actually saying in no uncertain terms that the consequences would be severe for Pakistan if there were a successful attack. I am sure that there are things about the Times Square incident, that we might not be aware of, that raised a cold sweat in the US officialdom. Maybe the fact that this could be easily done, or that there was 'stuff' in the car that could be replaced with fissile material and would then become a dirty WMD.

The US is really worried about someone packing some fissile material in a small truck, and making a cocktail and exploding it, or actually getting their hands on a low yield crude bomb made with enriched uranium, and setting it off. I've said many times that Al Qaida has been lately justifying a nuclear / WMD terrorist attack as acceptable according to Sharia.

This also gives us another reason why the US is so worried about the LET. Because the LET is probably Pakistan's designated JDAM delivery boy.

This is also why the US has field agents keeping a close watch on all facilities which handle fissile material in Pakistan, a fact that the Pakistanis crib about by saying that the US has its 'evil eye' on their nuclear 'assasey' (assets).

The threat of Nuclear terrorism coming out of Pakistan is very real, it is probably not a sophisticated suitcase weapon, but more of a crude low yield uranium weapon fashioned by pakistanis, that is portable enough so that it can be concealed and shipped into another nation undetected. Otherwise another even lower yield approach that might be possible, would be to lace a Faisal Shahzad type jerry rigged set-up with fissile material and explode it. It won't cause a nuclear chain reaction, but will cause sufficient terror. And one can of course be 100% sure that if the LET or some other Jihadi group from Pakistan is involved, it will be with ISI / Pakistan Army sanction.

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 18 May 2011 01:58

If TSP-PRC have mutual defence pact, then does PRC attack Uncle for the drone attacks?

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 18 May 2011 02:00

^^ It will make Unkil think twice. And it could also be a defence mechanism to stop US entering Pak territory to hit the Maal or take out the Haqqani's. It can mean a lot of things.

---------------
Senator Levin says consensus building to cut some aid to Pak.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 18 May 2011 02:02

shyamd wrote:Groper visits Beijing to sign a MUTUAL DEFENCE PACT. Which means anyone who attacks Pak also attacks PRC! Serious stuff.

The treaty, if signed, means that any jihadi group in Pakistan by launching an attack on India, and provoking a response, can potentially draw China into a war.

No matter how unrelentingly hostile China is to India, do you think it wants to engage in a war with India at a time and under circumstances not of its own choosing?

The Chinese will be **real idiots** to enter into any such agreement with Pakistan. The Pakis are really hallucinating here if they think China will enter into any such agreement with them.

PS: even worse, from the China POV is if a jihadi group in Pakistan launches an attack on the US, and China is bound to Pakistan by a mutual defence treaty. If any such treaty is done, there will have to be provisions allowing China to renege in the event of preceding terrorist attacks from Pakistan.

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 18 May 2011 02:06

Johann wrote:My personal view is that the US ought to make that deterrent posture much more public while publicly forswearing any first strikes on the Pakistani arsenal in order to increase stability and stop this mushrooming of the Pakistani nuclear arsenal. Their fears of a non-nuclear US first strike are driving a great deal of the proliferation risk.

Johann, in your view, TSP's recent nuke making spree has more to deter Uncle than India?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 May 2011 02:49

shyamd wrote:^^ It will make Unkil think twice. And it could also be a defence mechanism to stop US entering Pak territory to hit the Maal or take out the Haqqani's. It can mean a lot of things.

---------------
Senator Levin says consensus building to cut some aid to Pak.

PRC is more vulnerabale to massa in many assymetric ways. The more likely thing will be PRC holds TSPA arms while massa slaps them. Or tho other way round while PRC takes back the nukes.

--------
Seriously we need to keep a poll on chances of a jihadi coup in TSPA.

Rahul Shukla · Post by **Rahul Shukla** » 18 May 2011 02:50

China's legislature mulls pact with Pakistan to fight "three evil forces" (People's Daily)

China and Pakistan could strengthen cooperation in the fight against terrorism, separatism and extremism, under a bill tabled for deliberation on Tuesday in China's legislature.

The Sino-Pakistan Cooperative Agreement on Combating the "Three Evil Forces" would be China's second such international pact after the agreement with Kirghizia, Kazakstan, Tadzhikistan and Uzbekistan to safeguard regional peace and stability.

Is this what Pakhanistanis are claiming to be a mutual defence pact with the dragon?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 May 2011 03:03

All those three evil forces:Terrorism, Separatism and Extremisms emanate from TSP!

So is this new kind of doublespeak by PRC commies?

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 18 May 2011 03:09

ramana wrote: PRC is more vulnerabale to massa in many assymetric ways. The more likely thing will be PRC holds TSPA arms while massa slaps them. Or tho other way round while PRC takes back the nukes.

--------
Seriously we need to keep a poll on chances of a jihadi coup in TSPA.

Fair point I think if they do sign it. It will just be a piece of paper and only that - If you see the GCC, they all know that the mutual defence pact amongst them doesnt mean anything until they are all integrated into one country - confederation, so that they are actually able to act as one. So they have set into process integration. Pak integrated with PRC? Unlikely.

But this deal could mean entirely differnet things for Bharat though - shouldn't be a big deal for India anyway, we have faced both before and have faced the 2 front threat for a while.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 May 2011 03:22

For India it will rip the mask of cooperation between Islamists and Commies in India.
This is an external manifestation of what was internal so far.

Kanishka · Post by **Kanishka** » 18 May 2011 03:51

Rahul Shukla wrote:China's legislature mulls pact with Pakistan to fight "three evil forces" (People's Daily)

China and Pakistan could strengthen cooperation in the fight against terrorism, separatism and extremism, under a bill tabled for deliberation on Tuesday in China's legislature.

The Sino-Pakistan Cooperative Agreement on Combating the "Three Evil Forces" would be China's second such international pact after the agreement with Kirghizia, Kazakstan, Tadzhikistan and Uzbekistan to safeguard regional peace and stability.

Pakistan itself was born out of "separatism" (and now they agree separatism is "evil" )

Joseph · Post by **Joseph** » 18 May 2011 04:35

Johann wrote: There are only two factors that would change the equation;
(a) near-absolute certainty that the Pakistani state had lost or was about to lose control of the nukes and fissile material in one or more facilities, and they had fallen or were about to fall in to the hands of jihadi tanzeems or Pakistani military factions who could not be deterred
(b) a near certain belief that the Pakistani state as a whole could not be deterred.

The first option is a more likely scenario than the second, but how likely is it to happen, really?

Mutiny by the majors and colonels is more likely than a successful Pakiban assault, and both situations are much more likely to be seen in one or two locations at most, rather than across the board.

Johann,

How is the U.S. going to be able to get a fairly accurate measurement - reading of where Pakistan is in regards to your (a) and (b) above? High certainty is critical and there will be a certain reliance on indirect information when passing judgement on the sentiments within the PA and/or the Pakistani state.

Some related questions:

Is Kayani able to accurately assess where things stand with the majors, colonels and the lower ranks? He stayed mute after Taseer was killed because he cited sympathies within the PA for Qadri and he didn't want to risk unity within the PA.

Does the U.S. keep something similar to a Doomsday Clock in regards to what it knows (or thinks it knows) about the sentiments within the PA?

Johann wrote: Mutiny by the majors and colonels is more likely than a successful Pakiban assault, and both situations are much more likely to be seen in one or two locations at most, rather than across the board. However those kinds of scenarios are more likely to produce cooperative US-Pakistani action rather than unilateral US use of force

A cooperative US-Pakistani action suggests at a minimum the PA being able to reveal things to the U.S. that are considered state secrets at the moment. Perhaps I am influenced too much by current events, but I can't imagine the PA ever having a conscience.

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 18 May 2011 04:49

Johann wrote:and both situations are much more likely to be seen in one or two locations at most, rather than across the board.

Isn't that more than enough, at least for scaring the s..t out of Unkil and even the dhimmiest of SDRE regimes?

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 18 May 2011 05:14

This is dangerous time. We have the most rabid anti India couple in charge Bakistan: Kiyani and Pasha.
The ONLY redemption for these idiots lie in attacking India now. MMS has done a good thing by leaking to media the joint meeting with Service Chiefs.

Any Chinese misadventure across AP must be dealt with a firm disengagement from India towards derecognition of Tibet under China. This should be made clear politically too. Articles towards the effect should now start appearing in the press.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 18 May 2011 05:18

A tube light reaction on my part, but this is getting to be too good for anything:

What stitches Pakistan and China together is the fact that they have two common enemies, the United States and India.

These naked people have something to stitch with?

Also, I wonder if they are giving up on A'stan.

Three Evil Forces

Mao is waking up.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 18 May 2011 05:54

arun wrote:
For insight into the warped Pakistani mind set on the use of nuclear weapons, many moons ago an article about a retired military type who was an aide to Benazir Bhutto was posted on BR. Perhaps someone can dredge it up

Here you go
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... dier/2441/

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 18 May 2011 06:08

What's been bothering me over these past couple of years is that its seems to be always been a one-sided love affair in the Sinpaki relationship. The paki leaders (Gilani, Kiyani, Zardani et al) are the only ones that claim (using hyperbole) that their friendship with China is deeper than the deepest ocean, taller than the tallest mountain, sweeter than honey, purer than the fairest maiden, and all that mushy stuff. Has any Chinese senior leader said that as well? Everytime the pakis belt out one soppy proclamation after another, the Chinese respond by a straight-faced kill joy of a statement such as "we will respect you in the morning, too". Am I mistaken here?

ranjbe · Post by **ranjbe** » 18 May 2011 07:38

Editor of The News advocates heavy-duty Taqiyya to get around current Paki takleef.

And our doing so should not in any way be confused with us giving up our national honour (as the deliberately misleading ‘ghairat’ brigade will claim) but only tampering it with timely pragmatism. Our holy Prophet (PBUH) laid down examples of tactical easing off with his hijrat and Pact Hudabiya. Clear examples that short-term unpleasant tactical back stepping was ok, as long as one did not abandon legitimate desired strategic objectives. Whether it was a US induced intelligence failure or outright incompetence of our own sleuths is immaterial. What matters is that the Osama episode has put us in a hole and we first need to claw our way out of this pit and only then get on with doing things the right way. And we must begin in earnest by taking a worldview of our local priorities and concerns. We need to eschew conflict and buy time to build our economic might and positive relevance in the comity of nations. The world needs to be convinced that it would be a better place with us, and not without us. And if doing so means taking a step back without jeopardising our security then be it. There will always be another day.

http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDe ... 7568&Cat=9

ranjbe · Post by **ranjbe** » 18 May 2011 07:52

anupmisra wrote:What's been bothering me over these past couple of years is that its seems to be always been a one-sided love affair in the Sinpaki relationship. The paki leaders (Gilani, Kiyani, Zardani et al) are the only ones that claim (using hyperbole) that their friendship with China is deeper than the deepest ocean, taller than the tallest mountain, sweeter than honey, purer than the fairest maiden, and all that mushy stuff. Has any Chinese senior leader said that as well? Everytime the pakis belt out one soppy proclamation after another, the Chinese respond by a straight-faced kill joy of a statement such as "we will respect you in the morning, too". Am I mistaken here?

China does owe the Pakis on a number of critical issues which probably helped China break out of its isolation and consequently attain the strong economic and military power it holds today.

The 1962 Indo-China War was a watershed for Pakistan too. An already smouldering Pakistan-US military relationship, mainly on account of squabbles over equipping the newly created divisions of the Pakistani Army, was exacerbated by the American arms assistance to India, prompting angry Pakistani leaders to look up to China. They quickly concluded the border agreement which had not made any progress for several years, even conceding about 5000 Sq. Kms of the Shaksgam Valley contravening international norms.

Much earlier, Pakistan had also helped China break out of its isolation by normalizing its relationship with the USA, even as Pakistan itself was being violently divided due to genocide in East Pakistan. The economic powerhouse of China, which today it is, thus owes a lot of gratitude to Pakistan. The China-Pakistan relationship has scaled heights ‘taller than the tallest mountains’ and depths ‘deeper than the deepest oceans’ as the two sides never fail to mention frequently.

See

A Perspective of the American and Chinese Presence in Pakistan

http://pak-watch.blogspot.com/2011_04_01_archive.html

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 May 2011 08:41

How do you like that blog? Feedback is appreciated.

asprinzl · Post by **asprinzl** » 18 May 2011 08:51

India could have had a military response after Mumbai 2008 but the political elites f'ed-up the MMRCA deal. Otherwise India could have had an extra 126 planes in the sky to make Indian airspace near airtight which could have prevented Paki retaliation in case of an Indian military response. India's biggest enemies are not from foreign lands but from within.
Avram

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 18 May 2011 09:17

Excerpts from Hussain Haqqani's book: Between Mosque and Military

The myth of nuclear energy in Pakistan

Raging at Rawalpindi: American leaders are furious with Pakistan’s military in the wake of Osama bin Laden’s killing. But twisting arms will only backfire: Shuja Nawaz

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 18 May 2011 10:37

Not strictly an IED Mubarak, but 5 people got their 72 from yahoos through AK phyrr.

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 18 May 2011 10:43

Militants attack security post in Peshawar, two dead

PESHAWAR: More than 70 militants attacked a security checkpost on the outskirts of Peshawar near Barra on Wednesday, triggering a shootout that killed two security forces and wounded five, officials said.

The pre-dawn attack took place near Khyber, part of Pakistan’s lawless tribal belt on the Afghan border, which is regarded as a global hub of militants, including al Qaeda and the Pakistani and Afghan Taliban movements.

“They were armed with AK-47 rifles and rockets. We successfully repulsed the first attack. They attacked again and then there was an exchange of fire that lasted for about two- and-a-half hours,” security official Abdul Jabbar told Reuters.

A policeman and a paramilitary soldier were killed in the attack, he said.

“There were casualties on the other side also but they took away their bodies and we don’t know how many of them were killed or wounded.”