Managing Pakistan's failure

[devesh]

^^^
RajeshA ji, while I am no expert, using our own different populations to get into close contacts with Paki Islamists is a double edged sword. what's to say that they won't be borrowing ideas and plans from these fundoos and start fantasizing about Mughaliya 2.0? we must first make our own internal fundoos supplicant to our demands. when we achieve that, we can do to Pakistan what West has done around the world. we can create networks inside Pak which, even though unaware of it, are fighting for Indian interests...the domestic contacts and middle men in India must be firmly in our camp. they must consciously know they are fighting for Indian interests or at the very least be firmly inculcated in the idea that Dharma and India are here to stay.

[RajeshA]

X-Posting from TIRP Thread

India needs to get into the fight.

RajeshA, that determination has not yet been made, it appears from various bits and pieces that are emerging. An overcautious India may take a lot more time to come to that conclusion. However, we are not going to be able to avoid a fight with Pakistan, both in a literal and a figurative sense. Pakistan has concluded that India and the US are forming an axis and has decided to go with PRC the whole hog. Already after 26/11, it surrendered to PRC authorizing it to negotiate with India on its behalf. The new indicators clearly show that a desperate Pakistan is surrendering more and more to PRC. Internally, it is increasingly becoming very unstable. A breakdown of US-Pakistan relationship will push it more into Chinese hands and also make it more vulnerable internally. The new 'Friendship Pact' with China, the supply of TNWs and the Chashma 3 & 4 reactors will encroach on remaining Pakistani sovereignty a lot more. A false sense of security may push the PA already steeped in bravado may lead to tactical stupidity. Attacking India will then be a sureshot and time-tested way to stem the centrifugal forces. But, it would be fun if the old tanzeems-now-turned-foes suddenly decided that it was an opportune moment to strike at PA itself !! PA may not be able to fight a two-front war then. A lot rides on how the US-Pakistan relationship changes in the next few weeks and months.

The key to India coming out of the Pakistani vortex, created and supported by the Wahhabis, Anglos and Hans, is to keep Pakistan preoccupied with one or the other grave challenge to its survival other than India. A frontal confrontation is best avoided, as it pulls India further down into the vortex at the bottom of which lies the Indic Civilization severely hit and the other great powers laughing their hearts full.

There have been some passionate discussions on BRF what it really means when Pakistan transitions from joint US-Sino embrace into an exclusive Pax-Sinica!

As far as Tanzeems going after PA is concerned, I tend to look at them, as you originally put forth - as one and the same. Though I think, that certain Pushtun groups like TTP would like to keep their areas of domination to not be encroached upon by the Pakjabi Army. But the more Pan-Jihadist of the Tanzeems feel quite at ease with Pakistani Army as PA supports their aims in Afghanistan, in Europe, in West, against Israel and against India. The rift between PA and the Pan-Jihadists (Jihad against Yahud, Hunud and the Nasara) is basically due to the Saudi interests - to keep OBL's associates away from the Saudi throne, and not due to ideological reasons or differences in their mission statements. PA leadership identifies itself with the Sauds, where as the Pan-Jihadists identify themselves with OBL, both have the same vision, but differ in leadership. That is why TSPA is once in a while happy to deliver some Al Qaeda operative to the USA, for the Saudis consider him dangerous too due to his association with OBL, but TSPA is not averse to supporting the Pan-Jihadists in all other sense and means.

Once the Wahhabi rift between the House of Saud and OBL & Co disappears, and that could happen as the original AL Qaeda leadership gives way to the next tier, the minimal rift between Pakistani Army and AQAM could also disappear.

Now it is not clear how far the Sunni Tehreek would be amenable to Indian control even if we fund and arm them. In case they prove to be not amenable, then India can find herself another group of Barelvis, as the Pakistanis did with the Kashmiri Azaadi movement.

We can channel this funding through our own Barelvi community.

We should be extremely careful in entangling ourselves with these Islamist jihadi types. Even if we decide to get involved with the Sunni Tehreek in the absolutely worst case, it cannot be through Indian berelvis at all. Let us insulate Indian Muslims from these; we already have enough problems on our plate even otherwise. There are other non-communal faultlines within Pakistan such as ethno-linguistic sub-nationalism that should be exploited. As I have already felt, first we have to determine that Pakistan has crossed the point of no-return and needed to be tackled down. Then, we should go about it comprehensively and as safely as possible.

I retract my statement. Perhaps involving our Barelvi community would be unwise, but I am of the view that the Salafi/Wahhabi/Ahl-e-Hadith/Deobandi/Ikhwani) SWADI-Barelvi fault-line needs to deepened. This fault-line would ensure that space is created in Pakistani polity for the exploitation of other fault-lines based on ethnicity, etc. A consolidated SWADI combo stretching from Pushtun areas, to Pakjab to Sindh would seal the fate of Pushtunistan, Baluchistan as well as Gilgit-Baluchistan to always remain nailed to Pakistan. But if the SWADI-Barelvi fault-line leads to sectarian conflict in Pakistan Proper, then the periphery can disassociate itself from Pakistan much more easily.

In Yugoslavia, the Serb-Croatian war, i.e. a war between the two main dominant groups in Yugoslavia, allowed Slovenia to eject much more easily.

The problem right now is that Sunni Tehreek and the Shias vent out their anger after an attack on the KFCs and police jeeps rather than carrying out assassinations of militant Deobandi leaders. We need to fund and arm the Pakistani Barelvis to an extent that any attack on them results in a disproportionately higher retaliation on the Deobandi leadership, more vicious and more brutal.

[RajeshA]

devesh ji,

I did address the aspect of availing of our own Barelvi community for the purpose in my previous post to SSridhar in the TIRP Thread.

Perhaps what I meant to say was that we could use certain individual Indian Barelvis to build contacts and bridges with the political and militant leadership of the Pakistani Barelvis, and not the Barelvi community as such. Of course, only those individuals would be brought in into such a project, who share the mission goals.

Regarding Mughaliya 2.0, I have certain views. I believe, it can be advantageous for Indics to allow a Mughalistan narrative to take hold over Muslims in India, however we should help define that narrative.

[devesh]

RajeshA garu,

I know about your view that a Mughalistan narrative "controlled" by Indian nationalists can be useful. IMVHO, all these are half steps. ultimately, there is no alternative to recovering the lost people. that is the only way that Indic civilization can become truly secure. all these other half steps are useless at best, or at worst can create dangerous unintended consequences.

I am in agreement with Sridar garu's view that there are many other faultlines in the artificial entity of Pakistan. Sindhi nationalism being one of the foremost of those. right now, we are playing a very defensive game wrt Paki mischief in Kashmir. on a basic level, it is India's lack of understanding Pakistan. we are deluded into thinking that it a monolithic Islamic state which acts as one entity. as we on BRF know, nothing could be farther from the truth. I myself believed this for most of the life. only careful inspection of Pak in the last few years has opened my eyes. and ever since, I have been asking myself, why the hell does India not have even this basic info on present day Pak.

the first step that we need to take is to educate mango Indians on internal Paki situation. the idea that Pak is a "Unified Islamic monolithic state which acts as One" needs to be utterly demolished. there is no such thing. western social engineers in cahoots with DIE have propagated this view of India. they have magnified the differences a thousand times, and papered over the areas of inter cooperation, mixing, and prosperous intermingling.

when common Indian feeling about Pak no longer reflects the view of Unified Islamic state, we have achieved half the success. the vibrancy of Indian population will take care of the rest. we have a kind of oblivious ignorance that can be highly useful, if the ignorance is directed toward anti-national forces, and not toward knowledge of our historic past.

[RajeshA]

RajeshA garu,

I know about your view that a Mughalistan narrative "controlled" by Indian nationalists can be useful. IMVHO, all these are half steps. ultimately, there is no alternative to recovering the lost people. that is the only way that Indic civilization can become truly secure. all these other half steps are useless at best, or at worst can create dangerous unintended consequences.

devesh ji,

I think many agree what the most desired outcome would be! The problem I see is actually quite the opposite of what you imply - there are too few people giving any thoughts to half steps or full steps in the long path to what we desire. Without those half-steps and full-steps no path can be traversed, and we would end up standing in one place only.

In another post, perhaps in a slightly different context,

India would grow in multiple iterations to its rightful radiance - each iteration uses the situation prevalent, devises the appropriate strategy and grows to the next level, a level where the environment is more conducive to further growth, use a different strategy then and grow further.

At every point in time, we have to see what is the right strategy!

Call it iteration, or call it a step or a half-step, without them there is going to be no movement forwards!

[A_Gupta]

From the Chai-Ghar:

Pakistan is neither a theocracy, a democracy nor any other discernable modern political organism. It is a neo-Hobbesian creature that trundles along with the social glue provided by ethnicity, provincialism, feudal patronage, Army intervention, tribal affiliation and all the associated pre-modern forms of deliberation, negotiation and conflict that defines everyday Pakistani life.

http://pakteahouse.net/2011/05/23/pakis ... of-nature/

[ramana]

No its a kabila (armed camp of nomads) on the rampage with the control by the military. They won't let them strike camp and settle down for it then removes the need for the Army's overarching presence in the camp..

Hobbesian etc are neo-bs.

[A_Gupta]

Well, what he means is:

‘’Whatsoever therefore is consequent to a time of war, where every man is enemy to every man, the same consequent to the time wherein men live without other security than what their own strength and their own invention shall furnish them withal. In such condition there is no place for industry, because the fruit thereof is uncertain: and consequently no culture of the earth; no navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by sea; no commodious building; no instruments of moving and removing such things as require much force; no knowledge of the face of the earth; no account of time; no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.’’

[Agnimitra]

In another post, perhaps in a slightly different context,

India would grow in multiple iterations to its rightful radiance - each iteration uses the situation prevalent, devises the appropriate strategy and grows to the next level, a level where the environment is more conducive to further growth, use a different strategy then and grow further.

At every point in time, we have to see what is the right strategy!

Call it iteration, or call it a step or a half-step, without them there is going to be no movement forwards!

Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny! As long as our core integrationist values remain steady, and we put work into growing and expanding them, the conclusion is inexorable.

[RajeshA]

Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny! As long as our core integrationist values remain steady, and we put work into growing and expanding them, the conclusion is inexorable.

Values is only half of the story. There are external forces at work here too and need to be factored in. IMO, strategy is more like vector algebra, factoring in the current external forces, one's own capacity for force projection, and the dynamic one would trigger with one's own use of force. The result should be a net force in the direction of one's desire.

Sometimes one may need to even exert force in a direction which goes contrary to both one's values and one's desired direction of change.

[RajeshA]

Solving Pakistan: Solution 2

Unchaddee the Echandee of the Bully & Swat It Solution (cont.)

Continuing from here!

X-Posting from TIRP Thread

All this issue that if India attacks the Pakis they would all close shoulders and unite against India, it is all bogus. The trick is to get everybody to kick Pakistan, especially Afghanistan, Iran and USA, so that when India kicks them, they will seethe only so much more in anger. The Pakistani Army should be shown as an organization, that can be easily bullied and bought. We should never allow them to save face, e.g. when Zulfikar implored Indira to return the lands captured by India for otherwise it would be a severe loss of face for Pakistan; then Indira should have taken the opportunity to show Pakistan for the losers that they are. Every opportunity should be taken to belittle their face and echandee!

Rajesh the story that Packees will unite during an Indian attack dates from the 1965 war when I am told that poor ickle Packeestan was sitting and minding its own business when India attacked all of Pakistan got united. The "dream of unity" in Pakistan is exemplified by a stories of 1965. The India that Ayub Khan said would run at the sound of ginfire "attacked Pakistan" and was supported by China in their tarrel and deepel fliendship.

I am starting to rethink the common thinking that we should let it stew in its juices and not give Pakistan a chance to unite after an Indian response due to terrorism, or LoC escalation. I think, we should start thinking in terms of "welcoming" each and every opportunity to give Pakistan a kick on its face.

Just as it has not behaved by conducting proxy wars, cross-border terrorism, jihadization of Kashmir, sheltering known terrorists, and carrying out terror attacks, similarly we should give two hoots about Pakistani so-virginity, and start covert and overt retaliation - at a low level. For example, after some LoC firing from them, we can bombard their positions to dust through high-precision artillery. At least 100-150 dead Pakistanis should get their 72 at the end of the day with huge amount of loss of face! Or when some Paki vessel tries to apprehend any of our fishermen, we simply sink the boat - another 50 Pakis dead - another slap across the face! Any military jet that ventures too close to the border or LoC can be brought down by our Air Force or some SAM. If we are lucky, the plane would drop in Indian territory, and the pilot too! We can trade the pilot for some terrorist! Again they lose face! As said, we should take each and every opportunity to push their face into a pig's fæces. After some terror attack on India, I've often spoken that we should go for a muscular response with Land for Terror. Off the military pitch too we should stop treating Pakistanis with any amount of respect as if they were some state, some country.

And that is only a sprinkling of the football games we should be playing with Paki echandee. This should be coordinated with some high level of action, that "non-state" Afghans and their friends in TTP can play with Pakistani Army. PNS Mehran was just one fine example, but the TTP can be coaxed to go further on the Abu Ghraib road with senior Pakistani Army officers.

And then there is the situation developing between the Americans and the Pakistanis. The Avenger looks good. There will be many more Operation Geronimos. There will be more exposure of Paki perfidy in US courts. There will be more lectures to them by American politicians. After all, the election is closing in.

We should also see to it that IMF starts showing the Pakis more often the middle finger, and dekho-no-money of Pakistan goes down the drain.

In fact, the domain of Paki H&D loss is infinite and we should contribute to it as much as we can.

Once the average Packee sees that their military cannot compensate him with the loss of pride he feels being a Pakistani due to the general deterioration in governance and economy in Pakistan and the status of Pakistanis around the world, he would be forced to dump the Pakistani Army as his personal ego-booster! As Pakistanis see it, an H&D loss to the Pakistani Army is an H&D loss to every Pakistani individual. If the Army's H&D loss becomes a regular thing, why should the Abdul associate himself with this kabila of "hijras".

At the moment India tries to give the Pakistanis some face-saving! That has to change!

Now, does this not mean the TSP is already broken up? Are we expecting to see maps of new states to convince ourselves when in reality , incidents have already shown it has broken up and there are several new centres of power within the lands between western India and Afghanistan.

Ahh Precisely. But like a divorced couple whose marriage exists on paper - map-lines are drawn nowadays by the UN. That is why I have whined and howled time and again at the role of this artificial entity called the UN which serves the interests of a few powers by bestowing national boundaries that they want on other nations. If someone says a boundary is disputed - then the boundary is disputed. If US recognises no boundary dispute then al iz vel.

And this is related to RajeshA's post

The real problem is the unification of the US and China in trying to preserve Pakistan in the face of an Indian attack. Anyone may change borders but it is the UN that rejects or recognizes those changes and puts them on official maps that are drawn for schoolchildren. The US, its allies and China constitute 80% of the UNSC that does this type of bullschidt.

As Prem ji, so well put it, we should increase our national power along all axes. But that still does not solve the USA+PRC hold over the UNSC. I've speculated that we would soon get a chance to fix this. We should watch out for the collapse of national power in UK, and in fact speed it up where ever possible!

[devesh]

RajeshA ji,

"low level" operations should also involve under the radar interaction with Sindhis and Balochis and opening under the radar dialogues with Pashtuns. and other than that, what you say is on the spot: mango abdul in Pakiland has to completely lose any and all hope for H&D in Islamist Pak. that is when Pakis will start down the path of re-integrating with India. the Pakjabi elite might take a while, but changes will start taking place under their very noses, which they won't be able to control.

[RajeshA]

Solving Pakistan: Solution 2

Unchaddee the Echandee of the Bully & Swat It Solution (cont.)

mango abdul in Pakiland has to completely lose any and all hope for H&D in Islamist Pak. that is when Pakis will start down the path of re-integrating with India. the Pakjabi elite might take a while, but changes will start taking place under their very noses, which they won't be able to control.

Mango Packee would try to latch on to anything which breathes in some air of pride and defiance in his lungs. Sometimes it is Jinnah, sometimes Aurangzeb and the Mughals, sometimes the history of a "thousand year" subjugation of the Kufr in the Indian Subcontinent, sometimes it is the 1960s when supposedly their economy was better than India's, sometimes it is Pan-Islamism, sometimes it is the military "strength" of the Packee Army, sometimes it is the nukes, sometimes it is the strategic games they play with the superpowers, sometimes it is the Chinese indulgence, sometimes it is the Arab request to Pakis for mercenaries, sometimes it is the troubles in J&K, sometimes it is the terrorist attacks on India, etc.

The Mango Packee needs to feel pride in something because in truth a Packee has zero worth!

If we want to bring change in Pakistan, then it can only be through snatching away all fig leaves that save their ijjat, snatching away every straw he can grasp to stay above water, sapping away all his confidence to look himself in the mirror. He should find no protection, neither behind the Pakistani Army, nor behind the Pakislamists, nor behind the international community, nor behind Ummah, nor behind Allah himself! Everyday Packee should go home with a bleeding nose! Absolutely everybody should spit on the Packee!

We should be emphasizing those parts of Indian history where the Muslim invaders got a bloody nose. We should be emphasizing chapters of history where 90,000 Packees surrendered to Indian troops. We should be emphasizing the lands we have taken over from Packees or from under their noses like in Siachen! It should be said from every window at every opportunity, that Packees are downhill skiers and losers. This tradition of giving Packees a bloody nose should be kept alive.

Once Packee sees only humiliation staring at him from every corner, would he someday be open for re-embracing the Dharmic Continuum!

[ramana]

Another data point:

NSV in Newsinsight.net

Death Wish

Death wish
Pakistan is hurtling down the road to a jihadi takeover, says N.V.Subramanian.

30 May 2011: More than ever, this writer is convinced that Pakistan is headed towards a jihadi takeover. Some analysts foresee a manner of jihadi coup in the Pakistan army leading to this denouement. While this is entirely possible, this writer veers to the thinking that the growing imperviousness of India to Pakistani terrorism and the obstacles to a terroristic annexation of Afghanistan will bottle up/ concentrate jihadi forces within Pakistan to which it will fall sooner or later.

Pakistan for long has played with the idea of "good" and "bad" terrorists. The "bad" terrorists attack targets within Pakistan. On the other hand, the "good" terrorists or terrorist groups serve as instruments of Pakistan's state policy of terror.

The "good" terrorists were nurtured first in the form of the Afghan mujahideen and later the Taliban. They were employed to keep Afghanistan a client state of Pakistan. A subjugated Afghanistan would provide strategic depth against India. And it would keep Pashtun nationalism that does not recognize the Durand Line (and therefore Pakistan's border with Afghanistan) in check.

The Lashkar-e-Toiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed, etc, were the other set of "good" terrorist groups deployed against India to separate Jammu and Kashmir. They succeeded local groups like the Hizbul Mujahideen (HM) that were largely neutralized by Indian forces. Insurgents of JKLF, on the other hand, were decimated beforehand by HM on orders of Pakistan because they opposed integration with it and stood for independence.

Pakistan expected that the tribe of "good" terrorists would grow even as it would be able to exercise control over the "bad" terrorists. It naively believed that "good" terrorists would not cross to the side of the "bad" despite the presence of a variety of reasons to do so, including competitive Islamist ideologies, thwarted aims and ambitions, state attacks, and so forth. And that is what has happened.

For example, when the state clamped down on anti-Shia terror groups, they found sympathy with the FATA terrorists influenced by the Al-Qaeda and Taliban. When the Lal Masjid was attacked by the Pakistan army at the behest of China, it swelled the ranks of the Pakistani Taliban. There was even evidentiary growth of a Punjabi Taliban.

Then there have been breakaways from the Lashkar-e-Toiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed. JeM has been linked to Al-Qaeda attacks on Parvez Musharraf. Ilyas Kashmiri who has been named a possible successor to Osama Bin Laden has also made the transition from "good" terrorist (he was active in Afghanistan and J and K) to "bad".

So long India and Afghanistan presented soft targets, Pakistan could send a steady stream of terrorists there. The ones who were "martyred" became examples for others. But after 26/11 and the hardening of security, India is a tougher place to penetrate and operate in. And while Afghanistan is being ravaged by terrorists, the Taliban apprehends a Northern Alliance II which would prevent a complete takeover of the country.

And the important difference from before is that the United States cannot be indifferent to whatever is happening in Afghanistan. It cannot turn its back on Afghanistan as it did after 1989 and inadvertently incubated and facilitated the 9/11 attacks.

Indeed, while there is persistent talk of a US/ NATO troops drawdown, ultimately, America may be compelled to remain an influential, predatory military force in Afghanistan, because terrorism from there presents the worst threat to its mainland. Its drone campaign against Al-Qaeda/ Omar Taliban/ Haqqani Taliban forces in North Waziristan/ Quetta will grow in coming months backed in some cases with special forces operations. The US has already warned that it cannot be prevented from targeting the Al-Qaeda and Taliban leaderships. Those leaderships dread US resolve following Osama Bin Laden's assassination.

Increasingly blocked off or stymied from their external aggressive intents against India and Afghanistan, the terrorists, the "good" terrorist groups, that is, will turn virulently inwards. They will, in effect, make common cause with "bad" terrorist outfits like the Pakistani Taliban which attacked the Mehran naval base recently. The trigger for that attack was Bin Laden's death in the US Abbottabad raid. Other triggers will present themselves to fuse more "good" terrorist groups with the "bad".

Whether this process provokes a manner of jihadi coup in Pakistan is hard to tell, but it may. But it is important to understand that in the jihadi takeover of Pakistan, all the terrorist groups will find fulfillment of some of their aims. The Pakistani Taliban will see this as fruition of its fanatical obsession for a jihadi Sharia state with nuclear weapons. After the successful Mehran attack, it said as much.

For itself, the Lashkar-e-Toiba will seek to gain nuclear materials to hit India. Ditto the case with the Al-Qaeda and Afghan Taliban groups, but their targets will be US/ NATO forces in Afghanistan and continental Europe (assuming mainland US remains impenetrable). While India can protect itself and Afghanistan has foreign troops, Pakistan's security rests with a jihadi army, so that will be easier for the fused "good/ bad" terrorists to overcome. As this writer has already analyzed, the Mehran attack, with terrorists colluding with elements of the Pakistan navy, has shattered the morale of the Pakistan military. The will of the Pakistan military and its self-confidence will be destroyed if more such attacks happen, which will precisely be the aim of the amalgam of "good" and "bad" terrorists.

The time is past when Pakistan can bottle back the genie of terrorism. The Pakistan military's continued obsession with India (it might well sponsor another 26/11 out of desperation) and Afghanistan are hastening the country's descent into chaos and destruction. The Pakistan prime minister was insistent today for the US to replace the two anti-India Orions destroyed at Mehran. But he suicidally glossed over the threat to the Pakistan state emanating from the growing fusion of the "good"/ "bad" terrorists and the national-security establishment that the Mehran attack so damagingly advertized.

Pakistan can no longer be divorced from its death-wish.

So TSP is becoming like Mad Max at Thunderdome type of country.
All the jihadis want their nukes.

US experts like Uneven and Unfair want them to retain the nukes as an edge agaisnt India!

[RajeshA]

X-Posting from TIRP Thread

1 The US should realise that the continued existence of this entity called Pakistan is a threat to US at all times. Pakistan should cease to exist as a nation state.

2. Without Indian cooperation, the destruction of Pakistan is not possible for the US.

Raja Ram - Pakistan will survive as a whole or in parts with different names. But the only country that can keep it alive is India. The US can't do it. China can't do it. KSA?

Nations need an economy to survive on and the only nation on earth that can support the economy of Pakistan is India. When the Pakistanis find that out is a matter of debate. But before that the US and China have to exhaust the,selves supporting a small elite segment of the Pakistani people.

For a moment, I would like us to simply close our eyes (to reality and probability) and consider that Pakistan becomes India's munna; that Pakistanis, vipers as they continue to be, do not attack India or Indian interests; but they continue with the rest of their evolution and become a jihadi monster of unimaginable proportions for the rest of the world. In essence Pakistan becomes India's kitten and the world's man-eater.

It can only be possible if all of Pakistan's watering holes in the world become poisoned, and India remains as the only watering hole left for Pakistanis. What does India need to do for that?

Some suggestions:

1. Widen the rift between USA and Pakistan. It is increasing on its own, but we need to work on American public opinion as well as US Congressmen.
2. Get Pakistani Jihadis to indoctrinate, shelter and train Uyghurs. Uyghurs should become a no go area for Pakistani Establishment. Furthermore Pakistani Jihadis should learn to appreciate the value of kidnapping Chinese working in Pakistan. The current weakening of the establishment viz-a-viz the "non-state" jihadis facilitates such developments.
3. Shift the possession of the Oil Fields of the Arabian Peninsula, most prominently the Ghowar Oil Fields in Al Ahsa Province of Saudi Arabia, over to Arab Shias, so that the Salafis do not have any money to finance jihadi and madrassa networks in the Indian Subcontinent. It would not be bad, if Hejaz, the region containing the two holy mosques of Islam, are also taken over by the Shia.
4. Shut down the whole of West and Gulf for Pakistanis. They should become pariahs and be deported and no new ones allowed in. All remittances should dry up. Again it is a question of how we influence the Anglo-American world, Europe and Gulf monarchies.
5. Break up Pakistan to make it more manageable for India.
6. Make the Pakistani Feudals dependent on trade with India, and make the jihadi networks dependent on funding by the feudals.

Just some thoughts!

[shiv]

cross post

For a moment, I would like us to simply close our eyes (to reality and probability) and consider that Pakistan becomes India's munna; that Pakistanis, vipers as they continue to be, do not attack India or Indian interests; but they continue with the rest of their evolution and become a jihadi monster of unimaginable proportions for the rest of the world. In essence Pakistan becomes India's kitten and the world's man-eater.

It can only be possible if all of Pakistan's watering holes in the world become poisoned, and India remains as the only watering hole left for Pakistanis. What does India need to do for that?

In fact I had a similar train of thought although the vision I has was different. Pakistan's watering holes in the world are indeed already becoming poisoned. That does not mean that India should let toxic Pakistanis into India. However - as I said earlier there are two levels of existence" for any country. Level 1 is subsistence level with a hand to mouth existence, people living off food grown in the land, buffeted occasionally by natural disasters, migrating from one place to another as a result.

This was the model until perhaps a few centuries ago. But modern industrial economies changed all that, creating a Level 2 of existence. A modern economy requires trade, and in that trade you import what you don't have and export what you can. If you have a mineral such as oil you export that. If you can export agricultural produce like New Zealand that is fine. Or else you need to have an manufacturing economy like China or just plain tourism. If you have none of these it's back to subsistence economy. But in the old days you could migrate. If your people are considered toxic you can't even migrate. All migration will be inside your own borders where people will fight and kill for resources.

Pakistan is a Level 1 economy. It made forays into a higher level with some manufacture (value added agro produce like textiles and leather goods), tourism and export of manpower. That manpower export has now become toxic and the competition for textiles is high. Pakistan has no alternative other than to sink into a subsistence level economy. Many countries still exist that way. Why not Pakistan?

In the old days a country that had a powerful army could conquer other lands and loot would improve the economy, apart from the provision of employment driven by the military conquest. You need people to support the army and that generates employment and the lot supports the economy. The people of the conquered land "can go to hell". This was "normal" in the world until just 200 years ago. But the industrial age put an end to that. "Conquest" and "colonial power" reached their zenith with some countries getting modern arms before others and conquering and looting the whole world. But once the world was conquered infighting set in, everyone got similar arms and colonialism collapsed.

Pakistan is a child of the colonial mindset in which a military class got "allies" with an ultimate goal of "conquest". For the military elite of Pakistan, nurtured by the last dregs of the British empire and later by the new maharaja - the USA, conquest variously meant conquest of Kashmir and/or conquest of India. But the era of conquest has moved on. It is no longer as easy as it used to be to conquer a land and declare "to hell with the conquered people" simply because guns are available to everyone. Even holding Tibet or Afghanistan or Iraq require a mix of sealing borders and attempting to "win over" a population. That means conquest is expensive, unlike the free looting and genocide of an earlier era. The USA has fed Pakistan's conquest mindset. The US had not figured that out until 1965. After 1965 Pakistan's "conquest" mindset had to go covert. They used the US's (and former colonial) "global" tactics of subversion and said "if not conquest, sow the seeds of violence and chaos for possible future control". Pakistan's conquest policy has failed.

Pakistan's only available future is as a toxic nation with no useful means of building an economy that is integrated with the rest of the world. Internal strife and infighting is to be expected in a country like Pakistan and that is exactly what is happening. The only way to build up a future for Pakistan in the eyes of "well meaning foreigners" like the USA would be to open up trade with India apart from training (education) of Pakistanis to lead a modern life. But the USA does not understand the rabid hatred of Hindus that has been built up in Pakistan. There is a tendency to say "Oh Muslims hate Hindus, Hindus hate Muslims so why don't you kiss and make up" Clearly this is a gross misrepresentation of reality - but that reality is difficult to explain.

Muslims and Hindus can and do live together as occurs in India, but Pakistan is a special case of a Muslim nation being created on the basis of hatred for Hindus by a subset of Hindu hating Muslims of pre-1947 India. There is no way India's relationship with the people of Pakistan can be normalised until this poisonous indoctrination is removed. But the way forward is to first stop arming and funding the champions of the ideology of hate. Like Sadler said the USA would be content to fund the ideology of hate as long as it did not attack white Christians because India and Hindus are irrelevant and do not appear in the consciousness of the US as anything but a wild tribal and obsolete mindset. Which is exactly the view that is convenient for Pakistaniyat. Pakistan in fact spent decades fighting India/Hindus alone while appearing "secular" to their American financiers and armorers. It was India successful integration of its own Muslims and the earlier creation of Bangladesh that killed Pakistan's plan. The Muslims of the subcontinent were no longer represented by Pakistan and the morons desperately tried to seek uniqueness in islam. With Saudi funds and Wahhabism - that refuge in Islam turned Pakistanis against the USA.

But how to explain this complex history to "our American friends"?

[svinayak]

Christopher Hitchens article is the first one which puts the blame on America also.

[shiv]

Christopher Hitchens article is the first one which puts the blame on America also.

Nice article but there is an element of frustration in it - which is why it comes out as a rant.

There is something to be said for the fact that much of the educated Muslim intelligentsia of colonial India whose ancestors really did partake of court intrigue in India were pulled into the heady wine of "Pakistan" by fellow elite Jinnah. These people were accustomed to dealing with colonial "masters" as equals and they twisted the dumb Americans around their fingers. "Duh! America"

Th real problem is that the US will face massive cognitive dissonance and denial before they can admit that Pakis have taken them for a ride - so accustomed are Americans to thinking that they are supporting or lording over everyone else.

[RajeshA]

In fact I had a similar train of thought although the vision I has was different. Pakistan's watering holes in the world are indeed already becoming poisoned. That does not mean that India should let toxic Pakistanis into India.

I wouldn't call it really a vision on my part, merely a favorable scenario.

Making the concept of India being Pakistanis' last watering hole into a reality requires that India be comfortable with the notion, and that requires that Pakistanis not be allowed in into India. But rather they receive their thirst quenching from Indian watering hole in Pakistan itself. All India-Pakistani business and trade be either done virtually or by Indians visiting Pakistan. And more Bollywood for Pakistani living rooms/caves also delivered straight into Pakistan. Also all Pakistani women being married to Indian men, also taking place in Pakistan itself, with only the bride being let in into India. After all, there is a paucity of women in India, and Pakistanis have way too many nanha mujahid producing factories.

However - as I said earlier there are two levels of existence" for any country. Level 1 is subsistence level with a hand to mouth existence, people living off food grown in the land, buffeted occasionally by natural disasters, migrating from one place to another as a result.

This was the model until perhaps a few centuries ago. But modern industrial economies changed all that, creating a Level 2 of existence. A modern economy requires trade, and in that trade you import what you don't have and export what you can. If you have a mineral such as oil you export that. If you can export agricultural produce like New Zealand that is fine. Or else you need to have an manufacturing economy like China or just plain tourism. If you have none of these it's back to subsistence economy. But in the old days you could migrate. If your people are considered toxic you can't even migrate. All migration will be inside your own borders where people will fight and kill for resources.

Pakistan is a Level 1 economy. It made forays into a higher level with some manufacture (value added agro produce like textiles and leather goods), tourism and export of manpower. That manpower export has now become toxic and the competition for textiles is high. Pakistan has no alternative other than to sink into a subsistence level economy. Many countries still exist that way. Why not Pakistan?

Basically the difference in our two scenarios/visions for Pakistan is that whereas your scenario considers the question of how to integrate Pakistan into the world economy and make it a "normal" country again - with trade with India being Pakistan's only chance, the scenario proposed by me does not consider any "normality" as possible, or for that matter desirable. It is not desirable, because a Pakistan which considers itself as capable of normal interaction with the world, would fall back into its illusions, day-dreams and wet-dreams, and would always be anti-India.

I think, that barring major sex-change (aka character change) surgery, the Pakistanis future lie in exactly what they are doing - kill and get killed, living as toxic vipers and dying as toxic vipers. Barring major surgery, I don't think the seeds of jihadism which have sprouted in Pakistan and have in the meantime become sturdy trees, can be cut down. Pakistan would remain what it is.

Basically this scenario is mostly about taking your prescription one step further than making Pakistan into everybody's problem, namely making Pakistan only everybody else's problem. Considering how far Pakistan has evolved into becoming everybody's problem, and considering that India would in the end be Pakistan's only viable lifeline and watering hole, it is a scenario that I consider a possibility.

We may not in the end be able to reform Pakistan, simply divert its destructive exhaust pipe, its venom somewhere else.

[Singha]

does anyone have stats on the industrial sector in pak? as in whether its growing or shrinking in terms of revenue and people employed?

pakis are not going to cut it through services or tourism(UK jihadis coming for training are not tourists). a advanced agriculture, mining and industry represents their hope to be a Level2 economy. agri is collapsing due to too many people and too little water, plus people in power cornering more water.

[Aditya_V]

does anyone have stats on the industrial sector in pak? as in whether its growing or shrinking in terms of revenue and people employed?

pakis are not going to cut it through services or tourism(UK jihadis coming for training are not tourists). a advanced agriculture, mining and industry represents their hope to be a Level2 economy. agri is collapsing due to too many people and too little water, plus people in power cornering more water.

Then the best way for them is to outsource mining to foreign Companies and live of thier Royalty. Industry requires free thinking without loads of interference from Religion personal,beaucrats and peace. Things which TSP does not have.

[shiv]

Then the best way for them is to outsource mining to foreign Companies and live of thier Royalty.

Aditya - mining requires transport, labor and security.

[Aditya_V]

Then the best way for them is to outsource mining to foreign Companies and live of thier Royalty.

Aditya - mining requires transport, labor and security.

CHinese and bring in thier Labour and equipment, Faujis can give protection for a consideration.

[ramana]

X_posting....

a_kumar:

There have been some suggestions, including the Komireddy article on denuking Pakistan under a US protection umbrella.

I do not think GOI will or wants to make any overt statements. It will be a vindication of the TSP's irrational behavior. Right now TSP is killing a lot more US personnel than Indian, so the thrust should come from the US. I propose that the US do the following:

1. ISAF stops recognizing the Durand line as a legit border and start chasing the Good Taleban into their caves.
2. Recognize an independent Balochistan as a US protecterate.
3. Give an unqualified warning to the TSPA/ISI that any nuclear misadventure will be met with city busters, neutron bombs etc.
4. Reward the rump left of TSP with a lot of trade and financial assistance, while it is demartialized, denuked and deradicalized. Rope in other countries to perform the TSP-detox.

This requires two things:
-> The end of the Iranian bomb effort
-> A strong carrot to the PRC that her strategic and commercial goals can be met in the new environment; they still have a rump state of Pakjab/Sindh left to play their politics with but without the Jehadis/Taleban to deal with.

I doubt that something like the above will ever come true. TSP has made itself useful to enough masters that one or the other will stand up for its existence.

I think the managing Pakistan's failure thread has some more thought.

VikramS, Both your ideas hinge on one subject. What is TSP's utility that forces these masters to prop up TSP as a low cost option?

Your first idea ends up as a gain for India in eyes of those external masters of TSP.

What is needed is to make them act in their own interests to implement your ideas regardless of India's gain and make them feel the pain of India's loss.

Once you realize the range of factors then one can take steps to Blunt ( ) TSP.

&

At a basic level, ordinary Indians were all the same, whether Muslims or others. The difference however came between the elites of Pakistani Muslim and secular Indian elites. The kind of attire the former wore, the types of parties they threw, the servile attitude they displayed (versus the moralizing stand of many Indian leaders) and their one-track mind of obsession with India which lead to their willingness to sacrifice any principle, endeared them to the Westerners, especially the Americans. The British, for their part, also 'handed over' Pakistan to the Americans once they realized that they have become a second-rate power.

US is British Empire in a hurry. They inherited/grabbed the Empuire before their time. They did not do enough prep work to get ready to inherit the mantle. Its like the East India company, that got the Mughal India but needed the British Empire to bail them out after 1857.

SSridhar, obsequious and oleag·inous are what coems to mind when thinking of RAPE.

ob·se·qui·ous
Obedient or attentive to an excessive or servile degree

o·le·ag·i·nous
Exaggeratedly and distastefully complimentary; obsequious


BTW, About Britain passing on TSP to America, do you recall the last story of Panchatantra where the guy with the wheel on his back surrounded by ultimate riches passes it on to the protogonist who is in quest of the riches!

Turly, the ancient Hindus passed on wisdom only if we can recognize it!

[shiv]

CHinese and bring in thier Labour and equipment, Faujis can give protection for a consideration.

That is precisely what is not happening. I think I made a series of posts about that on this forum. Will either repost or link when I find them. But the Chinese are not getting the security they need. Not because of Paki unwillingness, but because of inability. Pakistan is not totally under Paki army control.

[ramana]

http://www.dailypioneer.com/344205/Indi ... ation.html

India must stand up as a nation
June 08, 2011 1:18:45 AM

D Suba Chandran

Have we learned any lessons from the Headley disclosures of Pakistani involvement in the 26/11 terrorist attack on Mumbai? Are we now more determined than before to take on Pakistan? Or are we still dependent on others to plead our case and send bogus dossiers to Pakistan? The world will take note of India if New Delhi sends out a firm message: Thus far and no farther. That calls for political courage

Finally, the much-awaited disclosures by David Coleman Headley are in the public domain. Yes, they nail down the involvement of ISI handlers and the Lashkar-e-Tayyeba in the Mumbai terrorist attack. So? Is there anything new in this ‘revelation’? What should be the primary focus in India? To tell the international community “we told you so” or to devise a strategy vis-à-vis Pakistan?

The hard reality in India is, even if the ISI chief goes public announcing the involvement of some of his officials in the Mumbai attack or with the Lashkar-e-Tayyeba, what can New Delhi do about the same? Demand the extradition of those officers and submit another nonsense dossier and make ourselves a laughing stock at the international level?

Either we learn from the Americans or devise our own strategy to deal with Pakistan’s involvement, instead of expecting the international community (read the US) to act on behalf of us. Our primary strategy vis-à-vis Pakistan in terms of dealing with terrorism seems to be on the following lines: First and foremost, we want international understanding and support for our ‘principled stand’ against Islamabad and want Pakistan to be declared a terrorist state. Second, we will prepare a dossier and submit it to Pakistan, demanding the extradition of individuals. Third, we will make statements, organise conferences and discuss amongst ourselves.

What has the US done? It works with Pakistan where necessary. It violates Pakistan’s sovereignty if there is a need by operating drones and flying SEALs all the way up to Abbottabad, kills the most wanted man and get them back to their base. Powerful nations in the world make a statement by their actions, and not by talking to media and compiling dossiers.

The primary focus for New Delhi should be in terms of devising a comprehensive strategy towards Pakistan, to prevent not only another terrorist attack, but also inform them that the use of terrorism as a tool against India is unacceptable. In fact, the Indian nation has been giving a wrong signal by stating “another attack of the Mumbai scale is unacceptable”. Does that mean another attack on the Indian soil of Jaipur, Hyderabad and Bangalore is acceptable?

Any comprehensive strategy vis-à-vis Pakistan in terms of preventing any future terrorist attacks should involve political, military and diplomatic responses. At the political level, India’s responses so far have been based more on emotions and rhetoric than any realistic approach based on realpolitic. The Government needs to evolve a common political strategy both inside Parliament and outside, in terms of building a consensus. Once there is a consensus on what needs to be done, if there is a terrorist attack, it will be easier for the Government to pursue a strategy. In fact, if there is a consensus on what is likely to be the follow-up, Pakistan may even consider twice before approving any terrorist attack.

{Why is he saying build political consensus in India? is there poltical dissension on this subject of retaliating on TSP after a terrorist attack? Is this to the INC for its confusing TSP with Indian Muslims}

Such a political strategy should have a strong military component. If there is a militant attack led by the Lashkar-e-Tayyeba anywhere in India, on any scale, what could be a political response with a military component? An attack on the Lashkar headquarters in Punjab, either by the Air Force or through missiles, with a strong political back-up, come what may, the Government will be willing to face the consequence.

This is where India’s military will have to do its homework in terms of preparing for a punitive attack and take on any follow-up military action by Pakistan. What will be Pakistan’s response, if India targets the Lashkar headquarters? Will they get ready for an all out war with India? Will they immediately use a nuclear weapon against India? Will they unleash more militant attacks on India?

The political establishment in India seems to have been caught by the Pakistan bluff: If there is any limited Indian military response to Pakistan’s involvement in terrorist activity, it will result in a conventional war, leading to the use of nuclear weapons. It appears, nuclear weapons have deterred India from protecting its national security!

Can India call Pakistan’s bluff? Is Pakistan so sure of waging a conventional war or use nuclear weapons against India? Or, does Pakistan believe such a posturing will enable the international community to pressurise India from not pursuing any military strategy?

{Its the latter. TSP hopes to get the international community to pressure India by rasing the bogey of nuclear flash point. And US has fallen for this trick many times since 1990. In a way there is willful complicty in the TSP nuclear enable terrorism as India is the target and not any one.}

This is where the third component of India’s response to Pakistani militant attacks needs to evolve: A comprehensive diplomatic offensive both vis-à-vis Pakistan and the international community. Both should be delivered a clear message that any militant activity on the soil of India will be responded with military action, and India will be ready to face whatever the fallouts are. Certainly, whatever may follow India’s strong political and military response cannot be worse than the situation that we are already in.

What is needed today is not to tap our shoulders, with a smirk and a “we told you so” in terms of Pakistan’s complicity vis-à-vis supporting militant activities on Indian soil. Rather what we need is an articulation of a coherent strategy and political support to pursue such a course, come what may. In the comity of nations, we will be taken seriously, only if we take ourselves seriously and stand up as a nation.

-- The writer is the Director, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, New Delhi & Visiting Professor, Jamia Millia Islamia.

Wow what a difference since PR Chari's days at the IPCS!!!

Great job. Need more exposure via social media etc....

[RajeshA]

Solving Pakistan: Solution 6

Stability of Afghanistan lies in Breaking Pakistan

Pakistan losing global sympathy - G.Parthasarathy

India should realistically recognise that the Americans are not going to expend time and effort to eliminate India-centric groups such as the Lashkar-e-Taiba. The American end-game in Afghanistan is just starting and we need to be proactive in seizing diplomatic opportunities.

The loss of sympathy can swing the pendulum in a totally different direction, with the Americans convinced that Pakistanis are not going to cooperate, so when the dam of patience breaks, the floods can wrought havoc. However until the dams break, it is simply a conjecture that it ever would, and one needs not to rely on that. However when the thread of patience becomes thin, there arises several constituencies which come up with their alternate solutions.

Bruce Riedel for example is trying to sell to the GOTUS, that Indian concessions would contribute to more Pakistani support to US plans. Ralph Peters offers a drastically different approach. There will be others who will peddle still different solutions. The main thing is that new constituencies in the USA are being created, who are willing to experiment with new ideas for the region, and it is for India to tap into these constituencies, which India deems as facilitating India's national interests, and to make these constituencies more influential.

The start of America's end game in Afghanistan means India has to come up with new ideas, which enables India to safeguard our interests in the region, or at least to start a new phase in the perpetual Great Game, in the perpetual conflict, which goes some way in ensuring that for India, all is not lost.

NOW IS THE TIME to come up with solutions to Afghanistan, and for India to harness goodwill for India in the world, as well as to target the national interests of various countries involved and having a stake in the region, in order to devise a new grand plan to stabilize Afghanistan for the sake of all well-intentioned stake-holders for the political tectonic plates are fluid at the moment.

When I speak of well-intentioned stake holders in Afghanistan, it is a somewhat loose term. It can include parties who are willing to help stabilize Afghanistan, even if their intentions are purely meant to safeguard their own interests. If some party is willing to bring peace to Afghanistan, which safeguards the interests of both Afghanistan and India, then the motivations of the involved party as such are immaterial.

[RajeshA]

Solving Pakistan: Solution 6

Stability of Afghanistan lies in Breaking Pakistan (The Proposal)

The Solution involves redrawing the borders of Afghanistan and Pakistan leading to the emergence of three new independent political entities in the region - North Afghanistan, Pushtunistan and Baluchistan.

The three independent* countries: North Afghanistan, Pushtunistan and Baluchistan, would come together in a confederation.

North Afghanistan would constitute of areas in Afghanistan inhabited by mostly non-Pushtun Afghan ethnic groups.

Pushtunistan would consist of areas in Afghanistan inhabited by mostly Pushtun Afghan ethnic groups, as well as Northern areas of Baluchistan Province of Pakistan mostly inhabited by the Pushtuns, Federally Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan, and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Province of Pakistan, with possibly the exclusion of the districts of Chitral, Swat, Dir and Mansehra.

Baluchistan would consist of mostly traditional Baluch areas of Baluchistan Province of Pakistan, especially the former princely states of Kalat, Makran, Kharan and Las Bela, as well as some areas of South Western Afghanistan, namely southern parts of Nimruz, Helmand and Kandahar provinces of Afghanistan.

The borders of the states would be drawn by a UN commission looking into history and demographics of the region. The main purpose of the confederation is first to liberate the potential of the region when it acts as a single unit, and secondly to give assurance to the various minorities spread over the various states that their interests would be safeguarded. To this effect, the 3 states should arrive at an agreement for the protection of minorities as well as their property and rights. The 3 states would also allow free movement of people of the confederation and goods through their territories, even though there would be border controls.

Each of the states: North Afghanistan, Pushtunistan and Baluchistan would have their own parliaments (state assembly in case of Baluchistan). There would be a Confederation Council set up by the three states to coordinate all matters. The Conferation Council would have its own bureaucracy.

Furthermore, Baluchistan though a part of the confederation would not be completely sovereign as would be the case with North Afghanistan and Pushtunistan. Baluchistan would accede to India and become an Indian state though with special provisions of autonomy on the lines of Article 370. This would be prudent because otherwise it would be very difficult to receive the support of Iran for this plan, as a free Baluchistan would raise fears in Iran of secessionist tendencies among its own Baluchi ethnic group in Sistan-Balochistan Province of Iran. Of course, that should not stop Baluchistan from setting up various bodies for trans-border cooperation between Sistan-Balochistan Province of Iran and "Indian State" of Baluchistan.

[RajeshA]

Solving Pakistan: Solution 6

Stability of Afghanistan lies in Breaking Pakistan (International Coalition)

One hurdle as I see it, is that the international community is still not willing to contemplate a redrawing of the borders of Pakistan and accepting the facts on the ground that Pakistan does not enjoy sovereignty over vast tracts of its areas, especially in Pushtun lands and Baluchistan, not to speak of the rest of the country where jihadis, organized crime gangs, and political militias control the areas, but we are digressing here. The international community needs to accept that there are ethnic groups within Pakistan which are dissatisfied and would like to leave the nominal federation, which in fact is simply a fiefdom controlled by a Kabila called Pakistani Army.

We need to shake away this inertia, and for that we need to build a coalition of heavy-weight countries in the world, who are willing to see it our way.

Of course, the Pakistanis would be crying foul, and consider it as interference in their internal affairs and go wild with conspiracy theories and so on, but all this would be the case regardless of how the world acts, and it should not be given too much importance.

Whatever coalition we build it should carry weight and should be able to convince the others of the principled nature of the solution, of its rightness, of its imperativeness.

The present arrangement in Afghanistan was worked out in Germany, and Germany played an important role in finding a solution which has lasted in Afghanistan for at least a decade a now. I speak of the Petersberg Accord signed on December 5, 2001 between the various parties from Afghanistan which laid out a road map for constitutional government in Afghanistan.

Germany is critical for India, if India wishes to gather support for a solution based on redrawing of borders of Afghanistan and Pakistan. At the moment it is Germany which decides in which direction Europe goes, especially with regards to what is international moral and what is not. Germany decided to abstain in the UNSC during the Libyan Resolution, and basically German position has been vindicated as one can see from the stalemate in Libya. Europeans know that Germany would not tread to take positions on international matters if these do not conform to high standards of international behavior. As such there is a lot of goodwill for Germany on international matters into which India can tap in. We also know that Germany's recognition of Croatian and Slovenian independence in December 1991 sort of triggered the unraveling of Yugoslavia. So when Germany looks at something to be in its interests, it is just as able to push international transformative changes as any other country.

The second country India needs to get on board is the Russians. India needs major backing for the idea in the Security Council, and it would help if at least two of the P5 would be in favor of the idea. For Russia it would actually mean a lot because the solution offers to Russia a means to reach the Indian Ocean, almost connecting with India proper. It establishes the North-South Axis in Asia, benefiting both Russia and India. Should through such a solution, Afghanistan be stabilized, it would also benefit Russia as the specter of Islamic extremism finding a way to Central Asia and Russia itself would retreat somewhat. Opening up Afghanistan would also imply that over the medium and the long term, one would be able to get Afghanistan to move away from a drugs-based economy and to diversify into other economic streams, a scenario which would immensely benefit Russia. Even in the short term it means that the drugs from Afghanistan would be looking for a Southern route, sparing Russia.

The third country of importance is Iran. It would be difficult to convince Iran of such a plan, simply because Iran may not be too eager to either see Baluchistan become a sovereign country nor would Iran like that India moves so much to the West. India would have to reassure Iran that in the long term it would be immensely beneficial for them as it would open up trade opportunities for them, as well as allow them to increase their influence eastwards as Pakistan, a Sunni fortress, is pushed further to the East. The participation of Iran would lend credence to the plan, as it would imply that there is also support of Muslim countries for the plan.

The fourth country India would need to rope in is Oman. Till 8 September 1958, Gwadar was part of Oman, when Oman sold it to Pakistan for a paltry 3 million USD. Too bad India's relations in 1958 with Oman were not so good, otherwise India could have purchased Gwadar for more, and built a naval base there. Anyway, today India and Oman have excellent relations and considering that Oman has had historical relations with the region it would be sensible to get Oman to support the plan. With Iran and Oman together on this, it would give the appearance that Muslim countries support the plan.

The fifth group of countries India needs to convince are the Central Asian states. No other countries would benefit so much from a stabilized Afghanistan outside the control of Pakistan as the Central Asian states as it would allow them to access the world markets from the South as well, through the Indian Ocean. They could transport their Oil & Gas from Oil and Gas hubs on the Makran coast. More importantly they will be able to banish the threat of Islamist extremists taking over their countries, as the major upside of this plan would be a retreat of the Taliban and Islamic extremists supporting violent takeovers of Central Asian Republics like Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, etc. The support of Kazakhstan to this plan would mean a lot, as it is one of the most influential of the CARs, and not a direct neighbor of Afghanistan, and thus can be counted to take positions more neutrally.

So the coalition of Muslim states in favor of the idea would Iran, Oman, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, perhaps Kyrghizstan (though they are quite busy right now), and perhaps Qatar, as they tend to take an independent viewpoint and are quite friendly with India. Due to the Kurdish presence in Iraqi Govt., even Iraq could come out in support of the plan. India could try to get the Kuwaitis on board as well, putting pressure on Saudi Arabia to sanction the plan as well.

One major influential coalition India should try to rope in is the European Union. India has good relations with many countries there, and many countries there including many small countries have their soldiers stationed in Afghanistan, and would like to bring back their soldiers, so basically they are ears to any suggestions. Besides Germany, India needs to work on the second tier of countries in Europe like Netherlands, who had a terrible time in Uruzgan and lost many men there, but who have already withdrawn their soldiers from Afghanistan and hence are not dependent on Pakistan for access to the region. Similarly the Poles also have some grudge with the Pakistanis due to the death of a Polish Engineer Piotr Stanczak murdered by the Pakistanis.

The second major European country from which India should look for support is France. Now it would not seem apparent why the French would want to support such a plan. But considering that the Brits would not be too happy with this plan, it affords the French an opportunity to sway the Europeans to its side and thinking, proving again that the French-German axis is more influential than the Anglo-American axis. The Anglo-American axis would probably just try to find some face-saving means to cut and run from Afghanistan, and the Brits would continue to support Pakistan versus India. France has the possibility to counter such politics and may want to be at the forefront of searching for an alternate grand solution for the region. In any case, India would need at least two P5 members to support the idea, and France and Russia are the best candidates to which India can turn.

India could use India's good relations with Commonwealth countries, African Union countries and ASEAN to garner more votes in the United Nations.

If India can build a coalition of European countries as well as Muslim countries, mostly neighboring Afghanistan (sans Pakistan), then there is a chance of India being able to build momentum for this plan to be accepted by still more countries, and bring it to a point where USA too throws its weight behind the plan despite British protestations.

The only two countries which would not be happy in the end is China and Pakistan, but China cannot save Pakistan, if the whole of the international community is in favor of the plan. May be Saudi Arabia too would not be too happy, but they are only interested in Pakistan providing them with mercenaries and possibly nukes, and Pakistan would still be able to do that.

So it is a question of building an international coalition to oversee the breaking up of Pakistan, and considering the lack of sympathy Pakistan has at the moment, it should not be all too difficult.

[RajeshA]

Solving Pakistan: Solution 6

Stability of Afghanistan lies in Breaking Pakistan (Security Frameworks)

Northern Afghanistan, Pushtunistan and Baluchistan, all need a much stronger security framework based on a political agreement, if they wish to escape Pakistan's vice-like grip. I'll just link to some posts I made on the subject of security and political frameworks earlier.

1. Northern Afghanistan
Solid Wall

ANA should build a solid wall in the Tajik dominated regions of Afghanistan, so that Pushtuns have no possibility of expanding into their areas. If expansion to the North becomes impossible, the Pushtuns could be encouraged to consolidate their hold over the Pushtun majority areas of Pakistan, and there they come into direct conflict with Pakjabis and TSPA.

Some sort of formalization of a boundary between Northern Afghanistan and Pushtun Afghanistan by the international community, perhaps using the Blackwill Plan would go a long way in pushing the Pushtun southwards, and changing the color of the issue from Talibanism to Pushtun Nationalism.

Hardening the North

there is a general understanding amongst the Afghans, that the Afghan Tajiks would not go and dominate Pushtun areas. Right now, ANA which consists of mostly Tajiks, is being used in Pushtun areas, and IMHO, they don't really feel good about it. It is one thing to protect one's own lands, but quite another to try to dominate the lands of your neighbors as well. So I think, ANA would be most effective if it is an army protecting only non-Pushtun areas of Afghanistan.

I also think, that of the two, the warrior culture is more pronounced amongst the Pushtun, so a reasonable way to ensure stability in Northern Afghanistan would be:

• Build the fighting capacity of the Tajiks - ANA, ANP
• Keep coalition troops in Northern Afghanistan as back-up.
• Keep the attention of the Pushtuns away from Northern Afghanistan, more concerned with politics of Pushtunistan itself.
• Keep the Pushtuns focussed southwards, towards Pakjabis.

I frankly don't see Pushtuns as helpful in Northern Afghanistan. Pushtuns are good at causing instability, and for that reason, India should avail of their services viz-a-viz Pakjab, and not for Northern Afghanistan.

Invite their leaders

India's cards just opened up. And warning to Karzai has been issued.

Amrullah Saleh and Abdullah Abdullah are the men in that order of importance if we are interested in bolstering Northern Afghanistan. India should help both consolidate Northern Afghanistan and not allow any Taliban to create a foothold there. Northern Afghanistan should be a no go area for Taliban and even Pushtun from the South!

India would have to step up and strengthen the Northern Afghanistan forces, mainly ANA, ANP and the various Northern Alliance militias. India can increase the quotas for Afghan officers to come to India to receive training. Even in Afghanistan itself India can organize training camps and send trainers. It is good to see that India has already started to do this.

India steals march on Pak, to arm Afghanistan
June 03, 2011 9:06:58 PM

Rahul Datta | New Delhi

In a significant move, India has decided to boost its strategic engagement with Afghanistan by resuming arms supply to the strife-torn nation to strengthen its strategic ties with Kabul and deny Pakistan a foothold there. The move comes in the backdrop of the commencement of the US-led coalition’s withdrawal from Afghanistan this year, which could give Islamabad a chance to regain control over the state of affairs there.

2. Pushtunistan
3 point program

With regard to the Taliban, India should pursue a 3. point program:

1. Northern Afghanistan is hardened, so that the Taliban have no chance whatsoever in extending their domination there.
2. In Southern and Eastern Afghanistan, the American forces should retreat, so that the Taliban have no excuse to continue the war.
3. All efforts are taken to wean away the Pushtuns, especially the Taliban, from the control of Pakistan.

We could open a Taliban liaison office in Qandahar or Jalalabad, primarily to talk about humanitarian issues with Taliban, how we can support the medical infrastructure in areas under their control, how we can provide critical surgery for those who need it, etc. All transactions from this office should take place only with Taliban area commanders. If the Taliban wish, they should also be allowed to open an office in New Delhi. Of course, we have to be aware that the Pakistanis would try to give Indians a bad name, perhaps by tampering with the medicines.

We need to open channels of communication with the Taliban.

New Political System

A New Political Framework for Pushtunistan

Afghanistan as it is would remain a playground for Pakistanis, for they would always try to impose some Islamist Pushtun proxy over the whole of Afghanistan spreading the instability over the whole country and beyond. In the current Afghanistan, it would not be difficult for Pakistan to find such proxies.

It is important that the Pushtuns, whether as Taliban or Imperial, understand and accept that their rule cannot extend beyond a certain area to the North and West. Right now the Taliban simply considers themselves as representative of Pushtun aspirations and based on historical imperial legacy, they try to impose their will on the others. For this reason it is prudent to think of dividing the country between the Pushtuns in the South and East and the others in North and West. Because of ethnic mixing and enclaves it would be difficult to impose a hard border, but it would help to demarcate a boundary, but to keep the two entities together perhaps in some sort of confederation.

What we don't necessarily want is that Taliban come to power even in Southern and Eastern Afghanistan. So India should here take the lead and propose a new political system for Pushtuni Afghanistan, based on tribal jirgas but elected in a more modern and transparent way.

Tribal cultures like to think in terms of their tribes and subtribes and not in terms of the area some individual resides in. As such we should introduce a political system in the region which better corresponds to the way of thinking of the Pushtuns. Such a system would be far more stable in the area, and prevent the Taliban from taking over.

Every Pushtun Sub-tribe should get a specific number of seats in the Pushtun Loya-Jirga. Every Sub-tribe would elect its representatives at national election time and send them to the Jirga. The voting would NOT be on the basis of geographical areas but rather on the basis of tribes and sub-tribes. In any election for the sub-tribe seats those x candidates who get the highest number of votes get the x designated seats.

Every Pushtun gets an Id card with his tribe and subtribe written on it or at least on the chip in the card. When he votes in the election, regardless of where it is in Afghanistan, he gets to see only the candidates relevant for his subtribe. In urban areas where there is a mixture of tribes and subtribes sharing the same geographical space, it would be best if the voting is done electronically, whereas in villages and outlying areas, where a single subtribe dominates, paper ballots can be used.

Right now whenever some Taliban kills some legislator, the people are somewhat shocked but do not agitate all too much because they consider it an attack on the state, and Taliban are simply a political aspirant. However if some legislator in the proposed system gets killed or otherwise bumped off by the Taliban, then that would be considered an attack on a particular subtribe, and the the passion being strong w.r.t. subtribes, the Taliban would have to pay.

It is with such suggestions that India should approach the Afghan Pushtuns and the international community. Should India play initiator role in this, the future Pushtunistan may owe India something. Moreover India can help the Afghans on technical matters regarding identity cards and holding of elections.

Strengthening Tribal Structures

A New Political Framework for Pushtunistan

We have seen how the Taliban moved with a vengeance against tribal leaders. They bombed the jirgas. They assassinated the tribal leaders. There is a good reason for this. The tribal leaders represented the definition of Pushtun society through their sub-tribes, their tribes and through their tribal affiliations, their identification with the Pushtun nation itself. For the Taliban, it was important to make the Pushtuns rootless, in order to embrace them into Taliban organization.

The Pushtuns are being converted from their tribe-based consciousness to Pak-controlled Jihadism.

The only way to stop this Pakistani project in its tracks is to counter this process and help institutionalize the tribal nature of the Pushtun society.

We saw how the "religious" tribalism in India, i.e. the caste system, helped in the hardening of people's allegiance to their religion, indirectly through their caste, during the centuries of Islamic rule in India despite a huge state-sponsored program to convert the people to Islam. We have also seen that once certain divisions are institutionalized, they take a life of their own and cannot be easily done away with, one prime example being that of the Scheduled Castes and Tribes.

Similarly if one can institutionalize the tribal structure by creating electorates based on tribes and subtribes amongst the Pushtuns, one can be sure that the Taliban will not be able to supersede those structures using Islam or Talibanism.

India should take the initiative and create a UN group of like minded countries and start inviting Pushtun tribal elders from Afghanistan for consultations on how to go about creating the political structures, etc. The Afghan Loya Jirga would not be able to hold itself up against Pakistan-sponsored Taliban once the Americans leave Afghanistan.

While the international community is committed to Afghanistan, it would be the right time to take the initiative. Perhaps India can try this with the help of countries like Germany, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, etc.

Invite their leaders

But we need an alternate Pushtun strategy and for that we need to build bridges with the Pushtuns, on both sides of the Durand Line! Karzai is one leg of that strategy Another leg of the strategy could be to build relations with the Awami National Party and invite their leaders like Asfandyar Wali Khan to India, but we need to broaden our outreach to the Pushtun much more. We need to have open channels with the various warlords, tribal chiefs, moderate anti-Taliban Mullahs, Pushtun diaspora in West and India, remnants of PDPA or Hizb-i Watan Party of Mohammed Najibullah, President of Afghanistan before Afghanistan fell to the Communists, Pushtun journalists and writers. We also need to have relations with Taliban, and for that we can start with Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef who had this to say about Pakistan in his book “My Life With The Taliban”:

“Pakistan, which plays a key role in Asia, is so famous for treachery that it is said they can get milk from a bull. They have two tongues in one mouth, and two faces on one head so they can speak everybody’s language; they use everybody, deceive everybody. They deceive the Arabs under the guise of Islamic nuclear power, they milk America and Europe in the alliance against terrorism, and they have been deceiving Pakistani and other Muslims around the world in the name of the Kashmiri jihad.”

There are other Taliban who have made anti-Pakistan pronouncements!

Afghan National Army is a bit Tajik-heavy, so there would be a need for Pushtunistan to have its own army. When one has such a political system in place in Pushtunistan, we also need to translate that into enhanced security, making the region stand up to Taliban assaults, especially those perpetrated by Pakistanis puppets. Pushtunistan would have to set up its own force. It would be best if each tribe would send a certain number of soldiers to a Pushtun National Army. Even though these would be trained fighters in their own right, India can help them become a proper army. Such training can be conducted to a large extent in Pushtunistan itself, perhaps in Afghan Pushtunistan, while some officers can receive training in India. Now this could be a force to take on the Taliban. This force would enjoy a lot of legitimacy amongst the Pushtun, as it would be created from their midst and by their sanction.

3. Baluchistan

The problem with Baluchistan has been that their freedom fighters have hardly received much support from India, nor has their freedom struggle amply been covered by the Indian or the Western media, which is actually a big pity, considering that restraint was never one of Pakistan's strong points when funding and supporting armed insurgencies in India, especially in Punjab and Kashmir. This needs to change.

BLA and other freedom fighters should be provided with better weapons, and at least funds to buy them in the Pakistani arms market itself.

More importantly their tales of subjugation, oppression and suffering at the hands of the Pakistanis need to be highlighted prominently both in the Indian media as well as where ever possible in the Western media as well. The Baluchi freedom struggle needs to be given far more coverage.

Furthermore Baluchi leaders should be invited to speak at many more conferences and be able to address the Indian people, Western think tanks, and meet with Indian and Western leaders to get their point across.

With sufficient funding and training, the Balochis are more than capable of holding back the Pakistani forces. With the Pakistani forces being kept deployed on their eastern border with India, on their western border with Afghanistan as part of GWOT, against the TTP, for internal security, for the security of their VIPs, there would not be that many Pakistani forces left to engage the Balochis. In fact the Balochis can ensure that no Pakistani troops can enter Baluchistan. In case it seems likely that the Pakistanis would deploy troops against the Baluchis, the situation can be heated up on the Indo-Pak border, on the LoC, viz-a-viz the Afghans, or internally.

4. Afghan Regiment of the Indian Army

Initial suggestion

RajeshA, I like the idea of creating an Afghan Regiment in Indian Army along with other sub-continental areas. It will be similar to Gurkha Regiment.

ramana garu,

Just for the sake of record, I'd like to enumerate some advantages of having an Afghan Regiment in the Indian Army.

1. It is a statement that India sees Afghanistan as its region of influence and has historical ties to it.
2. It is a formal way of tying both countries together at people's level.
3. India would be training Afghans who after some time would be steeped in Indian Military Culture.
4. If the Afghan Regiment is ever used against Pakistan, it would create significant psychological uncertainty in Pakistani Army ranks, because their indoctrination of racial superiority would fall flat. Secondly it may even cause some Pushtuns in the Pakistani Army to rethink their vows of loyalty.
5. When they finish service and return to Afghanistan, they can form a bulwark against those who follow Pakistani interests in Afghanistan.
6. Upon return to Afghanistan, they can be ambassadors of India in Afghanistan.
7. They can help in bringing Afghanistan in sync with India's strategic interests.

It would be good if India recruits Afghans from across the ethnic mosaic in Afghanistan - Pushtuns of various tribes, Tajiks, Hazaras, Aimaks, Uzbeks, Turkomen, Nuristanis, Baloch etc. Let them feel as one people of one nation within the Indian Army, taking the example of how Indians from different corners of Indian gel together in the Indian Army. Naturally accepting plurality and working together across narrow considerations of religion and ethnicity, is the best thing they can take back. Last but not least they can take back a lot more of animosity against Pakistan.

I also think, that besides being trained as soldiers, they should learn some other craft or profession during their time in the Indian Army for a time after service.

Self-sufficiency

Deployment of Indian troops to Afghanistan has been often a topic of discussion on BRF. I have earlier often argued that it is a wrong decision to put Indian troops in Afghanistan without an adequate and assured supply line!

But there are ways of getting around this issue, however that requires an intricate play on India's part to ensure that our supply lines do not get cut off. Any Indian military involvement should be based on following conditions:

1. The troops should be more or less self-sufficient in Afghanistan and not be dependent on supply lines from India.
2. The supplies should be sourced from either Afghanistan or from various neighboring countries primarily those to the north of Afghanistan or Iran.
3. The troops should be Afghans themselves, who feel at home there, who know the lay of the land, the mentality of the people, the tongues spoken there.
4. The troops should be under Indian command, flag and pay, following directions from Indian Military Command on how to proceed to provide security to Afghanistan.

I have been an advocate of raising an Afghan Regiment within the Indian Army, which could be deployed to Afghanistan, and has an independent procurement and logistics network there!

Why one united regiment?

When are we going to be raising an Afghan Regiment within the Indian Army, something on the lines of Royal Gurkha Rifles in the British Army?

For that the British doesn't need a major physical presence in Nepal!

RajeshAji,

Just my small nitpick for your plan....in place of Afghan Regmt...lets have separate
Tajik,Pustun and Uzbek regmt...isn't it they will be more useful for our cause...

Samudragupta ji,

I understand the ambitious nature of your sentiments!

"Afghan" is actually a collective term, and can cater to Tajiks, Pushtun, Uzbeks, Turkmen, Hazaras, and many others. I'd go for "Afghan Regiment" for following reasons:

• Afghan has come to mean anti-Pak! So it gives the Pakis the creeps, especially because of the Durand Line issue.
• Since Afghan is a collective term, we are sending out the signal, that we believe in unity of the region, and do not intend to play divide and rule politics, even if that may or may not be the truth.
• It does not seem intimidating to the other Central Asian Republics, and we retain our image of a benign power.
• It helps us mask, how many of which ethnicities are really in active duty in the Afghan Regiment.
• We can even have CAR citizens in the Afghan Regiment.
• It would be good if we get even this off the ground. Chances for getting all three - Pushtun, Tajik, Uzbek, are less.

Next to ANA and ANP, India should keep the Afghan Regiment of the Indian Army deployed in Afghanistan, and it should cooperate with ANA and ANP to ensure that the Taliban do not overrun Afghanistan. Now how would that be looked upon by Afghanistan, especially the Pushtuns and the world community?

Well if the Pushtuns can be persuaded to restructure their political system around the tribe and the system is inducted in the Pushtun region, then Afghan Regiment of the Indian Army can be active in the Pushtun region as well in support of the Pushtun National Army against Pakistan-supported Afghan Taliban. If there hasn't been any restructuring till then, then the Afghan Regiment of the Indian Army can only be deployed in Northern Afghanistan in the Tajik areas, hardening them against the assault of the Taliban.

Just trying to look into the looking glass, even if the Taliban were able to do a repeat of their feat in 1994-1996 in Afghanistan and regain control over most of the country there, the Afghan Regiment of the Indian Army would still be able to be active there, as the officially recognized government of Afghanistan would remain some group other than the Taliban, so our presence in Afghanistan would still be legal.

In any case, India can deploy the regiment to serve the interests of peace and stability in Afghanistan, and we should do it!

**************

In any case these are the four spokes of the proposal for a security framework for the considered region, and such a security framework should enable a high degree of confidence and assurance to the international community to sign off on making the region independent of Pakistan.

[shiv]

cross post

Let me say what will be good for Pakistan. What will make Pakistan succeed and give it new life?

Imagine a day when Indian Muslims rise up and start battling Hindus. Or even better than that - Hindus should start mercilessly massacring Muslims (and other people whom Pakistan calls minorities) BBC, CNN and the usual culprits will be showing Indian mosques burning like Islamabad Marriott of PNS Mehran.

The will be proof that Pakistan is necessary. Proof that Pakistan was justified. As long as Muslims live peacefully in India the idea of Pakistan is fckued. Indian Muslims must suffer for Pakistan to succeed. India must be a threat to Muslims for Pakistan's success. When Muslims in India suffer Pakistan can say "All look - we are the succour for Muslims. We are islam Inc. e were right. Pakistan is a success"

Gradually Pakistan is failing. The life is ebbing out of Pakistaniyat because Indians are not doing what they are supposed to do. This is India's failure. Not Pakistan's.

[Prem]

You told the same to Poaks and now they are egged on by ticks they cant even try this trick . Something fabulous is gonna happen soon in india and its good to wait for good news.

[Arjun]

Indian Muslims must suffer for Pakistan to succeed.

Two thoughts that occur to me based on this very insightful post-

1. It follows from your statement that Pakistan might try to show the world that Indian Muslims are suffering by asking its proxies in India to commit acts of violence against mosques / Muslims. The INC government would of course be very happy to blame any such event on Hindutva.

2. I would not want the wrong takeaway for India based on your post. Muslims should continue as always to feel secure in India - however at the same time, a campaign to have Muslims (& indeed all religions) to conform to Indian standards of liberalism should not be construed as a legitimate cause of 'takleef' for Indian Muslims. There should never be any 'appeasement' on that count.

[RajeshA]

Solving Pakistan: Solution 7

Managing Chaos and the Dharmic Inkspots

Considering that there is a strong possibility for the State of Pakistan to fail completely and become chaotic with time, India would need to manage that chaos as well.

X-Posting from TIRP Thread

Their policies and actions based on these will come to roost when the descent into chaos happens fully. They cannot handle that on their own and neither can they just abandon and leave. A resurgent and confident India will have to be approached by these very powers.

India will have to be ready for that eventuality and must have in place, plans for the displaced people of pakistan. It will have to be India that acts and creates safe havens inside the territory currently controlled by this entity and not in India proper. It has to be India that will have to lead the final arrangements of post Pakistan scenario.

The GOI will have to prepare for this eventuality in the next decade or so. It calls for clarity of thought and unity in purpose. It requires adequate preparation for the Indian state and the people. Whether we have that right now or we following a policy of drift is a matter of debate not germane to this thread.

One thing is sure though. It is not going to be easy to integrate the resulting states or its people with India or Indians. That again is something that has to happen through at least a couple of generations. The people who inhabit this entity have to first unlearn the false pretensions and false identity that they have lived through all their lives and re-discover their true identity and heritage. It becomes more complicated when that situation is also prevalent in India. India and Indians are yet to get rid of the shackles in their minds too.

Until this re-discovery happens, it is best that the population of the lands controlled by this entity are kept at arms distance and away from the Indian Republic. They have to be kept engaged by us but not integrated until the change happens. For a civilization that knows the value of time it is not unnatural to wait patiently.

Just my thoughts.

This can be taken care of in an international context, as I wrote sometime back.

**********

Pakistan is doomed. There will be an islamic revolution in that country and minorities will be killed as sport in between convulsions of killing different islamic sects. I remember MJ Akhbar's article where he says, what will India do if 1 million refugees turn up on India's borders? I am afraid that that day might arrive.

There needs to be a UNSC Resolution which declares certain enclaves within Pakistan where minorities may be in a higher concentration as UN protected safe areas, and allows other countries to deploy their militaries to secure these enclaves within Pakistan.

Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, and Ahmediyas, all non-Muslim minorities may apply to have an area designated as a safe area by the UN.

In the mean time, the world should highlight the human rights and minority rights abuses in Pakistan. The case of Aasia Bibi could act as a lightening rod!

This is just one solution!
**********

I also wrote a piece as to how India can go about doing this.

**********
Process of Total Chaos and Subsequent Redemption

The real question people have is whether failure in Pakistan will lead to NK like state, Yugoslav/Soviet style dissolution of union, Somali like total collapse, or perhaps even some sort of combination.

Some days back we had an interesting case where there was a quarrel between some Mehsud tribesmen and Usman Punjabi's men in Miranshah, North Waziristan, over the rich widow of a deceased militant, and it ended with Usman Punjabi's death.

What this tells us, is that the potential is there for Islamist groups to fight amongst each other for their share of the booty.

Now let's consider a situation, where the singular entity keeping Pakistan together, the Army has fragmented, for which there are also scenarios. Somehow I don't foresee a Yugoslavian situation, where there are nationalities that assert themselves. Nationalities can only assert themselves where there have been organized secessionist movements having a broad support amongst a nationality, e.g. the Baluchis, the Balawaristanis. During any collapse of the state, these organized movements could take the leadership in bringing some semblance of order to their respective regions and bringing the region under a collective leadership.

In Pushtun Areas, one can imagine a federation of tribes, where each tribe has an area carved out for itself, or an area where a single tribe dominates, and these tribes together form a council, a jirga, to consider issues which have national and extra-territorial relevance or for resolving inter-tribal feuds.

As far as Pakjab and Sindh are concerned, IMO, they would be hit the hardest. Due to the urbanization and development of both elites and middle classes, the tribal hierarchies have broken down. The state machinery has allowed the elite to fleece the country, without needing to give much thought to the plight of the common people. With the break-down of this state machinery, the common people would not be willing to accept the leadership of the present elites.

The Islamists too would not be able to establish a central control, as at the moment there are several militant groups, which are either held together by the Army's control over them, or due to some understanding between the charismatic leaders of these groups in view of a common challenge - the state, the kafirdom, etc. These alliances would be mostly opportunistic. Every Islamist/Jihadist leader would be competing with the other and be wary of head-hunting, poaching, encroachments into one's territories, betrayal to enemies, etc.

In fact, I foresee Islamist gangs marauding the common people, either taking away their kids and making them child soldiers, or if they have no kids, then taking away their possessions and raping the women. Islamism is going to be in name only and the Islamist leader of the gang, would issue fatwas, which would enhance his own position. Something similar to what we saw in Swat with Mullah Radio.

So basically I see a huge Somalia with the difference, that unlike Somalia, where the Islamists are trying to establish a single command over the country by getting rid of the warlords, in Pakistan the Islamists would be too disunited to really be able to do that. In Pakistan the Islamists would be the warlords. Whereas Somalia has a chance of coming out of its misery under some Islamist leadership, Pakistan would have no such chance.

Also there would be no comparison to the 90s Taliban Regime. 90s Taliban Regime in Afghanistan was under the command of Mullah Omar. He was the undisputed Emir. But mostly the unity in the Taliban Movement was the handiwork of ISI. ISI could keep the Taliban together, especially as ISI controlled the financing, the organizational hierarchy, the war-theater strategy, the arms, etc. In case of Pakistan, there would be no higher power. Even Al Qaeda cannot provide the country controlled by Islamist Gangs with structure and direction.

Pakistan's demise into chaos would be total.

What is in it for India?

Well if India is able to keep the refugees at bay and our borders closed, the situation would be very advantageous indeed. In Pakistan due to the activities of the Islamist Gangs, Islam itself would have lost out much of its moral sway. The moderate Mullahs would have already taken their leave from the field through bullets, courtesy of the Islamist Gangs, eager to establish their own writ over an area. We have seen some of this in Afghanistan and tribal areas of Pakistan, where tribal leaders and moderate mullahs have been killed off.

So what would be the right strategy for India?

1) Support every Islamist Gang in Pakistan through different handlers and agencies in India - financially, logistically, militarily, and through food and medical supplies. No other groups or countries should be allowed to exert their influence. Any Arabs, Chinese, Americans fishing in these troubled waters need to be taken off the board, using of course, the services of rival Islamist Gangs.

2) Ensure that there is rancor and strife between any two neighboring Islamist Gangs, and occasional bloodshed. India's hand should not be visible in all this. This should create a history of bad blood amongst the Islamist Gangs, which do not allow them to reconcile that easily.

3) Create an awareness in the international community, that religious minorities (Christians, Hindus, Ahmediya, Shia, etc) are taking the brunt of this break-down in law and order, and they need protection. This is to be packaged as a humanitarian tragedy.

4) Pass legislation in the Indian Parliament asking the Indian Government to secure islands of religious minority populations within Pakistan through military means.

5) Send Indian Soldiers to establish and secure 'safe area enclaves' within Pakistan for religious minorities (actually mostly for the Dharmic variety). These safe areas would be provided with food, medicines, water, security, training.

6) Through well-placed agents in Pakjab and Sindh, first countryside and then urban areas, get the people of an area - a village, a neighborhood, which does not belong to a religious minority, e.g. of the Dharmic kind, to pledge allegiance to a minority religion, in order to also avail of Indian protection from the marauding Islamist Gangs. Once the village/neighborhood has converted, India can send Indian forces in into the area.

7) Through military and administrative training of the religious minorities and those converted into a minority religion (e.g. Dharmic religion), and with additional support by Indian forces in emergency cases, India would be able to leave the care of the area in the hands of the locals, freeing the Indian contingent in the area for other areas.

8 ) Gradually as the area under a minority religion in Pakistan increases, India can start emasculating the local Islamist Gangs, through inter-gang wars, through stopping aid to a previously supported gang, through effecting betrayals in their ranks, through aerial bombing, through decapitating, through fighting them out, etc.

9) Once an Islamist Gang has been cornered or brought under sufficient pressure, Indian forces can offer the Islamist Gang to reform, and to convert to a minority religion (e.g. Dharmic one) and under proper guidance from Indian advisors to oversee the conversion of the populace under their own 'jurisdiction' to the same minority religion, in which case the ex-Islamist Gang would be allowed to function and survive.

10) As the ink-drops of Indian Protection spread along with an expanding converted population, a time would come when the rest of the population still unconverted would see the light of day and take the plunge.

IMHO, this is a viable strategy, and if conducted over 20 years, can lead to a reintegration of Pakjab and Sindh into the Indian Union as 'reformed' regions, totally compatible with the values and norms of the Indian Civilization.

Baluchistan and Balawaristan should have been incorporated into the Indian Union much before this Process of Total Chaos and Subsequent Redemption even starts.

As mentioned, before anything positive can start in Pakistan, Pakistan would have to stew in its Islamist juices until all molecules of Islam have broken down. There are steps India can take to see to it that Pakistan lands in the cauldron and there are step Indian can take to increase the heat under the cauldron, and all in the name of Islam. Any serious call for Democracy, Secularism, Islamic Reform, Stability in Pakistan by India is shooting ourselves in our own feet, though officially it is recommended that India sticks to a benign and supposedly helpless position. India needs a direction for Pakistan, a strategy, and what is a better strategy than to give the drug addict, that what it wants the most - Islam.

Basically this is a Hammer and Anvil strategy - Islamist Gangs being the Hammer and Indian Forces the Anvil. Another thing worth noting is that such a strategy built on controlling the chaos and providing the people a tunnel out based on their religious persuasion is not based on compulsion. Indian Forces will not be in Pakistan doing any missionary work or converting Muslims. Indian State need not compromise its secular credentials.

That can be undertaken is by private religious organizations in India using private security companies and providing information to the Indian State of populations in Pakistan requiring Indian protection, and lobbying for intervention by India.
**********

[shyamd]

ANA has had some success in recruiting lots of Pakhtoons. But they don't have the same commitments levels as maybe the Northern Alliance. Desh will see if we can toughen them up. Everyone is quite wary of ANA performance to date. It remains to be seen if they will improve. We don't have much choice but to work with them.

[ramana]

X-post...
"shiv"

TSP has no other purpose except to keep India in check.
The above 2 has been in vogue ever since its creation. However it is growing beyond its requirements-
a) TSP is descending into chaos , hence failing to keep India in check.
b) TSP has started attacking the western world rather than India.

Their policies and actions based on these will come to roost when the descent into chaos happens fully. They cannot handle that on their own and neither can they just abandon and leave.(Yes) A resurgent and confident India will have to be approached by these very powers. (No, outside powers will not do,other than pressuring India to take in abduls)

India will have to be ready for that eventuality and must have in place, plans for the displaced people of pakistan. It will have to be India that acts and creates safe havens inside the territory currently controlled by this entity and not in India proper. It has to be India that will have to lead the final arrangements of post Pakistan scenario. (this is what scares the most with RAPES/WKKS with outside powers screwing India)

As everything is failing, If the TSP and its handlers in final push to screw India, decide to merge with India in the hope that with merger 180 + million abduls will roam India pissing inside rather than outside. This can be a a truly masterstroke from TSPians handlers.
The power is with TSPA/RAPE class. They can make a treaty with India with all powers with TSPA/RAPES- army, local laws etc in TSP- but economically tied with India.They will get integrated easily into the DIE/SLIME class in India.
They care only for themselves and their power. They will strengthen the power of WKKs in India.

The remaining 180+ million abduls will feast on India. Many are beyond redemption because of 60 years of indoctrination.
It is something like letting lose mutant rats inside your home. The rats are not killed by rat poison.
No kanadian vizza but free India.
How will India tackle this.

wondering Is this a realistic scenario.

Well add to this one more possibility. This has been working in my mind, unformed and undefined ever since I made the suggestion a few days ago in another thread.

Could Pakistan be the final revenge of Indic thought on Arabi Islam? Look at it this way. Arab culture was there and Islam arose to include that. Islam overran Iran but the Persians put their own cultural stamp on it. Islam came to India and whether anyone likes the word or not or not there was a degree of syncretism where the local traditions were absorbed into the lifestyle of Muslims while Islamic cuisine and art had some influence locally. In other words the Islam of India was unique, It was Islam with an Indian stamp.

Pakistaniyat believed that the Indian stamp was either non existent or bad. Pakistan started with the idea that all culture was islamic (that is, there was no Indian stamp on Muslims of India) and that if Muslims rejected kafirs - the kafirs would be empty and without any culture or roots because all culture belonged to them (the Packees - can you believe it )

This idea failed miserably. It was a lie to start with. Then with General Albert Einstein ul Haq that genius - the idea of rejecting all that was Indian gained currency. It was helped by Wahhabism - which is fine with Arab culture. Pakis started denying their culture. but since they denied culture there was no way you can become an Arab. You can suck Arab anus, but you won't become an Arab.

What Pakis are left with is Islam without any soul or culture to support it. An empty shell of rules that can be adapted to different cultures provided one is not so stupid as to negate all culture. Having thrown out all culture - denying their Indian roots and not being admitted to Arabian naturalization. Pakistanis have retained what they think is pure Islam. And if you look at Pakistan and say This is pure "Paki" islam - you know what islam is without a culture to moderate it. It's a text interpreted by people who are not Arab - who do not have an Arab outlook, and who refuse to allow the Indian outlook because it has been rejected.

Islam is nothing without culture. No religion can be anything without culture. The Arabs have their culture. Islam in India has a culture unique to India. Reject that and you are fuked. You are Pakistan. A rootless ba$tard. They cannot become Arabs. Their only way to survive lies in the East. trying to claim India for themselves has failed as miserably as trying to claim Islam for themselves. Stupid idiots, these Pakistanis. Thoo!

Let them rot. We may have to bear some pain for a few decades or centuries. That is our fate. But they will not go anywhere. The future lies in the east. With heads bowed down to all that is hallowed in the east.

[RajeshA]

shiv saar,

I wouldn't say, the Pakistanis want to get rid of all culture. There is a lobby in Pakistan which still continues to promote the identification of Pakistan with the Mughal culture and thereby with the Persian culture, and wants to claim that that culture in fact separates Pakistanis from the Indians.

The problem is that Indian Muslims also entertain some of that culture through Urdu, clothing, history, architecture, etc. and some Indians consider it as having become part of Indian culture as well. Even Hindus feel at ease with the Persian influences in the culture.

That makes the job of the Two-Nation-Theorists in Pakistan still more difficult, because Indians just tell the Pakistanis that one can have influences of Persian culture in one's culture but that does not make one non-Indian if one belongs to the Indian Subcontinent. So the TNT argument falls flat on that account. Indians tell them that it is okay to have Persian culture and still enjoy Bollywood films. In fact many Bollywood films have themselves promoted the Persian influences in the past.

Ideally the Persian lobby would have wished that the influence of the Persian culture had stopped at the Indo-Pak border, because then they could have claimed whole of Pakistan as Persia's sphere of influence, but by the virtue of the Persian culture having had spread still further afield deeper into India that is not possible and any claim of Persian culture has to include India, and once India gets included in that sphere of Persian influence, India starts pulling back through India's own cultural influences.

What I wish to say is that the Two-Nation-Brigade even after the creation of Pakistan tried to set-up Pakistan on a foundation of Mughal and Persian culture.

But with advent of the Wahhabi Islam into Pakistan, especially after General Zia ul-Haq's reign, the Persian Cultural Lobby has had to take a back seat to Arabic Islamic Purity Lobby. To a large extent it is the Saudi Arabia vs Iran clash going on in Pakistan. Since then culture has become less important. Those who wish to identify themselves with Islam would do it through their beards, through piety or through humiliating those who are less pious. Culture has taken a back seat.

Actually since the identification with Persian culture has been somewhat under pressure due to the Arab influence, Indian culture is making a stronger comeback through Bollywood, wedding festivities, dressing, etc.

[RajeshA]

Solving Pakistan: Solution 8

Close the Paki Factory

Pakistanis have a few industries which work great. They are producing terrorists on mass. They are producing nukes on mass. And they are producing themselves on mass as well.

Since it is the Pakistani Establishment which owns the terrorist and nuke producing factories, it is difficult to convince them to put a stop to them. USA has been pouring in money by the billions, in order to put a cap on this production, but the production has only picked up pace.

Only the Paki producing factories are in private hands. And it is they who are amenable to make a deal for them. So lets make a deal with those Pakistanis and buy off those factories.

[RajeshA]

Solving Pakistan: Solution 8

Close the Paki Factory

First of all a few posts which were made in this context on the TIRP Thread.

Hari Seldon wrote:

OTOH, an easy solution to solve the perennial gender ratio disparity in the western border states (esp Punjab and Haryana) is to selectively let in 'em wimmin refugees only, perhaps...

saadhak wrote:

OTOH, an easy solution to solve the perennial gender ratio disparity in the western border states (esp Punjab and Haryana) is to selectively let in 'em wimmin refugees only, perhaps...

IMO, we should stop advocating 'taking in their women' - on whatever pretext.
A few reasons:

1. The gender ratio points to an ill mindset in the said states. Importing women is not going to get rid of that mind-set. This cannot be a solution.
2. Who would want inbred, rabidly anti-Indian (since 3 generations at least) women giving birth to and bringing up their kids? Think one level deeper for the social implications.
3. We do not have to sink to the level of barbarians by humiliating them through their women.

Surely there are many other ways of heaping humiliation on the enemy without compromising on our morals and keeping value and social systems intact; also setting the right examples for our future generations.

RajeshA wrote:

OTOH, an easy solution to solve the perennial gender ratio disparity in the western border states (esp Punjab and Haryana) is to selectively let in 'em wimmin refugees only, perhaps...

IMO, we should stop advocating 'taking in their women' - on whatever pretext.
A few reasons:

1. The gender ratio points to an ill mindset in the said states. Importing women is not going to get rid of that mind-set. This cannot be a solution.

The gender ratio points to an ill mindset that was the case in the said states a couple of decades ago. This is changing. However those men folk who are not so privileged to have a wife, should those men have to live a life without love and family? And if yes, for what fault of theirs? Were they personally responsible for what happened a couple of decades ago?

2. Who would want inbred, rabidly anti-Indian (since 3 generations at least) women giving birth to and bringing up their kids? Think one level deeper for the social implications.

Okay so now the Paki women are not good enough for Indians!? In fact they are so bad, the women need to be humiliated by calling them inbred and rabid!

3. We do not have to sink to the level of barbarians by humiliating them through their women.

But all of sudden, we cannot humiliate their men, because humiliating others becomes barbarian!

Surely there are many other ways of heaping humiliation on the enemy without compromising on our morals and keeping value and social systems intact; also setting the right examples for our future generations.

As far as I see it, I don't know what morals and values and social systems Hari Seldon ji violated by suggesting that we be somewhat lenient in admittance with women refugees!

KJoishy wrote:

Surely there are many other ways of heaping humiliation on the enemy without compromising on our morals and keeping value and social systems intact; also setting the right examples for our future generations.

I wish there was a way I could use a Like button for saadhak's post.

harbans wrote:

I wish there was a way I could use a Like button for saadhak's post.

Me too. I would consider it reprehensible to use Women in such a manner as suggested. Saadhak ji, great post! Thanks for it.

saadhak wrote:

To avoid derailing the TSP thread, responding to RajeshA ji here.
RajeshA ji, let me start out by stating I am an admirer of the options you bring to the table on dealing with the problem of Pakistan.
However, targeting the enemy's women is one area which I differ with.

The gender ratio points to an ill mindset that was the case in the said states a couple of decades ago. This is changing. However those men folk who are not so privileged to have a wife, should those men have to live a life without love and family? And if yes, for what fault of theirs? Were they personally responsible for what happened a couple of decades ago?

Sir, this is very much still prevalent - whether in a reduced manner or not, I cannot say. As far as I know from interactions with people in my own community and with friends, there is a definite bias towards having a son. The process is still being influenced. There is still an interference with nature trying to maintain the balance. Even if the said men were not directly responsible, we reap a lot of what our ancestors have sown. Same is the case here.
As far as love and starting a family goes, I do think it should be delinked with heaping humiliation on the enemy.

Okay so now the Paki women are not good enough for Indians!? In fact they are so bad, the women need to be humiliated by calling them inbred and rabid!

Just saying it like it is. Can't deny that they are inbred. And even Pakis take pride in being rabidly anti-Indian. I don't think this is a humiliation to them. Even if it is, it is much less than doing a barbarian on their women.

But all of sudden, we cannot humiliate their men, because humiliating others becomes barbarian!

No sir, I believe their men can't be humiliated enough.

As far as I see it, I don't know what morals and values and social systems Hari Seldon ji violated by suggesting that we be somewhat lenient in admittance with women refugees!

I'd want to stress that my intention is not to make it personal and target any person, but voicing my opinion against the mindset.
Certain posts in other threads have also talked about forecefully taking their women.
Our morals and value systems and models whom we are taught to emulate unambigously state women are to be respected. I'll leave it at that.
As far as social systems go, I highly doubt you would have Paki women enmasse to start suddenly embracing our culture given their background and upbringing.

RajeshA wrote:

saadhak ji,

I'm sorry if my response sounded critical. Thank you for your response. I agree with the gist of your sentiments. However I disagree in their application in this case, and that the issue is off-topic. We are dealing with the current evolution and future scenarios in Pakistan.

Some of my past posts on this issue:

1) economic disparity

*********

I am for Big Boss 5 with Paki chicks and Yindoo men. That will put whole of Pak on fire.

Perhaps time for catalog RAPE brides from Pakistan, hand delivered to an address in India, all pretrained in Gayatri Mantra!

Mail order paki brides. This is L&M material.

Pratyush ji,
The Indian Economic Juggernaut should keep on rolling, as Pakistani economy tanks. Give it another decade, and we will see, Pakistani families willing to give away their daughters to Indian men, and not just Muslims, but to the most kaffir of men, so that some monthly "stipend" back to their families in Pakistan, keeps them afloat.

If India can ensure, that the Islamists in Pakistan do not succeed in closing off all avenues of Bollywood entertainment coming in into Pakistan, and the people-to-people contact can continue, then that is the logical conclusion. Once it becomes a trickle, it becomes a stream. Once it becomes a stream, it becomes a flood. All Pakistanis are about to become our saale.
*********

2) Situation in Pak

*********

The realilty of Sialkot:
(maika of sania mirza)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WRkSxjaEWI

This is the town which used to be the center of their leather industry, football export, and surgical instruments.

ensoi.

Similar stories ringing across all town and cities of Pakistan. But why are the people so agitated, they are a wahid ismali nuclear power kyon ji?

Gagan ji,
you mean Sania Mirza's Sasural!

At 1:40 he says that his friend came calling and due to poverty he did not know how to marry off his daughters. Can no BRFite rise to the occasion and make Pakistan his Sasural!

Less women for Pakis to use as factories.

The Pakistanis should wait another few years. India which has a skewed gender ratio would be more than happy to buy up, I mean marry all the women Pakistan has to offer! Every saala would get pocket money for the whorehouse, I mean the goat zoo!

That would be the biggest change in Indo-Pak relations when India becomes rich again, and Pakistan keeps on digging its grave! There will be even more love across the boundary!

*********

As far as love and starting a family goes, I do think it should be delinked with heaping humiliation on the enemy.

I agree with you completely. But I also think that the issue is very much delinked. It could be that one or the other BRFite may have mentioned it in that context, something I may have missed, and thereby created a link, however just because someone opines that link, does not mean that such a link should necessarily exist.

We in India have a paucity of women, and were Pakistanis be willing to marry off their daughters to Indians, why should we object. It is not as if we are kidnapping their women, or buying them as slaves to work, or abusing them as sex-slaves, or killing off their men-folk and taking them as war-booty! No, we are not doing that! Something like may indeed be humiliation. But just marrying their women is not a humiliation. I would even call it an honor we are bestowing upon the Pakistanis.

Both sides get something from it. The Pakistani side of the family gets some monthly financial support and survive, and the Indian family gets a bahu.

At a strategic level, it would be taking away the Paki Breeding Factories, which is in fact how the women are used there. There is a population explosion going on in Pakistan, and such a move on a larger scale can moderate that. In fact, from this perspective, no amount of Pakistani women we Indians marry can be enough. Indians would be doing a national duty should they marry a Pakistani woman, and thereby stop her from breeding more India-hating Jihadis. In fact, it is a valid means of managing Pakistan's failure.

I don't think this is a humiliation to them. Even if it is, it is much less than doing a barbarian on their women.

Again, I would like to point out that marrying a woman can hardly be considered barbarian.

Certain posts in other threads have also talked about forecefully taking their women.

This is something I missed. On second thoughts, I too may have suggested that, but that is in a case where the Pakistanis attack India with nuclear weapons, in which case all bets are off anyway. But other than that, I am not aware of anybody suggesting we forcefully take their women.

Our morals and value systems and models whom we are taught to emulate unambigously state women are to be respected. I'll leave it at that.

And that is exactly what we are doing by taking their women as wives and not sex-slaves.

As far as social systems go, I highly doubt you would have Paki women enmasse to start suddenly embracing our culture given their background and upbringing.

Usually when some people consider migrating to other countries for the sake of studies or jobs, they often undertake exams and courses to prepare them for what awaits them, especially if the migration land has a different language and culture. So there are ways and means of preparing them. If courses are not available, one can just pack them on DVDs and the Pakistani women can get training on them.

As far as motivation is concerned, IMO, if their families are hungry and living foot to mouth, then there would be reason for them to send their daughters to India and get a son-in-law willing to support them. Such families would in fact encourage their daughters to get the necessary preparation and training to be considered an acceptable wife and daughter-in-law.

The Pakistanis however have to first become conscious of this "opportunity".

gakakkad wrote:

^^ Rajesh saar , which paki chick are u smitten by ? By the way skewed sex ratio is a temporary problem. I am sure that with further social development we ll get on with it. Our immigration policy should not be different from the Americans. We ll only welcome skilled immigrants who can add value to our country. Trust me several their will be several russian women and women from the CIS (erstwhile soviet colonies) who would be more than willing to marry Indians once our economic juggernaut gets rolling. (they are already top of the market in flesh trade industry.) These women have had a secular upbringing . Besides USSR had several great scientists , sport persons and chess players. These chicks would have far better gene pool to pass on to your offsprings than these NAPAKIS . Since the napakis interbreed prolifically their is a stagnation of their gene pool . (this is a scientific fact and not GILGITSTANI GENETICS)

RajeshA wrote:

^^ Rajesh saar , which paki chick are u smitten by ?

gakakkad ji,

I'm off the market! I'm just thinking of my bhai-bandhu in desh!

By the way skewed sex ratio is a temporary problem. I am sure that with further social development we ll get on with it.

10s of millions of Indian men will not find a partner, and mostly these Indians would be the poorer ones. The situation is very very dire, and it will take generations for the problem to be resolved.

Our immigration policy should not be different from the Americans. We ll only welcome skilled immigrants who can add value to our country.

That is fine but does not solve the problem of missing brides.

Trust me several their will be several russian women and women from the CIS (erstwhile soviet colonies) who would be more than willing to marry Indians once our economic juggernaut gets rolling. (they are already top of the market in flesh trade industry.) These women have had a secular upbringing . Besides USSR had several great scientists , sport persons and chess players.

gakakkad ji,

Having several years of experience with women from the region, I do concur with you. Even after marriage, I've had Uzbek girls cornering and inviting me to watch bollywood movies with them, with my wife wondering what the whole thing was all about! One girlfriend of mines had to drag a Russian girl, who had been pestering me to teach her Hindi and English, away from me and introduce her to another Indian. The Indian and the Russian are now married with kids.

Anyway that is beside the point. We need the poorer strata of Indians to also be able to find wives and settle down and have their families, and this demand cannot be fulfilled by a few girls from ex-Soviet Union. Besides the Pakistani women through their language and TV viewership already know a lot about Indian families. They just need some Dharmic training and they are ready to go!

These chicks would have far better gene pool to pass on to your offsprings than these NAPAKIS . Since the napakis interbreed prolifically their is a stagnation of their gene pool . (this is a scientific fact and not GILGITSTANI GENETICS)

When the Pakistani women start breeding with Indians again, the problem of a closed gene pool would be resolved.

JE Menon wrote:

Trust me several their will be several russian women and women from the CIS (erstwhile soviet colonies) who would be more than willing to marry Indians once our economic juggernaut gets rolling. (they are already top of the market in flesh trade industry.) These women have had a secular upbringing .

In general, it would be best to avoid such stereotyping unless the arguments are backed up by facts. As a matter of fact, our economic juggernaut is already rolling, and I'm yet to see any statistic suggesting a disproportionate representation of former USSR females among those marrying Indians. There is no indication that women from other poor countries would be more reluctant to marry Indians as the juggernaut continues rolling.

Will be happy to see some real data though, if it is available.

Hari Seldon wrote:

^^^ L&M thread maybe a better place to diss-cuss the intricacies of the issue, perhaps...

RajeshA wrote:

^^^ L&M thread maybe a better place to diss-cuss the intricacies of the issue, perhaps...

There are many angles to it.

• Cutting down the potential of Packees to produce ever more India-hating jihadis is one aspect, which does not really belong in the L&M thread.
• The aspect that the Pakistani dekho-no-money is soon to be in free-fall, and would in fact facilitate the catalog bride market, also probably is not something one would put in the L&M thread.
• How Indians go about setting up this channel for importing brides in a conservative anti-India society is another challenge, that may not belong in the L&M thread.
• Using the institution of marriage with Pakistani women as a means of establishing networks there and recruiting Pakistanis to do protect India's national interests there is another aspect.

JE Menon wrote:

RajeshA,

I'm not discussing the merits or otherwise of what you are saying. I am objecting to bringing in a specific subset of women into the picture and letting that stereotype be perpetuated on BRF. Hence my request to whoever brings this subject up to put up data. Otherwise we are being unfair and unjust to the women in the countries mentioned above; and we would ourselves be guilty of cack-handedness and insensitivity, something which we frequently accuse non-Indians of when they talk about things Indian.

SandeepA wrote:

Can we please take the discussion on managing porki women elsewhere? Maybe to the Managing Pakistan's failure thread or better still the Love and marriage nukkad dhaaga! This has become too OT on this thread.

RajeshA wrote:

JE Menon saar,

As I said here, the women of ex-Soviet Union are not the issue here, at least not on this thread, and I just mentioned that in passing in a response. I also did not propagate here any stereotype, and my few personal examples were just examples and not a generalized statement. I am also not too keen on further discussing how Russian goris find Indian men.

The issue here was ONLY about the downward evolution of the Pakistani state and society, and whether that would lead to a demand to marry off their daughters and sisters to Indian men and whether there will be a demand for Pakistani women from the Indian side.

Basically I look at this from the PoV of decreasing the runaway birth rate of Pakistanis. Should the phenomenon of cross-country marriages kick off in a big way, the demand for wives in India coupled with Indian money can mean a wholesale suctioning off of women from Pakistan. A prospect which also solves many strategic problems for India.

And as we are talking about the coming future, there are no statistics I can provide about that!

Hari Seldon wrote:

RajeshA ji,

Lest you misconstrue my words, I agree with your thoughts on the issue. Riding moralistic high-horses while downplaying practical crises that can be discerned as coming down the line hasn't exactly been unknown in this great land of ours as can be seen from some posts piling on here and there.

Building honorable marriage bonds is also what I advocate, not as some have sought to perhaps portray, pushing innocent people (yes, pak ones too can be innocent, after a fashion) into forced anything. But people see what they want to see and go on and on about it. Fine, I guess.

RajeshA wrote:

Hari Seldon ji,

I was quite sure we are of the same opinion on this.

abhik wrote:

RajeshA ji, FYI you can mail order your Paki bride right away if you want(albeit only if you are a Muslim). Just go to the matrimonial section of the TOI-let and search for "Aman ki Asha" (like its more infamous namesake this is also a joint venture with the Jung, and if am not mistaken predates it) in the "Grooms wanted" section. You will also find in the "Brides wanted" a similar section but only much smaller. Of course one can speculate as to why as to more Paki parents are interested in marry off their daughters to Indians than have their sons marry an Indian.

saadhak wrote:

RajeshA ji, thank you for the detailed response.
I appreciate your optimism, solution oriented thinking and hope in Pakis seeing the light one day and willingly offering to build relations across the border. I honestly think they have gone too far for this to happen.
Lest I be accused of sermonising and taking the moral high ground, will end from my side knowing that in the end, we are all on the same side onlee.

cheenum wrote:

^^ Rajesh saar , which paki chick are u smitten by ? ... Since the napakis interbreed prolifically their is a stagnation of their gene pool . (this is a scientific fact and not GILGITSTANI GENETICS)

I agree with Gakakkad? no point in letting in Paki-maal into desh (either for flesh trade or catalog brides). It will only corrupt our next generation. When non-hindus (boy or girl) marry hindus, 99% of the time, the hindu is made to change their way of life and this would only hurt us in the long run. Immigration from CIS countries or even SE asian countries (with INDIC cultures) would be a better option. The skewed sex ratio is more in the Punjab-Haryana region, this would be stabilized with movement from the hinterland. Better education, health care and awareness would solve this problem rather than import a virus from Pakiland.

shyamd wrote:

JE Menon saar,

As I said here, the women of ex-Soviet Union are not the issue here, at least not on this thread, and I just mentioned that in passing in a response. I also did not propagate here any stereotype, and my few personal examples were just examples and not a generalized statement. I am also not too keen on further discussing how Russian goris find Indian men.

The issue here was ONLY about the downward evolution of the Pakistani state and society, and whether that would lead to a demand to marry off their daughters and sisters to Indian men and whether there will be a demand for Pakistani women from the Indian side.

Basically I look at this from the PoV of decreasing the runaway birth rate of Pakistanis. Should the phenomenon of cross-country marriages kick off in a big way, the demand for wives in India coupled with Indian money can mean a wholesale suctioning off of women from Pakistan. A prospect which also solves many strategic problems for India.

And as we are talking about the coming future, there are no statistics I can provide about that!

Pretty good idea. However, question on peoples minds will be that the children will have to be bought up as Hindus/sikh etc. BTW regionally, isnt dowry paid for by the female side and some places male side provides dowry? It will be an interesting development to say the least and its a soft way of dealing with a larger problem.

RajeshA wrote:

Pretty good idea. However, question on peoples minds will be that the children will have to be bought up as Hindus/sikh etc. BTW regionally, isnt dowry paid for by the female side and some places male side provides dowry? It will be an interesting development to say the least and its a soft way of dealing with a larger problem.

Well if Hindus or Sikhs would be willing to pay a higher mehr, then they will get the bride! Accordingly the kids would be Hindu or Sikh. In Pakistan, the parents would be telling their neighbors and relations that the guy is an Indian Muslim. All is Taqqiya!

I think, with the way the gender-ratio is skewed in India nowadays, the days of dowry are really numbered. Mostly it will be Indian men who would have to dole out the money!

If India can suction off 30-40 million Pakistani women, Pakistan is dead, or the next generations would only be some satyrs hopping around the mountains! The number of Indian males who would get no wife in India is also around that much.

If the mehr is 2000 USD per Pakistani woman on an average, then with 80 billion USD, India would have killed Pakistan for good, and in a generation the whole of Pakistan would belong to India!

I say, if they don't sell us their nukes, we should buy off their women!

VikramS wrote:

Rajeshji:

I think this discussion needs to be moved to managing Pakistan Failure thread.

In fact as some others have suggested in the Feedback section, we perhaps needs a subsection on threads on TSP because of all that is happening there.

One of the sub-threads could be on how to roll back the demographics of TSP, and the current thread of reducing the birth rates by importing TSP women could have a place there.

This line of thought can be misconstrued and needs to be discussed in context which not everyone who reads this thread will be able to appreciate. So let us take the discussion out of the short-lived TSP thread and put it in a more specific location, where the broader context is not lost.

BajKhedawal wrote:

^^ Rajesh saar , which paki chick are u smitten by ? ... Since the napakis interbreed prolifically their is a stagnation of their gene pool . (this is a scientific fact and not GILGITSTANI GENETICS)

I agree with Gakakkad? no point in letting in Paki-maal into desh (either for flesh trade or catalog brides). It will only corrupt our next generation. When non-hindus (boy or girl) marry hindus, 99% of the time, the hindu is made to change their way of life and this would only hurt us in the long run. Immigration from CIS countries or even SE asian countries (with INDIC cultures) would be a better option. The skewed sex ratio is more in the Punjab-Haryana region, this would be stabilized with movement from the hinterland. Better education, health care and awareness would solve this problem rather than import a virus from Pakiland.

I agree with Cheenu & Gakakkad, It will mostly be a case of "Aah bahl mujey maar" (come bull gore me). Case in point Rahul Butt son of Mahesh Butt, and Sanju baba. At partition time we have paid a heavy price of getting rid of gangrene, no need to self inject it - amounts to suicide.

[shiv]

I think this import Paki wimmens topic needs to be seen in its totality.

You see - if you say that India has 1000 men and only 900 of them will have women and the other hundred can get wimmens from Pakistan, the theory is fine but in practice let me speculate on what could happen. In a crowd of 1000 men competing for fewer wimmens - the top 900 men - the stud men, the rich, the well endowed, the more desirable men will get their women. The less desirable men will be left unmarried even if they are good men. The theory states that these "good men" should get Paki wimmens by import.

In practice what will happen is that some of the stud men and rich men will go for some of the more attractive and desirable Packee wimmens. And this will leave the "less desirable" 100 men with "rejected" Indian brides to choose from.

Unfortunately in India we have not suppressed our women enough (We need to do more, much more to bring our women in line and take what they get). Those Indian women who have lost out the attractive Indian men to the competition from Pakistani women will not sit back like wimps and marry the dregs even if they are "good men" (because shiv says so for political correctness). They will marry out - they may marry Americans, Argentinians and even Packees. They are not going to necessarily end up marrying Indian dregs just because they are the only ones available.

Secondly, (and i repeat that we men have not suppressed women enough) - we need to recall that women are way way ahead of men in certain matters. They are frequently able to twist men around their fingers - which is why men even on BRF only half resentfully refer to wives/significant other wimmen as "Supreme HQ". The point to remember here is that the first man in a girl's life is daddy. Women are able to handle husband, sons/s and daddy and give them all something. So by importing Packee wimmens we are inadvertently importing/helping Packee mens. Will post more sociological info on this later

It does not pay to treat women as a separate entity from men. If we desire to shoot Paki men, shoot the women too. If we get wimmens, the men will also come. It would be a massive self goal to try and get women alone and imagine that it will have no effect on our own women. Why don't we move on to some other idea?