Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): June 30, 2011

[UBanerjee]

Seems like MMS crew thinks aim is "how can we get Pakis to stop bothering us".

[Shrinivasan]

our best and long term friends there are the northerners, Tajiks, Uzbeks etc., who will not like us to split Afghan...in fact the very fact that we are talking to Taliban would anger them. So ways have to be found to carry them along without two timing them as Pakbarians would do..

Suppiah, Northern Alliance is an interesting group... They seem to be strangely silent for some time.. India is and should be extremely careful in dealing with Afghanistan so as to keep Northern Alliance within our fold. It is India's Strategic foil against the Poaks... NA reduced Paki's so called strateguc depth in Afghanistan. Also after Karzhai, it would be a NA president!!! we need to keep Desh Interest in mind and not rush head-long into a love fest with Talib to suit Uncle's Agenda or MKBs ministrations...

[Shrinivasan]

Public and political anger at weeks of cross-border shelling from Pakistan boiled over in Afghanistan, as protesters took to the streets of the capital, lawmakers demanded explanations from the central government, and a senior border police official submitted his resignation.According to Afghan officials, more than 760 rockets have been fired into the eastern Afghan border provinces of Konar, Nangahar and Khost in the past six weeks, killing at least 60 people and wounding or displacing hundreds more.

What was uncle doing when this Rocket Barrage was going on? was it not detected before it started? Why didn't the Afghan Gunships / NATO Fighters retaliate? is it part of the Piss process presented to the Pukes by Ombaba? Were there any US/NATO Casualties... that would be interesting to see???

[RajeshA]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/war ... story.html
(Poaksoors finally gone over the mental cliff?)

Afghans infuriated by shelling from Pakistan

Time for Indian Army to go and scout the villages for those Afghans, whose near and dear got killed or were wounded or whose property was destroyed. Looking for recruits for Indian Army's Afghan Regiment.

The poster image needs to be changed appropriately:

[Shrinivasan]

'Disengaging Pak post 26/11 may be an error' ; Says foreign secretary Rao

What else did you expect, she is from MKB school? Actually she tried to break out of it and do some tough talking in Agra and was listed as one of the person who spoilt the party for Mushrat (according to him, she was one- MEA spokeperson then, Sushmaji was another, dunno who is the third women)... after that under stern tutelage by WKKs she has become like this.. she was the one waving Karampa's flag much against IBs evidence collected (when even Dalai Lama decided to stay out of the fray).. a Blessing that this Dhimi is stepping out.. retiring...

[abhishek_sharma]

a Blessing that this Dhimi is stepping out.. retiring...

Not retiring...going to Washington D. C.

[Shrinivasan]

'Disengaging Pak post 26/11 may be an error' ; Says foreign secretary Rao

Funny the heading has no resonance with the actual statement... It looks like Karan Thapar and his boss in CNN-IBN decided that this is how the interview should go.. but Sec. Nirupama Rao DID NOT oblidge them. What she actually said was the usual diplomatic godly-block. it can be spun anyway one wants...

[Shrinivasan]

a Blessing that this Dhimi is stepping out.. retiring...

Not retiring...going to Washington D. C.

Oh really, I didn't know that... Is she getting posted as India Ambassador to the US? what about Amb Meera Shankar?

[abhishek_sharma]

^ Meera Shankar is retiring

[RajeshA]

Her article is quite 'mild' she is simply repeating MKB's suggestion that India should talk to Taliban. I see no issues there, if we can talk to TSP we can talk to anyone. Perhaps the Talibans are desperate to get rid of their two timing ISI sponsors and find some reliable friends. There are numerous reports that say Taliban commanders don't have any respect for Pakis. It will also brownify some TSPA pants and make them more vulnerable..

I like the idea of talking to Taliban provided the idea is to set up a Pashtunistan on both sides of the Durand line. That would split both Pakistan and Afghanistan - something that needs to be done. The idea that someone in the US has considered this was posted on here a few days and a few weeks ago - can't recall who. Personally I fully endorse a Pashtunistan. It gives the Pashtuns the state they have always wanted, and de recognizes the Durand line. It reduces the problems faced by the Pakistani state in their troubled northwest regions- they are our brothers after all and I would like to help them get better.

Some ideas in this regard:
1) A New Political Framework for Pushtunistan
2) Building Consensus for a New Pushtunistan.

[SSridhar]

At last, I read Ms. C. Fair's article just now. I have a few comments.

. . .Headley‘s ties to an al Qaeda leader, Ilyas Kashmiri, has furthered speculation about LeT‘s ties to al Qaeda.

The above makes it look like as though it was Headley who helped forge the relationship between AQ and LeT. The LeT-AQ bonding goes a long way back to the Afghan jihad days. Though Prof. Hafiz Saeed entered the Afghan jihad scene quite late in the day, he was able to strike an alliance with OBL's ideologue-turned-foe, Abdullah Azzam and create the organization Maktab al Khidmat that served the Arab and other foreign mujahideen as they landed in Pakistan en route to the Afghan theatre. The ISI was directly involved with Prof. Hafiz Saeed. Later, OBL gave very generous grants for the construction of the Muridke facility of LeT and even stayed with Professor saheb in Lahore and Muridke. LeT's connection with Al Qaeda was proved when Abu Zubaydah, a top Al Qaeda operative, was arrested from an LeT safe house in Faisalabad in March 2002. Even ideologically, there are no differences as the puritanical Ahl-e-Hadees are wahhabi. The LeT got a lot of funds through OBL contacts in KSA.
In one of the footnotes (p 10), she says:

Recent evidence provided by David Coleman Headley during his trial for his participation in the Mumbai attacks of 2008, he claimed direct ISI involvement in his management. These are allegations made in court and may not be true. Moreover, the Director General of the ISI, Lt Gen Ahmad Shuja Pasha, conceded some that ―rogue elements of his organization were likely involved. However, he denied that this operation was ―authorized.

At first it intrigued me why she was saying this when discussing about how an LeT attack on US homeland would not take place without an ISI nod. Then I got it. She seems to suggest that so long as GoTUS keeps the ISI happy, the US need not fear the LeT. She has recently been at pains to minimize the magnitude of 26/11. She went ballistic at Arnab Goswami over this. Another attempt of hers seems to be that she wants to project the ISI as a responsible intelligence agency though it may have contacts with terrorist organizations. One can only surmise that in her opinion, such contacts are par for the course so long as the recepient of such terror is India. Also, look at the speed with which she believes ISI Director Lt. Gen. Shuja Pasha. His words are taken by her as gospel truth. This article appeared on June 14, a full six weeks after the perfidy of Kayani & Shuja Pasha became irrefutable and yet she wants to believe words coming out from Pasha.

Pakistani and American analysts tend to view the 1985 Pressler Amendment as a punitive tool as it was finally this legislation that required sanctions to be applied to Pakistan in 1990. However, this is a serious misunderstanding of the objective and origins of the legislation. The Pressler Amendment did render U.S. assistance to Pakistan conditional on an annual presidential assessment and certification that Pakistan did not have nuclear weapons. However, its origins were not punitive; rather the amendment permitted Washington to sustain its military and other assistance to Pakistan even though other parts of the U.S. government increasingly believed that Pakistan had crossed the nuclear threshold, meriting sanctions under various U.S. laws.

I was pleasantly surprised by the above. We know that Pressler was eventually drafted by the US and Pakistan together making sure there were loopholes for Pakistan to continue to receive assistance even as it went furiously ahead with its nuclear weapons programme. So, why is she inserting such a seemingly damning fact in the article ? Is it to show how ungrateful Pakistan has been and how generous the US had been ?

Pakistan, the militarily weaker of the two states, required a nuclear deterrent against India to ensure the territorial integrity and survivability of the state.

Rubbish. This is a Pakistani line which Ms. C. Fair once again sells as an axiom. Pakistan and the US know very well that Pakistan's territorial integrity would be ensured *only* by not needling India, only by removing the enduring hatred for Bharat and the Hindus within Pakistan, only by removing terror as a legitimate state policy, only by distancing itself from theocracy, only by behaving like any normal nation-state and not siding with a third country to act as its proxy against India under its benign protection. It did not need nuclear weapons to ensure its survivability. It needed nuclear weapons for two reasons: one, to escalate violence under Nuclear Enabled Terrorism so that India would be hesitant to retaliate disproportionately to its provocations that could then threaten its integrity and two, to withstand world pressure against its jihadi policies against India. There could be other beneficial fallouts of the nuclear policy but these two were primary, IMHO.

Deobandi militant groups, which include the Pakistani Taliban and its constituent members from JM, SSP and LeJ among others, have come to conclude that anyone who does not espouse their beliefs is munafaq. This includes Pakistani security personnel, as well as civilian leadership and individuals who oppose these groups and their sanguinary agenda. Under these pretexts, Deobandi groups have launched a sustained campaign of violence

Ms. Fair's argument here is that since the sectarian jihadi outfits term other as munafiq and have launched a savage attack on the State and since LeT pursues a more inclusivist policy that does not treat anyone within Pakistan as munafiq, the State supports them. This is inaccurate, IMHO. I do not think that it is simply this ideological underpinning of munafaqit that distinguishes the Punjabi Taliban and LeT. The Punjabi Taliban and the TTP later on began attacking the State when Gen. Musharraf had to reverse some of the policies of the State in support of terrorism under pressure from the US and India. Gen. Musharraf preferred a hudaibaiya-like cunning approach against the formidable adversaries but the frothing-at-the-mouth-corner jihadi terrorists would have none of it. The jihadi warriors do not easily understand the nuances of diplomacy. So, they have gone hammer-and-tongs against the 'betrayers'. They want a pliant GoP and PA. They have widespread support not only within the society but also within the armed forces. LeT has been insular from other terrorist organizations ever since its inception. There are reasons for that. The Ahl-e-Hadees are not a significant sect within Pakistan. The pre-existing Ahl-e-Hadees groups therefore did not like another one springing up in the late 1980s as the space was getting overcrowded. LeT was therefore at the bidding of the PA/ISI. The real issues for the Punjabi Taliban started after Gen. Musharraf changed horses midstream after 9/11 under the 'for us or against us' threat from a rampaging US and 12/13 under Op. Parakram threat from an infuriated India. At that time, the Punjabi Taliban turned en masse against the Establishment. The Laal Masjid episode united the Al Qaeda, TTP and the Punjabi Taliban against the Establishment and consolidated into AQAM. These groups looked at the LeT with suspicion and attempts made by it to integrate with the TTP were not successful. As AQAM began to batter Pakistan with one spectacular attack after another, the LeT began to loose its cadres steadily to these more pious and more jihadi organizations. LeT was pushed more into the hands of the PA by this turn of events. As international pressure grew to ban JuD and declare Professor saheb as a terrorist under the UNSC's Al Qaeda & Taliban Sanctions Committee recommendations, the LeT needed GoP and PA support even more. The Kabul Indian embassy suicide attacks and the 26/11 incident have made the bonding even more inseparable because in all these case the planning was by the PA/ISI and execution by LeT (with logistics by Haqqani for Kabul). Any unravelling of this bond will decimate the PA and so PA will not allow any action against LeT. For this very precise reason, the Deobandi militant groups do not have any trucks with LeT. The LeT obviously explains away its relationship with the 'Establishment' by resorting to religious precepts such as Kalima, ummah etc. because it cannot expose the true nature of its joined-at-the-hip relationship with the PA. If the 'munafiq' theory is to be accepted, then Ms. C. Fair has to explain how the Deobandi sectarian jihadi groups like JeM and HuJI have been so close to the Wahhabi Al Qaeda for decades now.

Pakistan has endured serious criticism for continued patronage of JuD. However, when one appreciates the domestic importance of LeT in helping to counter the violent agendas of rival militant groups savaging Pakistan, the state has an enormous incentive to encourage and facilitate this expansion of JuD throughout Pakistan at any cost.

The immune system began attacking the 'self' only in c. 2002. For more than a decade before that, there was no 'muqlid', 'ghair muqlid' differentiation. Even today, one does not hear such differences as being discussed among mainstream Urdu press or media. These differences may be true at an ideological level but they do not determine the current trajectory of events in Pakistan. The 'Establishment' attributes violence within Pakistan to the perception that Pakistan is forced to fight Muslims on behalf of somebody else or to even innocent civilians being mostly killed in drone attacks. Seriously, Ms. Fair is inventing reasons here with her munafiq theory.

By bolstering the organization‘s domestic legitimacy, JuD becomes an ever more effective organization in countering the competitive dangerous beliefs of the Deobandi groups.

Taliban captured Afghanistan through violence. India was divided by Islamist violence. AQAM is trying to establish a Caliphate through violence. Islamic history is littered with violence as the route to propagate religion and conquer lands far and wide. Similarly, violence by wahhabi/salafi/Deobandi/takfiri groups will overwhelm the Believers in Pakistan. Ms. C. Fair is trying to portray JuD as a group of do-gooders and such do-gooders have no chance against violent jihadi hordes. In fact, there is very little difference between LeT/JuD and the AQAM as far as governance is concerned. Both reject democracy, both want an Emir who can implement strict shariah, both want to curb woman's rights etc. etc. The LeT/JuD partakes the same 'dangerous beliefs' of the Deobandis as far as common men & women are concerned.

While India should find some way of addressing the grievances of its own Kashmiri populace as well as that of the Muslims in India elsewhere for its own domestic security (among other domestic reasons), arguments for changing the territorial status quo to appease Pakistan are likely misguided as a means to assist Pakistan in putting down LeT. While India would almost certainly never accept any such adjustments, such a policy would likely have significant negative externalities were it to go forward, principally because it would reinforce Pakistan‘s belief that militancy is an effective tool of foreign policy.

While the general thrust of the argument appears correct, the truth that is being suppressed here is that Indian Muslims and Kashmiris having grievances is India's own problem to tackle and it does not need anybody's advice on that. Another truth that is being suppressed by addressing Pakistan superficially like this is that it is the aggressor against India holding areas of India and even conceding Indian lands to a third country. The question that needs to be addressed here is not whether India will appease Pakistan by accepting adjustments along the LoC but how India should retrieve its legitimate lands from an usurper.

Given that Pakistan is unlikely to be induced to abandon its reliance upon militancy under its nuclear umbrella for both external and internal reasons, the international community —including the United States—should abandon its Panglossian optimism that additional foreign assistance or security assistance will shift Pakistan‘s strategic calculus away from using LeT or other militants to service its internal and external goals

The bolded part is an accurate assessment but it was known to Indians decades back. Better late than never for the likes of Ms. C. Fair.

So, Ms. Fair's ready and easy acceptance of Shuja Pasha's line on 26/11, her enunciation of Pakistan's India paranoia as an axiomatic truth, and the munafiq theory on LeT are deliberate ploys for peddling a certain viewpoint. However she also comes to an important conclusion that the Pakistani state is irredeemabl and time has come to treat it differently, which is certainly a welcome sign.

[abhishek_sharma]

Pakistan's attitude towards terror has altered: Rao

Pakistan's attitude towards tackling terrorism has "altered", a "concrete" development that India should take note of, foreign secretary Nirupama Rao has said. "I think the prism through which they see this issue has definitely been altered," Rao told Karan Thapar on Devil's Advocate programme on CNN-IBN.

She was replying to a question on whether India saw a change in Pakistan's attitude towards terrorism during the recently concluded foreign secretary-level talks.

Asked whether it was a positive development, Rao said it was an outcome that India must take note of.

"I think when they speak of the fact that non-state elements in this relationship need to be tackled, that we must look at safe havens and sanctuaries, that we must look at fake currency, we must look at all the aspects that are concerned with the business of terror, I think that is a concrete development," she said.

Rao, however, said she would not expect Pakistani officials to talk about the strategic link between the Pakistani state and militancy and terror.

Asked whether her Pakistani counterpart Salman Bashir accepted the revelations made by Mumbai attacks case accused David Headley in a Chicago trial court, Rao said the strategic link between the Pakistani state and militancy and terror needed to be broken.

"Well, he is not going to say that in so many words to me. I think it would be unrealistic for me to expect that the foreign secretary of Pakistan is going to say that," she said when asked whether Bashir admitted to the strategic link between the Pakistani state and terror outfits.

[RajeshA]

[arun]

Pakistan's attitude towards terror has altered: Rao

Pakistan's attitude towards tackling terrorism has "altered", a "concrete" development that India should take note of, foreign secretary Nirupama Rao has said. "I think the prism through which they see this issue has definitely been altered," Rao told Karan Thapar on Devil's Advocate programme on CNN-IBN.

She was replying to a question on whether India saw a change in Pakistan's attitude towards terrorism during the recently concluded foreign secretary-level talks.

Asked whether it was a positive development, Rao said it was an outcome that India must take note of.

"I think when they speak of the fact that non-state elements in this relationship need to be tackled, that we must look at safe havens and sanctuaries, that we must look at fake currency, we must look at all the aspects that are concerned with the business of terror, I think that is a concrete development," she said.

Rao, however, said she would not expect Pakistani officials to talk about the strategic link between the Pakistani state and militancy and terror.

Asked whether her Pakistani counterpart Salman Bashir accepted the revelations made by Mumbai attacks case accused David Headley in a Chicago trial court, Rao said the strategic link between the Pakistani state and militancy and terror needed to be broken.

"Well, he is not going to say that in so many words to me. I think it would be unrealistic for me to expect that the foreign secretary of Pakistan is going to say that," she said when asked whether Bashir admitted to the strategic link between the Pakistani state and terror outfits.

Mr. G.K.Pillai who retired on June 30th 2011 as Home Secretary has a completely different take than Foreign Secretary Ms. Nirupama Rao on the Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s attitude towards Islamic Terrorism.

Excerpt from an interview datelined July 3, 2011 by Deccan Chronicle completely contradicts Ms. Nirupama Rao.

Seems like our Foreign Secretary Ms. Nirupama Rao as a serving bureaucrat has no option but to parrot the fatwa of bonhomie being peddled by the Congress party led UPA in a cynical attempt by the Congress Party at playing communal vote bank politics:

‘Pak not sincere about punishing 26/11 culprits’

July 3, 2011

Q. How do you see Pakistan’s inaction on the 26/11 Mumbai attacks?

A. Pakistan is not sincere. The evidence is clear that even during 26/11, instructions were coming from the handlers across the border. Now the voice samples of those handlers from Pakistan are available with us, they are available with the FBI, and I am sure they are available with the Inter-Services Intelligence. We say the voices belong to (Zakiur Rehman) Lakhvi and so on. It is enough for the Pakistan authorities to check the voice samples. Don’t give me the samples. You have Lakhvi in jail. Take the voice samples and see whether they match, or take voice samples of any of the other four handlers who were instructing. Such a simple exercise is to be undertaken since he is in their custody. And if it matches, you say yes, he’s the man. And if it does not, please come to us and say, you’ve got the wrong guy.

Deccan Chronicle

[SSridhar]

Pakistan's attitude towards terror has altered: Rao

In what way is this different from the January 12, 2002 speech of Gen. Musharraf or the various assurances on eschewing terrorism that he conveyed to Indian leadership through his American interlocutors ? Privately, the Pakistanis may say anything but do they have the willingness to translate that into action ? Do they have the power to do so ? Do they really want to do so ?

[abhishek_sharma]

Pakistan's attitude towards terror has altered: Rao

In what way is this different from the January 12, 2002 speech of Gen. Musharraf or the various assurances on eschewing terrorism that he conveyed to Indian leadership through his American interlocutors ? Privately, the Pakistanis may say anything but do they have the willingness to translate that into action ? Do they have the power to do so ? Do they really want to do so ?

chankian onlee....Use super comprehension mode ...

[RSoami]

When Taliban overran the Pashtun regions they did it on the back of their religious call for Jihad.
Talking of engagement with the Taliban for creation of a pashtoonistan smells of lack of understanding of the rise of islamic fundamentalism among the pashtoons.
They might end up creating a pashtoonistan but only if Pakistan and Afghanistan were to get less `religious` and not more. The taliban would rather blow up the hindu kuffrs than talk to them.They create islamic emirates and not porkistanor foolishtan..for a reason
IMHO the taliban are only as much pashtoons now as the pakistani shias are hindus.
Regards

[RajeshA]

They create islamic emirates and not tattistan or porkistan

RSoami ji,

Just a request. Kindly use other expletives, if possible in English. This is too close for the olfactory sensitivities and imagery of us Indians. At least it causes me to cringe. It hits the BRFites more in the face than it does the Porkis, for we are more often here than them.

[RSoami]

Buhoooo...buhooo
It was my favourite...
Dis ijh a madarsaa onlee...

PS I have edited my post

[RSoami]

However, I rarely see a serious post (ignoring the "nuke them" category), even a micro-post, about what GoI *should* do, when it should do it and what would be the consequences of that action.

Its probably because we can sum up in two or three lines what we want the govt to do.Certainly talking to the pakistanis is not one of them.And because the government engages,disengages and gets into other `positions` with the pakistanis we react to it.

I think I remember writing somewhere what i would want the government to do.
Strengthen the counter terrorism and intelligence apparatus, double fence the border, stop others from helping them(diplomacy) and take initiative.Talking and sending dossiers is certainly not one of them which is loathed here and rightly so IMHO.

Regards

[shiv]

When Taliban overran the Pashtun regions they did it on the back of their religious call for Jihad.

Can you point me to links to articles that it was religious fervor that made the Taliban overrun the Pashtun regions. Where did these "Taliban" arise from?

I always thought that the Taliban were largely Pashtuns trained and led by the Pakistan military and funded and armed by the US and KSA

[Dilbu]

If TSP altered their view on terrorism because they lost control of their own mad dogs how the phuck does it affect india's stand on TSP's terror against India? This is a very wrong line of thought from MEA. I hope it is just chai biskoot. They should know better after all these years of TSP perfidy.

[ranjbe]

Unkil implementing Plan B, where they will not be dependent on Paki supply routes in the future, via strengthening the Northern supply line. Todays Washington Post:

As recently as 2009, the U.S. military moved 90 percent of its surface cargo through Pakistan, arriving by ship at the port in Karachi and then snaking through mountain passes, deserts and remote tribal areas before crossing the border into Afghanistan. The Pakistan supply lines are served entirely by contractors instead of U.S. military convoys and are vulnerable to bandits, insurgents and natural disasters.

Today, almost 40 percent of surface cargo arrives in Afghanistan from the north, along a patchwork of Central Asian rail and road routes that the Pentagon calls the Northern Distribution Network. Military planners said they are pushing to raise the northern network’s share to as much as 75 percent by the end of this year.

“If you look at what we’ve done there in the last two years, we look at it more or less as a logistics miracle,” said Alan F. Estevez, the Pentagon’s principal deputy assistant secretary for logistics.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat ... story.html

[SSridhar]

A Swiss couple abducted

The Swiss were driving from Punjab province, and when they reached Lorali, about 90 miles (150 kilometers) north of Quetta, the capital of the province, they were given a police escort, local Pakistan officials have said. However, once they reached its outskirts, beyond the area under police jurisdiction, they were left without security guides.

It was the police who tipped off the abductors.

[Mahendra]

^incorrect

The Pulees are the abductors

[RajeshA]

New Routes for USA into Afghanistan

Unkil implementing Plan B, where they will not be dependent on Paki supply routes in the future, via strengthening the Northern supply line. Todays Washington Post:

As recently as 2009, the U.S. military moved 90 percent of its surface cargo through Pakistan, arriving by ship at the port in Karachi and then snaking through mountain passes, deserts and remote tribal areas before crossing the border into Afghanistan. The Pakistan supply lines are served entirely by contractors instead of U.S. military convoys and are vulnerable to bandits, insurgents and natural disasters.

Today, almost 40 percent of surface cargo arrives in Afghanistan from the north, along a patchwork of Central Asian rail and road routes that the Pentagon calls the Northern Distribution Network. Military planners said they are pushing to raise the northern network’s share to as much as 75 percent by the end of this year.

“If you look at what we’ve done there in the last two years, we look at it more or less as a logistics miracle,” said Alan F. Estevez, the Pentagon’s principal deputy assistant secretary for logistics.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat ... story.html

The Pentagon should get Indian Railways to build railroads through Central Asia, thereby increasing the throughput. It would be best if the railroads built are built to Indian Gauge - 1.676 meters.

If Pentagon is willing to spend some money, India may be willing to deliver a far better logistics network in Central Asia, than happens to be the case right now.

It is also important that the rail network in Central Asia is built to the Indian Gauge.

[Kashi]

Bravo. A similar offer should be extended to Bengali Hindus persecuted by Khaleda Zia and her terrorist Pakistani proxies.I think this policy should be uniformly implemented to all the persecuted ones be it hindu,sikh,shia, jews,sunni,ahmedi,christians,tibetian buddhist etc.For centuries India has always provided safe refuge to people persecuted in their countries.These are our indic ethos and i think we must not leave them.

Our indic ethos??

we must not leave them?

Are you taking a piss?

[Vivek_A]

This might explain Ms Fair.

http://tribune.com.pk/story/201071/rest ... -academia/

Restraining academia
By Ayesha Siddiqa
Published: July 2, 2011

Creating Pakistan chairs was a visionary idea of the Bhutto government but making intelligence clearance a prerequisite is almost criminal. What capacity do intelligence personnel have, be it a simple spook or a head of a spy agency, to fathom the scholarly depth or capacity of an academic?

The problem with the Pakistani state is that it is constantly on the lookout for safe scholars which does not necessarily mean people are good at their jobs. The state’s search has taken it in the direction of buying foreign scholars of dubious distinction to write books on Pakistan, presenting the establishment’s perspective. There are two such books that were published in 2011. The state has also tried to intervene in private ventures for encouraging scholarship on Pakistan abroad. For instance, a retired technocrat of distinction tried to interfere with the selection process of one fellowship to a reputed American think tank with the intention of injecting what was considered a safe scholar. His effort failed because the think tank discouraged any compromise on merit. Later, the gent with dubious academic distinction was sent on one of the chairs abroad. The problem with this approach is that it becomes difficult for credible scholars to defend the state’s perspective, especially when it becomes increasingly questionable. It is very difficult for a scholar worth his/her salt to defend certain positions in the world. Nor should it be presumed that the world is ignorant of Pakistan’s reality. Unfortunately, intelligence agencies are given a wrong impression about what could be defended by hired hands pretending to be scholars. What the agencies don’t understand is that what they can pretend to sell through these hired scholars on local television channels or newspapers might be difficult to sell in a serious academic environment (interestingly, some of these hired scholars do not even have doctorate degrees).

[Gerard]

Islamization A Catch-22 For Pakistani Military

[GuruPrabhu]

Its probably because we can sum up in two or three lines what we want the govt to do.

Thanks for responding.

think I remember writing somewhere what i would want the government to do.
Strengthen the counter terrorism and intelligence apparatus, double fence the border, stop others from helping them(diplomacy) and take initiative.

This is a fairly benign set of points. Which of the above do you think GOI is not doing? Also, do you really think this represents BRF consensus?

[somnath]

The Pentagon should get Indian Railways to build railroads through Central Asia, thereby increasing the throughput. It would be best if the railroads built are built to Indian Gauge - 1.676 meters.

If Pentagon is willing to spend some money, India may be willing to deliver a far better logistics network in Central Asia, than happens to be the case right now.

It is also important that the rail network in Central Asia is built to the Indian Gauge.

If I may, given that India shares no borders with any Central Asian country, or indeed with Af, how is that going to be possible?

And well, why should a rail network criss-crossing CA be on Indian gauge, and not the Soviet gauge (whatever that is) that should be the "standard"?

[Purush]

Bravo. A similar offer should be extended to Bengali Hindus persecuted by Khaleda Zia and her terrorist Pakistani proxies.I think this policy should be uniformly implemented to all the persecuted ones be it hindu,sikh,shia, jews,sunni,ahmedi,christians,tibetian buddhist etc.For centuries India has always provided safe refuge to people persecuted in their countries.These are our indic ethos and i think we must not leave them.

Our indic ethos??

we must not leave them?

Are you taking a piss?

He's a known paki; don't take anything he writes seriously.

[Prem]

Punjab U Osama Bin Laden Literary Fest
( Any Raa Agent from Benis attending )
http://paxalles.blogs.com/paxalles/2011 ... -fest.html

Punjab University in Lahore, Pakistan is sponsoring a literary contest in honor or Osama bin Laden. The organizers are thought to be Islami Jamiat Talaba who enforce strict Islamic behaviors on campus. The poem and essay competition at the prestigious Punjab University shows the footholds of hard-line Islamists on college campuses and growing efforts to raise their profile and influence even in the relatively cosmopolitan atmosphere of Pakistan's culture capital, Lahore.The contest's organizers have kept their identities hidden. But many students and teachers suspect it is being held by a powerful Islamist student group that has increasingly enforced its conservative religious views on the rest of the campus — sometimes violently

.

[RajeshA]

New Routes for USA into Afghanistan

The Pentagon should get Indian Railways to build railroads through Central Asia, thereby increasing the throughput. It would be best if the railroads built are built to Indian Gauge - 1.676 meters.

If Pentagon is willing to spend some money, India may be willing to deliver a far better logistics network in Central Asia, than happens to be the case right now.

It is also important that the rail network in Central Asia is built to the Indian Gauge.

If I may, given that India shares no borders with any Central Asian country, or indeed with Af, how is that going to be possible?

There is a lot that can be transported over Iran.

And well, why should a rail network criss-crossing CA be on Indian gauge, and not the Soviet gauge (whatever that is) that should be the "standard"?

Indian railways gauge is 1.676m. Russian railways gauge is 1.520 m. In fact, in parts, Iran too uses the Indian gauge.

1) So basically if Indian Railways get involved with Iranian Railways, we can offer to expand their Indian (Broad) Gauge network, and link it to the proposed Central Asian Railways Network also on Indian (Broad) Gauge. Since we would be transporting all the material through Iran, it will be facilitatory if Iran too knew that the Central Asian Network would be primarily be useful to Iran.

Wouldn't Iran want that the connectivity of Central Asia is better with Iran than with Russia?

2) Secondly it is in India's interest that in Central Asia they use the Indian (Broad) Gauge, as whenever in the future India gets to be connected to Central Asia, we would be well-placed to utilize it. Secondly India can export railway engines and coaches, etc. to Central Asian countries, thus opening an export market for us.

3) Even though it would be a little more difficult for the USA to transport the stuff if it is being transported through the Northern Distribution Network rails, BUT USA too would not want to finance a railways network which integrates with that of Russia in a seamless manner. So Pentagon too would buy the idea, that a different gauge would be strategically useful.

4) Moreover the politically favored route would be through (Black Sea, Georgia, Azerbaijan, [Turkmenistan | (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan)], Afghanistan), and not necessarily through Russia. So it is not necessary that the Russian Railways Gauge should be identical with that in Central Asia.

5) Considering how the alliances are coming together, USA would not mind giving India this contract.

6) It is in India's interest that Afghanistan be better connected with its neighbors other than Pakistan, so that Pakistan's influence decreases. Moreover India too does not want that the region comes under Chinese influence, and that region becomes a market for Chinese railways building companies. China mostly uses the standard gauge.

7) Last but not least, Pentagon would want to transport heavy stuff over the railways, maybe even tanks, etc. With Indian (Broad) Gauge carrying capacity can be designed to be higher.

[GuruPrabhu]

^^^ With increasing use of containers for goods transportation, the gauge mismatches are not that big a deal. At gauge conversion points, a goods train with 100 wagons of containers can be transferred in a couple of hours with proper design of crane systems.

Chinese will just build such transfer points - it will only be a minor hiccup and not a show stopper.

[Theo_Fidel]

I've see some notes that the troop level in Afghanistan will be 50,000 or less in Obama's second term. About a third of what it is now.

[gakakkad]

I've see some notes that the troop level in Afghanistan will be 50,000 or less in Obama's second term. About a third of what it is now.

if at all he has a second term .

[pgbhat]

^^^ With increasing use of containers for goods transportation, the gauge mismatches are not that big a deal. At gauge conversion points, a goods train with 100 wagons of containers can be transferred in a couple of hours with proper design of crane systems.

Chinese will just build such transfer points - it will only be a minor hiccup and not a show stopper.

Dual gauge

[RajeshA]

New Routes for USA into Afghanistan

^^^ With increasing use of containers for goods transportation, the gauge mismatches are not that big a deal. At gauge conversion points, a goods train with 100 wagons of containers can be transferred in a couple of hours with proper design of crane systems.

Chinese will just build such transfer points - it will only be a minor hiccup and not a show stopper.

A hiccup from the Chinese is better than a binging spree from them.

Dual gauge

Dual Gauge is easier if one has a broader gauge first. But if one has the narrower gauge first, as is the case with "standard gauge" which the Chinese have, then expanding it with broad gauge is more difficult.

So either the Chinese would have to rework the whole rail network we set up in Central Asia, or would have to put broad gauge on its own rail network, which can be a huge exercise in itself. And should the Chinese do it, then Indian Railways can also sell rail engines and coaches to China as well, broadening our market.

[RajeshA]

Published on Jul 04, 2011
By Dr. Maleeha Lodhi
Change in Afghanistan?: Khaleej Times

Any shift to the Biden strategy will likely entail frequent and more extensive Drone attacks in Pakistan’s border areas, even clandestine operations like the one that killed Bin Laden. This will risk inflaming tensions further with Islamabad. Expansion of covert operations will pitch Pakistan-US relations into uncharted terrain when ties have already hit rock bottom and are in a state of disrepair. With no agreement on Drone operations and Islamabad trying to limit CIA activities in Pakistan, more unilateral actions can push relations to breaking point. Whether a Biden-type plan will be feasible if relations deteriorate further is open to question.