Managing Pakistan's failure

[RajeshA]

Responding to the Pakistani Jihadism in Kashmir

Published on Aug 06, 2011
By Ajmer Singh
Jammu and Kashmir: Two jawans beheaded by militants: India Today

In a barbaric incident, which has shocked army officials, Pakistan-trained militants beheaded two soldiers and dumped their bodies during an encounter to check infiltration attempt near the Line of Control (LoC) in Kupwara district of Kashmir late last month.

It is suspected that the militants killed the jawans from the 20 Kumaon regiment, beheaded the duo and reportedly retained their heads as war trophies.

Published on Aug 06, 2011
By Kanchan Gupta
The Birkin effect: Our jawans are beheaded: Daily Pioneer

X-Posting from TSP Thread

It seems to me that I had a (false) image in my mind where there was the Pakistani army on the one hand whom I used to call uniformed jihadis and the other bunch of non uniformed jihadis. The line between the two may be non existent.

This is one more proof of the PA having been taken over at least up to the level of mid-level officers (if not higher) and certainly at the level of foot soldiers, by the jihadi groups, especially HuJI. The Strategic Depth concept has given way to Reverse Strategic Depth. The beheading certainly shows the hand of HuJI/Al Qaeda connection. I suspect that these terrorists were working along with the PA to perform this gruesome act. Let's recall incidents during the Kargil war and Ilyas Kashmiri's similar action that won him awards from the then President & COAs Gen. Musharraf in c. 2000. For far too long, our retaliation has been weak. To support what Ilyas Kashmiri had done, ‘Maulana Zahoor Ahmad Alvi of Jamia Muhammadia, Islamabad, issued a fatwa in support of slitting the throats of Indian Army officers’. Kashmiri's stock within Pakistan rose after that.

I am aghast when people claim that they have detected a change for the better among the Pakistanis. TSP is janus-faced. Not a word of what Pakistan says can be trusted. This incident calls for massive punishment.

[shyamd]

Balochistan conflict: ‘PM’s talks with leaders unlikely to succeed’
By Qaiser Butt
Published: August 7, 2011

P

olitical observers view Gilani’s effort as an ad-hoc arrangement to remain in power. PHOTO: AFP/FILE
QUETTA:

Despite the Army supporting Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani’s latest initiative to start dialogue with the armed resistance of Balochistan, experts believe the effort is bound to fail, The Express Tribune has learnt.

Even moderate Baloch political leaders who have been advocating a negotiated settlement of the Baloch crisis refuse to accept the idea of holding talks, said a professor of the Balochistan University, on condition of anonymity.

Prime Minister Gilani’s initiative came on Wednesday when he informed a gathering in Islamabad that he had asked the governor and chief minister of Balochistan to engage the “annoyed” Baloch leaders in political dialogue.

Islamabad has always described the Baloch armed resistance as “upset” or “annoyed” in order to lessen the gravity of the decades-old conflict.

The prime minister’s decision appears to be backed by Army Chief Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, who last week in Quetta, while praising the “patriotism” of the Baloch, said that the Army was willing to extend support to the civilian government in case it decides to hold talks with the Baloch Naitonalists, said a source familiar with the matter.

“The Army cannot hold direct talks with the annoyed Baloch leaders in the presence of a democratic government,” Kayani had said, adding, that the Army would however, support the civil government if it were to hold talks with the Baloch leaders.

In a related development, President Asif Ali Zardari summoned provincial Chief Minister Nawab Aslam Raisani along with his cabinet ministers to Islamabad next week for an extraordinary meeting to discuss the Balochistan issue.

According to Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) sources, President Zardari also summoned Interior Minister Rehman Malik and heads of national security organisations for the meeting.

Meanwhile, the Baloch National Party (BNP) and National Party leaders during a joint meeting in Quetta on Thursday announced that they would launch a struggle against the killings of Baloch activists and take a stand against what they feel is the exploitation of Balochistan’s resources by the federal government.

Dr Jehanzeb Jamaldini who took command of the BNP after party chief Sardar Akhtar Mengal went into exile also rejected Gen Kayani’s claim that the Army and intelligence agencies were not involved in the kill-and-dump operation targeting Baloch political activists.

Political observers in Quetta view the prime minister’s initiative as an ad-hoc arrangement to remain in power.

The Indian factor

Army officers posted at the Chamalang coal mines in the Marri tribal area are convinced that the Baloch armed resistance is backed by India.

Colonel Adil told The Express Tribune that Marri and other Baloch militants were being supplied with arms and ammunition by India via Afghanistan. “We have undeniable evidence that India is funding the Baloch insurgency since the last few years,” said Col Adil.

Published in The Express Tribune, August 7th, 2011.

So add it all up. Assasinations in Afg of high profile figures who are US allies. Target ALL the Baloch leaders at a local level and high level. Decimate the US chances to retaliate against Pak. This is the end game. I think the Paki's were waiting for this day all this time.

Kayani is under immense pressure. He is going to conduct some Kargil style operation at some point. We really need to be on our A game from now on. No F'ing around.

[RajeshA]

Solving Pakistan: Solution 6

Breaking Pakistan: Baluchistan

In a previous post, I spoke of building an international coalition to gain recognition for freedom for Baluchistan and Pushtunistan.

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.

Published on Jul 15, 2010
By Ahmar Mustikhan
Balochistan is forgotten Tibet of South Asia, Mehran tells Europe: Crisis Balochistan

A declaration was adopted on the sidelines of a European Parliament meeting in Brussels that called for stopping the ongoing massacre of Baloch people in Balochistan. The declaration "Stop the Massacre" was adopted at a panel discussion “al-Qa’ida and the South Asia experience: Regional and Global perspectives” and was moved by Mehran Baluch, Balochistan representative at the U.N. Human Rights Council and youngest son of legendary Balochistan leader Nawab Khair Bakhsh Marri.

Three prominent European experts who deal with terrorism and counter-terrorism issues led the panel discussion. These experts were member of European Parliament from Germany and the EP rapporteur Terrorist Finance Tracking Program, Alexander Alvaro; European Union Counter-terrorism Coordinator Gilles de Kerchove and Yvan Alexander.

Panel Discussion - Al-Qa’ida and the South Asia Experience: Regional and Global Perspectives.

So Baluchistan is being spoken about in Europe too. It will get more traction.

[RajeshA]

Responding to the Pakistani Jihadism in Kashmir

We have 2 scenarios:

1) Pakistan bombards villages and Indian army positions across the LoC. We take casualties, we retaliate, but we try not to escalate, as we do not want a wider war.

2) India and Pakistan have a tense LoC with occasional firing, but basically the artillery is silent. The Pakistanis concentrate on cross-border terrorism, on pushing trained terrorists over into Indian land, especially in the Kashmir sector. This cause an uptick in terror activity, in insurgency, especially in Kashmir sector. Our jawans lose lives fighting scum.

In both these scenarios, we lose! We need to make Pakistan pay for its infiltration of terrorists and cross-border terrorism in Kashmir. But fighting terrorists in Indian land, where they get some support from the local populace is going to be a difficult task, and that task needs to be done. But this is also a very easy strategy for Pakistan to keep on pushing irregulars and motivated Jihadis over into India without any consequences. We die and they live and make merry!

We need to go after targets, which are easily visible and identifiable as Pakistani Army targets, where Pakistanis feel the pain, but which does not cause an escalation. These targets also have to be held accountable for the infiltration of terrorists into Indian territory, so that we can justify hitting them as a "dissuading measure".

Let's consider a scenario where India enters into an undeclared war with Pakistan on the LoC. We keep a constant bombardment of Pakistani position all along the LoC. Killing 15-20 Pakistani army-men per day on an average should become an Indian policy. We target their positions very precisely, and kill only their army men, and no civilians. We can keep on doing this from Indian side of the border initially using our very precise artillery guns.

As India develops and procures better surveillance systems, artillery guidance systems, guns with more firepower, India would have the initiative in hand to push back Pakistani forces from the LoC as and when we like to. We should do this using artillery and not make use of drones and the like, because firing across the LoC is a known phenomenon, and a "peaceful" mode of interaction between two hostile neighbors, and not a cause of war.

No position on the Pakistani side up to 30 kms from LoC should be secure for more than a week of setting it up. Any Pakistanis manning those positions are either sent to get their 72s or have to retire with injuries and wail over their depreciating pensions.

It is all about making Pakistanis get used to taking the pain without protesting too much. It is about Pakistan sitting in the dentist's chair, getting a root canal treatment, and withering it out year after year, something like we have been doing with all the terrorism. Another similar treatment is the way drone attacks on Pakistani territory have been carried out by the USA, and Pakistanis have been forced to accept them. We can gradually build up the level of bombardment, so that it gives Pakistanis sufficient time to get used to taking an ever-increasing level of punishment.

Also any consignment of similar artillery guns that Pakistan buys should be sabotaged or intercepted before they can enter service.

In fact, bombing Pakistan across the LoC should become so commonplace, that it should have no effect on good relations between India and Pakistan. Their Foreign Minister should be entertained in India on a regular basis. We should be playing cricket and all the fun stuff. Blowing up Pakistani positions on the LoC should in fact be our peacetime policy.

While politically we keep the relations "warm", the LoC should always be kept hot, with Indians being very aggressive about it. However we should keep our rhetoric to a minimum. It should always be justified on the basis, that "Pakistani positions were providing cover for terrorist infiltrators and hence they had to be persuaded to relocate", or that "Pakistani positions were using artillery to bomb civilians on this side of the LoC, so they were being incentivized to cease firing! Otherwise we are in favor of having a peaceful LoC!" Even as we put out such statements we should keep on destroying Pakistani positions.

Furthermore we can use our "friendships" with GCC countries, Iran, USA and even PRC to advise the Pakistanis not to escalate, and diffuse tensions, not as moderators, but as messengers, even as they push these countries to put pressure on us to cease bombing, something we don't need to abide by. Moreover firing across the LoC is something that has been taking place at various levels of intensity throughout our history, so it it can be sold to the international community as almost a "natural" happening, nothing to lose one's sleep over.

We should in fact use Pakistan's proclivity for saving its H&D over speaking the truth for our benefit. We should in fact let them know that if they don't shout and beat the war drums, India too would not brag about killing Pakistani Army men, hurting their H&D.

All this is to keep the possibility of escalation low.

With time, we should also proceed to take over land from them, even as we deny doing this. It would keep us on the offensive and it would keep Pakistan's echandee intact. If they admit that their land has been taken over, they would have a severe loss of H&D, so they should keep it quiet and simply take the punishment quietly.

With terrorism they retain the psychological pressure on Indians. With regular artillery-firing across the LoC, destroying their positions and bunkers, we regain the psychological advantage.

[RajeshA]

Responding to the Pakistani Jihadism in Kashmir

X-Posting from US and PRC relationship & India Thread

India needs to re-open Kargil sector type of action and keep it confined to Kashmir in order to assert itself without triggering redlines. This way its confinded and keeps the TSPA under real pressure.

Not yet. TSPA wants us to give them a fight. Now is not the time imo. It will unite an already split country. The TSPA itself is on the verge of an internal split with crore commanders being against Kayani. Lets leave them in a hole. Its cheaper for us to approach from the north (which is what we are doing - we are going to go big when the time is right) as I said. AfPak on boil has allowed us to go in and eliminate LeT and assorted friends and K is a bit more peaceful. Paki foot soldiers are diverted to Af Pak. A war now may unite Unkil and TSP. It will give Obama an easy 2nd term and a host of other things. Each day goes by the US is sending warnings of splitting TSP and toiday the US handed us Rana evidence and it was enough to implicate ISI, which signals that US is sending more warning signals to Pak that they have the evidence. They know that if India implicates US it doesnt mean much.

Now is not the time. Now is the time to be extracting as much as we can from the US. UNSC perma seat, economic benefits, full support in Af-Pak etc. US is sitting in a precarious situiation in the region. It is being taken on from all sides. We are in the midst of a cold war.

shaymd,
I completely concur with your thoughts, I think we should wait and watch and get ourselves stronger.
no matter what the chest thumping crowd says we must not take our eyeball of the target. wind is blowing in India's favor.
India doesn't have to fire a single shot and defend ourselves strongly at the border and rest will be taken care of by itself.

Wait and watch is good but shouldnt be confused with inaction. When needed a blow has to be struck. My suggestion is to confine the action like Kargil and deliver the defeat. This precludes the hopes of others to ride on Indian efforts.

Wait and watch is good but shouldnt be confused with inaction. When needed a blow has to be struck. My suggestion is to confine the action like Kargil and deliver the defeat. This precludes the hopes of others to ride on Indian efforts.

But saar, what does it achieve? What is the objective?

Wait and watch is good but shouldnt be confused with inaction. When needed a blow has to be struck. My suggestion is to confine the action like Kargil and deliver the defeat. This precludes the hopes of others to ride on Indian efforts.

But saar, what does it achieve? What is the objective?

Shyamd, POK matches the Hiranya Kashyap conditions of TSP: Its not TSP, its a disputed area, it does not present an extentialist threat to TSP.

I think India should use force in POK to show the TSP that it will pay a price for terrorism.

All the Strike Corps/Cold Start are for escalation control.

By making them (SC & CS and dash to Indus) the prime focus India is reducing its options for action.

Right now TSP regularly strikes India and gets US support post facto as India rattles the CS doctrine and redlines etc.

By limiting the action to POK from the start and the option to expand as escalation control India still has force as an instrument of state policy.

No one can intervene when India acts on disputed Kashmir.
At same time it tells PRC that POK is India's.

Also in 1992 when Germany invested in East Germany why did it do that?

[RajeshA]

Doing Business with Pakistanis

X-Posting from TSP Thread

This seems to be the wisdom Pakistan has got after all its other business models are going bust. Obviously Pakistanis want to be the middle-men who want to sell Indian goods to Central Asia. They want to control the trade, and make a nice commission on all the trade.

Rajesh, this approach of Pakistan is at least a decade old. IIRC, it was Musharraf who stated this objective of becoming a trading nation in circa 2001. He sold IPI to Pakistanis on that basis. Of course, he was not for liberalizing all other trades from India. He backed out when Reliance offered diesel, preferring to buy much costlier diesel from West Asia instead as usual. He preferred IPI (Iran-Pakistan-India) 'peace pipeline' because that would place Pakistan at an advantageous position to turn the tap off after Indian enterprises had committed to the Iranian gas. That could be disastrous (as the current Reliance KG-D6 fiasco shows) and that was the kind of lever that Pakistan wanted. While he wanted the Iranian & Turkmenistan gas to flow to India earning for him sizeable transit fee (TSP demanded exorbitant rates), he was not willing to let other types of trade (even one way) and he forbade any type of India-Afghanistan trade at all (even one way from Afghanistan to India). The MFN status would not allow us to use Pakistan as a transit point for trade with third-party countries. That may have to be through a separate set of treaties.

SSridhar garu,

IMHO, the novelty would be in making commissions off the sale of products of one's enemies. The smugglers who are doing this across the border, or the merchants who do this over Dubai have of course long appreciated the value of doing so, but it is a novelty that the Pakistani state is considering jumping on that bandwagon - selling Indian goods.

The case with pipelines was of course to develop political leverage over India and use it for blackmail. With re-export of Indian goods through Pakistan, that is not at stake. They can't blackmail India with that.

India has no control over trade with Pakistan once MFN happens. Indian businessmen would export if the price was profitable and as Pakistan moves away from 'positive list' to a negative list of goods. This is normal. It is in Pakistan's hands to make this announcement, not India's. Pakistan is deterred by the incongruity of the term 'MFN' as applied to India. Already, India has accorded MFN status to Pakistan for almost a decade now and yet Pakistan's exports to India are minimal. In order to obfuscate its own inability (or even unwillingness) to export anything substantial, Pakistan claims that it is India's invisible trade barriers that stop its trade.

They have probably understood that brooding over the nomenclature of Most-favored Nation (MFN) is not really worth it. If they can let Raymond Davis go, they can also let MFN status for India.

Anyway, I have three major concerns with trading with Pakistan. One is that Indian political leaders and bureaucracy must not think that 'trade' could somehow make Pakistan behave more reasonably with us. That would be a fallacy simply because Pakistan is an irrational state and continues to treat us as 'Enemy No 1' and wants to hurt us in every way. Both the 'good' and the 'bad' Taliban, waiting in the wings to assume power, would want this even more.

I believe, the concept of trading and still remaining strategic rivals and even enemies has become clear, with the example of China and the discrepancy of its commercial relationships and its political relationships with both USA and India.

I can only hope that these lessons are not ignored.

Secondly, I do not think we can use trade as a lever against Pakistan. Pakistan wants to keep in its trading hands strategic products like gas while it wants to import from India non-strategic products. Of course, onions and tomatoes can also create riots but they can be easily imported from elsewhere, unlike gas. Besides, Pakistan can easily turn around and expose Indian cunning if India decides to restrict exports. While Pakistani gas pipelines can be sabotaged and blame laid at the feet of the Balochis or bad Taliban, India can be hauled to WTO for violation, by Pakistan.

Actually I don't want pipelines to be on the table at all.

The levers against Pakistan would not be at the level of country to country relations, but there would be many a businessmen from the strata of establishment, feudals and RAPE who would depend on their business with India, both for having a market for their agricultural produce as well as resellers for Indian goods in Central Asia. Any disruption in this trade due to political and military tensions would disrupt this economy, and they will suffer.

AFAIK, WTO makes some leeway when two countries are in war, or in semi-war, but I may be wrong.

Thirdly, I would welcome trade if GoI would use that as a policy instrument to safeguard India from Pakistan. I am yet doubtful that we have such holistic thinking on Pakistan in place. Various ministries are approaching Pakistan in a piecemeal fashion. We have not yet determined on what to do with Pakistan or how to deal with it.

Trade with Pakistan should not detract us from the need to get rid of this country and to break it up.

[RajeshA]

Doing Business with Pakistanis

Earlier I said that we should allow India to trade with Pakistan. Most probably Pakistan would try and make a kill by reexporting goods imported from India, onward to Central Asia, and make a commission. The MFN status would allow Pakistan to import Indian goods cheaply and get a good margin when reselling the goods in Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, etc.

Pakistan may choose to resell using the Indian Brand - "Made in India" label, or try to resell it by repackaging them as "Made in Pakistan". The latter would be of course hard, as repackaging can't be done on all packaged goods.

In a way, Pakistan would be making Indian goods more available in Central Asia, and also more popular.

Pakistani resellers of Indian goods in Central Asia may be making a neat profit, so in a way we would be creating a lobby in Pakistan invested in peaceful relations with India, if they wish to continue to avail of this revenue stream. But Indian producers may see Pakistan as a market, and the Central Asian market as an extended Pakistan market and feel compelled to restrain India politically in not exacerbating Indo-Pak relations even as India continues to suffer from Pakistan-sponsored terrorism. Indian security considerations should not be dependent on such mercantile interests.

In order to avoid such a situation of our business community becoming dependent on Pakistani middlemen to sell their goods in Central Asia, we should consider Iran as a route for transporting Indian goods to Central Asia as well. Often Indian goods to Central Asia are transported over UAE, but I would guess that makes them much costlier.

Since the goods may have to be transported through sea to Iran, perhaps Chahbahar Port and then transported further on to Afghanistan and further, this could prove noncompetitive if these goods are transported through Pakistan. So the businessmen would give preference to the Pakistan route.

So I propose, that GoI subsidizes the transport of Indian goods to Chahbahar Port, if the goods are meant for Central Asian markets (not Iran).

It does incur an extra cost on the Indian State, but it neutralizes the advantage to the Pakistanis. As such the MFN status Pakistan grants India would come in handy to bring down the prices of Indian goods in the Pakistani market, but in Central Asia, the Pakistanis would not get undue advantage and create a trading monopoly for Indian goods, but would have to compete with all those who trade through Iran - be they Indians, Iranians or Afghans.

Since we speak of Iran, I also think we should get rid of the hurdles in India-Iranian trade that have cropped lately. It is true, that Iran is getting more and more into a China-Pakistan-Iran Axis, but that should not really stop India in not availing of the Iranian market.

At the moment Iran is under international pressure. This is the time, when Iran would be willing to make concessions to India. So this is the time for India and Iran to reach a Free Trade Agreement, where transactions take place in Indian Rupees, including Oil. Considering the amount of Oil India buys or used to buy from Iran, Iran would have a huge amount in its Rupee account. Lately it was in the news that India owes Iran over 6 billion USD. This amount can act as a "credit line" to pay for getting Indian infrastructure companies to do projects in Iran, and these infrastructure companies get paid in Rupees, or Iran can simply import more Indian products into the Iranian market.

Why do I bring up the issue of an Indo-Iranian FTA here?

Well as Indian-Iranian trade increases, the price of transporting goods to Iran would come down, and as such the transportation costs of goods to be sent to other Central Asian markets too would come down, making Indian goods transported to Central Asia through Iran competitive with those transported through Pakistan, making Pakistanis cut down on their commissions for reselling Indian goods in Central Asia. So Pakistanis earn less and they do not develop any trade monopoly with regard to sale of Indian goods in Central Asia.

[RajeshA]

Solving Pakistan: Solution 6

Breaking Pakistan: Baluchistan

X-Posting from TSP Thread

Pakistan is a hard country if the objective is to control chaos. In fact even Afghanistan is a hard country if one wants to control chaos, especially one which can threaten with an insurgency within that chaos.

Sometimes high waves on the sea can seem pretty daunting, but some are able to surf the waves. If one does not take up the task of bringing order to the chaos, but rather simply contributing to that chaos in a way, which brings net benefit to oneself, then one does not need to fear chaos. A chaotic place is a perfect place for somebody with resources at hand and no values to boot, to achieve the maximum influence.

The more chaotic Pakistan gets, the easier it would be for USA and India to control some factions there, and facilitate war on other factions.

But if USA and India try to install a government, and do nation-building, then we will of course fail miserably.

The other way to deal with a chaotic country is to fragment it formally, and try to help those parts who are willing and capable of distancing themselves from the chaotic core, and bring order in their corner of the chaotic country. This is possible because the country may not be homogeneously chaotic. One can separate Baluchistan and Gilgit-Baltistan from Pakistan Proper and bring order to those parts. That would be much easier.

[RajeshA]

Solving Pakistan: Solution 6

Breaking Pakistan: Baluchistan

X-Posting from TSP Thread

The other way to deal with a chaotic country is to fragment it formally, and try to help those parts who are willing and capable of distancing themselves from the chaotic core, and bring order in their corner of the chaotic country. This is possible because the country may not be homogeneously chaotic. One can separate Baluchistan and Gilgit-Baltistan from Pakistan Proper and bring order to those parts. That would be much easier.

RajeshA ji, I agree with much of your post.However I am not convinced about the above paragraph.Formal Separation of Baluchistan and Gilgit is easier said than done.Sure they will control some pockets but that is about it.Sorry to say this but a few thousand rag tag guerrillas armed with just kalashnikovs and RPGs is not going to cut it.They are no match for Pakistani army.Historically the bane of all insurgencies is armor and airpower.Until unless the baluch and gilgit Freedom fighters are provided with Manpads (stingers,iglas etc) and anti armor weapons to counter paki air and armor assets , they will never be able to match the Pakistani Army.If you remember even in 1980's , resistance against soviets started succeeding only when they were supplied with stingers(well known) and Milan anti armor missiles(not so well known). In addition these freedom fighters will also require training and coordination which is best provided by intelligence agencies such as CIA and unconventional warfare experts like Green berets.India also did the same in 1971 to Mukti Bahini.Although I seriously doubt if this unconventional warfare capability still exists in India especially wrt Balochistan and Gilgit.

USA has all the above capabilities but the question still remains.Does it have the will and guts to do so?

darshan ji,

as you stated, this cannot be done by Baluchis and Gilgitians and Baltistanis alone. External help is critical to their endeavor.

Once the West creates a moral framework for a people to be liberated, it is often easier to help. As was in the case of East Timor, where a Muslim country was forced to let it go. East Timor declared independence from Portugal in 1975, and then it was invaded by Indonesia. Subsequently Indonesia was forced to admit that East Timor deserved to be independent.

Same is the case with Baluchistan and Gilgit-Baltistan. Baluchistan became independent on August 11th, 1947 four days before Pakistan. It was also coerced to become part of Pakistan. Gilgit-Baltistan was in fact invaded by Pakistan and does not belong in Pakistan at all. De-jure it is Indian territory.

So if the West is willing to make Baluchistan and Gilgit-Baltistan into disputed territories deserving of self-determination and independence, then it can be possible for the international community to force Pakistan out of these areas. If Pakistan declines, international sanctions can be applied on Pakistan. Also weapons can be supplied to Baluchis and Gilgitians and Baltistanis.

These two regions have a case for Independence! Legally they are also the low-hanging fruit.

The key is whether USA finally dumps Pakistan and takes on the challenge.

[shyamd]

For appearances’ sake: PM forms committee to deal with power crisis

Published: August 8, 2011

Five-member panel to consider ways to reduce the energy sector’s circular debt.
ISLAMABAD:

Rather than taking the tough measures necessary to solve the country’s chronic power crisis, Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani has formed a ‘high powered’ commission to suggest ways to end the prolonged electricity outages in the country.

The prime minister is reported to have set up the panel on Sunday, shortly before he left for a two-day visit to Saudi Arabia, a visit in which sources said Gilani may seek Riyadh’s assistance in solving the energy crisis.

The panel will be headed by Finance Minister Abdul Hafeez Shaikh. Two other cabinet members – Water and Power Minister Naveed Qamar and Petroleum Minister Asim Hussain – are also on the panel along with Planning Commission Deputy Chairman Nadeemul Haq and the acting governor of the State Bank of Pakistan, Yaseen Anwar.

The committee is likely to focus on the issue of the inter-corporate circular debt that has financially crippled the energy sector. The circular debt started when the government promised subsidies to the energy companies rather than letting them raise prices, but then did not pay many of them, forcing them to borrow from banks to pay each other until they reached a limit where they cannot borrow any more.

As a result of the debts – and the government’s refusal to let the energy companies raise prices for fear of the political backlash – the energy sector has begun producing less and less power even as demand continues to rise, resulting in longer and longer power outages which then produce the political backlash that the government was trying to avoid in the first place.

Yet the existence of circular debt has not prevented the government from continuing to subsidise the consumption of electricity in the country. For the fiscal year that ended June 30, 2011, the government spent Rs395 billion on subsidies, of which three-quarters was for electricity.

The government appears to not have an exact figure for just how much circular debt there is in the energy sector, though reports in the media, based on conversations with officials at the largest energy companies in the country, puts the figure close to Rs400 billion.

It is not clear if that number reflects the gross circular debt – the combined liabilities of all companies – or the net circular debt, which would include just the sum of their payables minus the sum of their receivables.

“The focus of the committee will be bringing this down to around Rs100 billion… if that is achieved, we can safely say power crisis in Pakistan is over,” said an official.

A statement issued by the prime minister’s office said that the committee had been empowered to think of ‘out of the box solutions’. While PM Gilani said that he hoped that the committee would finalise its recommendations soon, he did not provide a timeframe for them to complete their work.

Of the five members of the panel, three of them – the finance minister, the petroleum minister and the deputy chairman of the Planning Commission – are in favour of deregulating prices in the energy sector and ending all forms of subsidies.

Published in The Express Tribune, August 8th, 2011

[RajeshA]

Shiv saar's pearls of wisdom

X-Posting from TSP Thread

Sanctions work to punish, but not to solve problems. The leaders are seldom affected by sanctions. Only a country whose leaders wish for their people to be happy will be affected by sanctions. Otherwise a wealthy oligarchy will corner the little wealth a nation has and use it for personal wealth and arms while the people starve. Because the people have no power or wealth they live a life of subsistence and are totally under control of he oligarchy and their army. If information is controlled then the people can be fed misinformation about how the entire world is against them. NoKo has these features, Pakistan has these features, Saddam's Iraq had these features. Cuba has some features like this

Saddam's Iraq needed two wars with a huge coalition of forces to take Saddam down. And that was after a decade of sanctions. Korea has been under sanctions for decades and no country can take it down. Cuba has been under sanctions for decades but keeps going. Pakisan has not even been under sanctions. It has been fed well. So even if sanctions affect Pakistan the hope that sanctions will eventually beat a stable system of impoverished information starved people led by a powerful oligarchy with an army is remote.

X-Posting from TSP Thread

As far as I can tell the US has influence only within the Pakistani army and that influence seems to be waning. the Pakistani army itself is not in full control.

Yet the USA has tried, and tried hard to keep funding and arming the Paki army in the hope that they can exert control on Pakistan. If the army goes, or slips out of US control, there is no one for the US to deal with. Of course the army will not slip out of control unless there is a colonels coup - but Pakistan is too chaotic at present to be absolutely sure. Pakistan has a history of "soft" coups that are not bloody. There may be a silent coup with a silent handover of the Paki army to a more overtly jihadi organization.

In my view such a "silent coup" will garner the support of many Islamists and the people of Pakistan but go anti-US. In fact signs of these are already apparent in the way Pakistani leaders have been cosying up to China in the last 2-3 months. In the meantime the attacks in Xinjiang indicate that not all jihadi factions are interested in Pakistan first agenda. Those are an indicator of the Pakistani army, even in its more ant-US avatar is still not fully in control.

Finally the army does not control Karachi at all. Karachi alone constitutes about 10% of the population of Pakistan. That makes Karachi alone the 60th most populated "country" in the world out of a total of 220 odd countries. Karachi's population fals a little behind Taiwan and Sri Lanka and matches the population of the Netherlands. Even the Pakistani navy has (acc to reports on BRF) "temporarily" left Karachi.

Neither the US nor India are talking about splitting Pakistan although I sincerely hope they are cooperating. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Need to see how much the USA will bribe and arm the Paki army with AMRAAMs and F-16s.

X-Posting from TSP Thread

Karachi has a population of about 15-18 million. Baluchistan - 9 million and NWFP - 21 million. Assuming about 10 million residents of Baluchistan and NWFP together do not come under the Paki army control - we have about 15% of the population of Pakistan and 40-50% of its land area beyond the control of the Pakistan army. But this information is pure dramabaazi. With only 2% Pakis paying income tax - clearly 98% of Pakis do not directly contribute to the state and the state can do nothing. But let me ignore that and stick to dramabaazi.

Of the remaining 85% of Pakis - most of them who are "under Paki army/government" control - perhaps 90-100 million live in Pakjab. Pakjab has the greatest contribution to he Paki army and Pakjab appears to be greatly Islamized/radicalized. Pakjab also has 50-70% poverty and illiteracy. But the army is theirs and islam is theirs. Pakjabis are most likely to support an islamized army and they are extremely anti India. Nowadays they are anti US as well as far as I can tell - I need to revisit poll stats about this.

Now here's the rub. Other than Kandle Kissing there is nothing India can do about Pakjab. We can have some Aman ki Tamasha and other forms of tamasha - but the hatred remains. It is the US who have had better control over Pakjab by virtue of US influence on the Pakistan army. The US has lived comfortably and happily with the anti-India sentiment of the Pakistan army. It is only now that there is an anti-US sentiment in the Pakistan army. The US is "newly upset" about this antiUs sentiment. Anti-India sentiment was taken as a "given" in Pakistan - something that the US had to accept to be friendly with Pakistan and have influence in the army.

What the US is seeing now is a Paki army that is not just anti-India, but anti US as well and increasingly Islamized. The Pakistan army is unable to fight Islamization and would rather resist the US. Putting pressure on the Pakistan army is causing the Islamists to fight the army which the army can't do because of popular support for Islamists. The Islamists will destroy the Paki army from within - but resisting the US will not destroy the Pakistan army. The Paki army knows that resisting the US is a safer bet. The US will not dierctly fight the Pakistan army - which would also destroy the Paki army killing the only lifeline the US has in Pakistan.

Under such circumstances, what can the US do? What can India do? What options would be best for Indian and US interests?

1. Destroy the Pakistan army. India or the US could do that. The US could do that directly, or indirectly by provoking war with India (less certain). Destroying the Paki army would benefit India by removing the most powerful. coherent entity opposed to India. But it would leave an angry Paki population and angry jihadis. it would also kill the only connection the USA has with Pakistan, so the USA does not want to see the Pai army destroyed.

2. Bribe, fund and strengthen the Pakistan army to try and get them to fight jihadis. This is what the US has been doing from 9-11. It is a bad option for India and for the US it has failed miserably. the US is just finding that out. (hey we could have told them 10 years ago.)

3. Try to get the Pakistan army to make peace with India so it does not get into a suicidal war with India. I am certain India would not object to this and I think the US is trying to encourage this. But it will not work as long as there are infiltration bids and terrorism into India. India also requires that the us stop supplying Pakistan with offensive arms. the US has been fork-tongued about this and all it effort are bound to fail if the US thinks that arming Pakistan and them asking them to make peace with India will work. Pakistan will negotiate from weakness. They fight if they feel strong. They are feeling strong enough to fight a proxy war agaisnt india and the US. And the dumbass US is the source of their strength.

4. Try and win over civil society in Pakistan and get a civilian government system going. India does not object to this. But Pakistani civilians - manly the Pakjabis fear India and increasingly dislike the US. This is an uphill struggle - but this is the one single area where I will acknowledge that the US has successfully exerted pressure on the Paki army. I suspect (without proof army tolerate buffoons like Zardari and nobodies like Hina Rabbani Khar. But this comes at a price for India - the Pakistan army has been bribed by the US and armed against India to do this. And that army sits in the background ready to take over power if need be. And they may well do that if the US stops paying them. And if the US pays them - they attack India.

Ultimately the US and India will have to reach agreement about what to do with the Pakistan army and how to manage the fallout of a weakened/toothless Pakistan army. The US is not ready for that and India will not benefit from anything less.But until the Pakistan army is rendered weak there can be no progress. Only unpredictable chaos AND a powerful army as we see now. Remove the army and let the chaos begin in earnest.

X-Posting from TSP Thread

Shiv ji , What do you think about US or India supporting armed factions in Pakistan to cut Pakistani army or even Pakistan in size?For eg Baloch freedom fighters or MQM.Do you think if this will happen?I mean US has the capability and India could develop such capabilities within some time.But then both have demonstrated supreme WKK tendencies till now and this doesn't seem to change.Is there a chance that this might change in future.

Darshan I have no exact answers. I get the impression that everyone in Pakistan is armed - or has access to small arms up to AK-47 level. Mere small arms are freely available - so anyone can form a "militia". The Baluchis are probably at this level as are the MQM

The next level up is access to RPGs, heavy machine guns, anti-aircraft weapons, vehicles NVGs and communications equipment. This is made available to trained LeT or HuM type militants just like it was made available to the Taliban.

The third level is all of the above plus military training and discipline, including the ability to set up explosives and booby traps, mortars and some rockets. At this level you start getting a "proper soldier". The Pakistan army has access to this as ell as "branches" of the Pakistan army like the LeT and some factions of the Taliban

One higher level from here would be access to armored personnel carriers, helos and army logistics and army intelligence. The army retains control of this but clearly provides these facilities to the LeT and the good Taliban.

What this means is that a militia that the Pakistan army does not support will remain more or less at level 1. India and the US would have to work with level 1 "militia" and have them fight vastly better rained and equipped forces. This would eb a suicidal/unworkable venture without making the Pakistan army weaker. Making the Pakistan army weaker would simultaneously reduce many LeT and good taliban like forces to level 1 militia.

What needs to be done is to reduce the ability of the Pakistan army to sustain itself as an army and more difficult to provide services to their terrorist partners. What the US is doing is exactly the opposite. They give the Pakistan army heavy equipment to look after the Pakaramys India fears and they give the Pak army access to intelligence, NVGs and good secure communication equipment which the Paki army can use for supporting the LeT and the good Taliban. They subsidize the military budegt by giving F-16s and AMRAAMs along with their aid. There is no chance that making minor militia fight this mighty army can succeed. Only the US armed forces or the Indian armed forces can defeat the Pakiarmy. Militias can harass but not win against these guys. The militias will hod their own for a while. the Paki army will never get Karachi because they cannot use their heavy stuff. But when the heavy stuff comes in - the militas will be wiped out.

The Taliban, fighting the US are not a simple militia. they get the logistics, training and intel of the Pakistan army while the logistics of US forces is controlled by the same Pakistan army. So a US that cannot prevail over the Taliban will never be able to arm and make Balochis win a fight with the Paki army. Nor India for that matter.

[RajeshA]

Solving Pakistan: Solution 6

Breaking Pakistan: Baluchistan

X-Posting from TSP Thread

Once the West creates a moral framework for a people to be liberated, it is often easier to help. As was in the case of East Timor, where a Muslim country was forced to let it go. East Timor declared independence from Portugal in 1975, and then it was invaded by Indonesia. Subsequently Indonesia was forced to admit that East Timor deserved to be independent.

East Timor became a European cause, according to Wiki, because the Portuguese saw videos of Timorese praying in Portuguese; and because 95% of the Timorese had converted to Christianity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_East_Timor

My analogy was not about why the "international community" took up the cause of East Timorese Independence, but simply pertained to the ability of the West to coerce Indonesia, a Muslim country, to let go of a part of it.

So if the West is willing to make Baluchistan and Gilgit-Baltistan into disputed territories deserving of self-determination and independence, then it can be possible for the international community to force Pakistan out of these areas. If Pakistan declines, international sanctions can be applied on Pakistan. Also weapons can be supplied to Baluchis and Gilgitians and Baltistanis.

a. The West makes these determinations out of self-interest, not out of objective considerations.

b. In any way recognizing this power of "the West" by India means that the West can play the same games with any area of India. Let's remember whom the "international community" is. It is not Fiji and Chad and Senegal. It is the US and Europe. I think China knows the potential of this with regard to Eastern Turkmenistan and Tibet and would not invoke this "self-determination" stuff.

a. In the case of Baluchistan and even Gilgit-Baltistan too, the West would make the determination of their "liberation" based on their self-interest, and not because of considerations of history and legality.

BUT, the historicity of Baluchistan would help the West to justify any arguments they make about "liberation" for these regions, in case they see it in their self-interest.

b. I have never argued that India should use the same arguments as the West on "self-determination" for Baluchistan, and Gilgit-Baltistan. India is in her rights to claim Baluchistan, on the basis of Baluchistan being part of British India, its disputed accession to Pakistan, Baloch aspirations being not to be part of Pakistan and Baluchistan being India's "Near Abroad" and "Core Interest". So even as West and India can both work for the liberation of Baluchistan, both would use different arguments to justify their diplomatic and military pushes.

[RajeshA]

X-Posting from TSP Thread

Under such circumstances, what can the US do? What can India do? What options would be best for Indian and US interests?

X-Posting from TSP Thread

Shiv ji , What do you think about US or India supporting armed factions in Pakistan to cut Pakistani army or even Pakistan in size?For eg Baloch freedom fighters or MQM.Do you think if this will happen?I mean US has the capability and India could develop such capabilities within some time.But then both have demonstrated supreme WKK tendencies till now and this doesn't seem to change.Is there a chance that this might change in future.

Darshan I have no exact answers. I get the impression that everyone in Pakistan is armed - or has access to small arms up to AK-47 level. Mere small arms are freely available - so anyone can form a "militia". The Baluchis are probably at this level as are the MQM

The next level up is access to RPGs, heavy machine guns, anti-aircraft weapons, vehicles NVGs and communications equipment. This is made available to trained LeT or HuM type militants just like it was made available to the Taliban.

The third level is all of the above plus military training and discipline, including the ability to set up explosives and booby traps, mortars and some rockets. At this level you start getting a "proper soldier". The Pakistan army has access to this as ell as "branches" of the Pakistan army like the LeT and some factions of the Taliban

One higher level from here would be access to armored personnel carriers, helos and army logistics and army intelligence. The army retains control of this but clearly provides these facilities to the LeT and the good Taliban.

What this means is that a militia that the Pakistan army does not support will remain more or less at level 1. India and the US would have to work with level 1 "militia" and have them fight vastly better rained and equipped forces. This would eb a suicidal/unworkable venture without making the Pakistan army weaker. Making the Pakistan army weaker would simultaneously reduce many LeT and good taliban like forces to level 1 militia.

What needs to be done is to reduce the ability of the Pakistan army to sustain itself as an army and more difficult to provide services to their terrorist partners. What the US is doing is exactly the opposite. They give the Pakistan army heavy equipment to look after the Pakaramys India fears and they give the Pak army access to intelligence, NVGs and good secure communication equipment which the Paki army can use for supporting the LeT and the good Taliban. They subsidize the military budegt by giving F-16s and AMRAAMs along with their aid. There is no chance that making minor militia fight this mighty army can succeed. Only the US armed forces or the Indian armed forces can defeat the Pakiarmy. Militias can harass but not win against these guys. The militias will hod their own for a while. the Paki army will never get Karachi because they cannot use their heavy stuff. But when the heavy stuff comes in - the militas will be wiped out.

The Taliban, fighting the US are not a simple militia. they get the logistics, training and intel of the Pakistan army while the logistics of US forces is controlled by the same Pakistan army. So a US that cannot prevail over the Taliban will never be able to arm and make Balochis win a fight with the Paki army. Nor India for that matter.

We are talking about how USA is improving the ability of the Pakistani Army to sustain itself. Of course, USA has to stop that! But how does it go beyond that?

Even if USA stops providing Pakistan with weapons, PRC could take the slack and replace USA as the main arms provider, which they are already doing. These may not be the newest of newest cutting-edge technology, but they would do if provided in bulk. Basically we have little control over this, unless we start trying to intercept all deliveries through PoK and by sea, which we most probably wouldn't unless there are open hostilities.

Neither can we really stop Pakistan recruiting more soldiers. As the living standards in Pakistan will plummet, more and more youngsters would want to join the army, as their only hope of sustenance of their families. More and more Pakistanis would want to work in the Army for less and less. So if we hope that a deteriorating economy would provide some means of strangulating Pakistani Army then that may not hold out. North Korea is holding out as a garrison with little money. Even in Myanmar the Tatmadaw is all powerful.

Pakistan's agricultural land would always provide sufficient food to keep the Army well-fed, at least as long as we let Indus Waters flow unimpeded downstream. Not just that, a deteriorating economy would also increase the numbers of non-uniformed jihadis, also willing to work with the Army. So the route of a deteriorating economy can have only limited RoI.

The only way to constrain the Pakistani Army is really to take away its "strategic depth"! And by strategic depth one means the geographical area and its geostrategic connectivity that the Army can avail of with impunity with no other force to challenge it credibly.

If one takes away Pakistan's access to Central Asia (Pushtunistan's separation), Pakistan's access to China (PoK reintegration with India), Pakistan's access to Sea (Baluchistan and Mohajirstan's reintegration with India), Pakistan's access to Iran and the Gulf Region (Baluchistan's reintegration with India), only then is Pakistani Army's capacity totally degraded.

Then Pakistan becomes landlocked and its freedom is gone. It becomes dependent on Pakistan Proper's (Pakjab, Seraikistan, Northern Sindh) neighbors for its energy, water, logistics and trade. Its capacity to do cross-border terrorism or global Jihad is severely degraded. Its capacity to earn from narcotics is severely degraded. And its nukes become constrained to a smaller area. This Army can be attacked much more easily, should the others decide to pound it.

Armies in countries like North Korea, Myanmar, Pakistan can survive if their patron has access to them, if they are strategically located, if they have natural resources to trade, if they have access to the sea! Without all that, these regimes become vulnerable to fragmentation.

As TSPA withdraws to Pakistan Proper (Pakjab, Seraikistan, Northern Sindh), external powers like India, USA can turn the screws even tighter by encouraging and funding fragmentation of the TSPA itself and the growth of rival power centers with their own little lashkars. The TSPA would be put under a siege, a quarantine, and then strangulated in Pakistan Proper, until they decide to part with their nuclear weapons.

[RajeshA]

Isolating Pakistan from China

X-Posting from TSP Thread

Pakistani Army was really shocked that Osama bin Laden was taken out by the Americans in Pakistan's backyard. At that time, Pakistanis fully understood that despite America's talk of alliance and cooperation, USA knew the depth of Pakistan's betrayal and perfidy! There was absolutely nothing Pakistani Army could have possibly done to restore trust, at least not without committing suicide! The Game was Over! There was no way back! The Truth was truly liberating!

I think it was at this moment that Pakis realized that American shield that protected them from India was gone! They needed to make alternative arrangements! Hillary's speech just confirmed to them where American interests now lay!

Now Pakistan is trying to bolster its sense of security by availing of PLA! But it just shows Pakistani Panic!

Now we need to increase that sense of Pakistani insecurity. Under American shadow it was just a show to get more weapons and to act irresponsibly. But now after loosing American umbrella, that sense of insecurity really becomes palpable. Every time the Porkis now panic, they will run to China. Let them do it!

India (and USA) have to now show to the Pakistanis, that China cannot help them! The Pakistanis have to put all their hopes and aspirations of security at the feet of the Chinese! The more they invest in the Chinese to come to their aid, the bigger would be the disappointment and shock, when India or USA give Pakistanis a jhapad, and the Chinese cannot do anything about it.

Pakistanis need to feel a tangible loss, say Baluchistan or something similar, with the Chinese staying back! The more they invest emotionally in China, the greater would be their anger at China later on for ditching them! And that anger would also need to be harnessed properly into East Turkestan!

The Chinese said that India cannot protect Vietnam! Well India needs to send a message on the ground, that the Chinese too could not save Pakistan!

[RajeshA]

US-Pak Falling-Out

X-Posting from TSP Thread

I see several possibilities here in the increasing presence of PLA in Pakistan.

• PRC also might want to hedge India from all directions and Pakistan's acquiescence comes handy. Ms. Clinton's speech in Chennai two weeks back exhorting India to assume leadership role in maritime affairs in Malaca Straits, South China Sea and upto the Pacific is an indication of the talks possibly going on between the two countries. India seems yet undecided on such a role but PRC may want to preempt that by sending India a signal with its fine-tuned aggressive posture along LAC and now along the India-Pakistan border.

Ms Clinton's speech in Chennai made me think a little bit!

Ms Clinton is telling India to assume leadership role all the way to the Pacific! But India's main security concern is Pakistan, its irredentism, its terrorism, its nukes. So how can US expect India to do what they are asking India to do? US knows that China will increasingly pose a major threat to it in the Pacific, and military wise there is hardly another country out there which can help USA in any major way in the Pacific theater. All other countries, American allies, only provide America with geostrategic deployment possibilities, but not fighting power. Japan and South Korea are net importers of security. Australia is a net contributor of security in the words of Stephen Smith, Australian Defense Minister, but Australia is still a small place and they have their own problems with defense equipment. Canada can only make small contributions. Britain is increasingly a basket case! Germany is coy! French have shown little proclivity to show presence in the Pacific since the last two decades, and they are a fickle ally. Russia would sit in the stands and watch!

India is the only power with a potential to neutralize Chinese power in the region!

But India will not dance because of Pakistan! And Pakistan is too crazy, close and nuclear-armed for our liking and war-making!

So the only solution one can think up of is for America to cut down Pakistan to size, freeing India to share more of the security burden with America in the Pacific.

In the last few years, American strategy was to achieve two things:
a) Its own goals in the War on Terror.
b) Getting Pakistan and India to talk, build confidence, reduce the tension.

America has failed in the first goal, and had only partial success in the other.
a) Pakistan was much too serpentine for a fair deal!
b) Pakistan was much too antagonistic for a understanding!

Pakistani Army remains as before hostile towards India. With the civilians, the situation is somewhat better.

And because the Pakistani Army remains hostile towards India, and on top of that has become evermore a paw of the Chinese, as the relationship after OBL hit went downhill, America cannot provide India with a Pakistan, which poses no threat to India. India has herself seen how far American influence in Pakistan has degraded, so how can American guarantee a benign Pakistan to India. As long as America does not do that, there is little chance of India venturing out to share any burden with USA.

So if USA cannot neutralize Pakistan's willingness to hurt India, the only option left for USA is to neutralize Pakistan's capacity to hurt India.

Ultimately that is the understanding USA would have to reach with India. USA cuts down Pakistan to size, and India helps shore America's security burden in the Pacific!

And as America pounds Pakistan, India would play Pakistan's concerned friend.

If not thus and then how?

[ramana]

PLA in TSP is a sure sign that TSPA is on the wane.

[abhischekcc]

Everybody is thinking that the US and China are sluggin out in pakistan against each other.

Step back and take a counter perspective!

Paki units are needed in the west of that country, leaving the eastern flank vulnerable to a sudden surge in hostility (not necessarily an invasion from India). Such a situation would fatally destabilize pakisatan.

US is going to withdraw from pakistan and will no longer be able to gaurantee its security against India. So, kung fu panda steps in, essentially replacing US as the gauranteer of paki security against India.

Will US really be unhappy with this situation? No
All they have to do is make an announcement that China will 'manage' South Asia from now on.
This is what they did.


US and China are NOT cometing with each other. They are still cooperating.
An year or so back I said that US economic crisis means they will depend on China more and more. And that China will expect political rewards in return (because US does not have the wherewithal to give economic rewards). And I had also said that India will bear the brunt of this compromise. China entry into pakistan is an instance of this 'cooperation'. Give up the thought that these two Saimese twins will ever fight each other.

[RajeshA]

US is going to withdraw from pakistan and will no longer be able to gaurantee its security against India. So, kung fu panda steps in, essentially replacing US as the gauranteer of paki security against India.

Will US really be unhappy with this situation? No
All they have to do is make an announcement that China will 'manage' South Asia from now on.
This is what they did.


US and China are NOT cometing with each other. They are still cooperating.
An year or so back I said that US economic crisis means they will depend on China more and more. And that China will expect political rewards in return (because US does not have the wherewithal to give economic rewards). And I had also said that India will bear the brunt of this compromise. China entry into pakistan is an instance of this 'cooperation'. Give up the thought that these two Saimese twins will ever fight each other.

abhischekcc ji,

While it is correct, that USA has become all the more dependent on China, as its debt balloons, the question is whether USA can afford to give up its hold on Asia completely, including the Middle East. Giving up Pakistan to China wholesale, actually does come to that - becoming shut out of Central Asia completely. It also means that once China has consolidated its hold over Central Asia, the Gulf is ripe for the picking!

Is USA willing to give up Asia, in order to get a few billions from China as budgetary support. You say that is the case. I have strong doubts about it.

I think USA still has a few cards to play. It may give China more leeway in Pakistan, but it can poison the chalice before presenting it to China on a silver tray. It can still ensure that when it makes a comeback, the game would still be wide open for it to make an entry.

So my assumption is that while USA would allow China to make incursions in PoK, and leave India to deal with it, any way we deem fit, it would still not allow the Chinese to capture Baluchistan. And USA would probably take down Iran before it leaves.

[abhischekcc]

I am not sure about giving away of pakistan.

But I am sure that they are cooperating with, not competing against, each other. And trying to get India to foot the bill.

[Samudragupta]

Both CPC-PLA and US is trying to get the crown jewel of Pakistan through the backdoor entry of PLA in Pakistan....I think US is trying to lure PLA in Pakistan in the same shoe as was FSU in Afghanistan....In that case US expects India to be the new Pakistan....

[RamaY]

Apologies if duplicate

X-posting from TSP thread

>>India has only two fu@king options to solve its problems: 1) Isolate pakistan or 2) De-partition

Please read a part of the TSP threads, Shiv's book, etc. We have several other options: Engage Pakistan, Isolate Pakistan frome everyone else (except us), rewind partition partly, nuke the fu(kers, some of the above, and in worst case all of the above in sequence. Time will tell, even with less than 20-20 hindsight, that the Indian approach was sophisticated, deeply considered, evolutionary and for lack of a better word "organic". In short, as the late RN Kao put it much more succintly we are LeTting "them stew in their own juice" - and what a juice it is.

Of course, there is a price to be paid. But there is no approach for which a price would not have to be paid. This may be the only one that simultaneously allows us to grow as we have done over the last 20 years approx. And we need to do that, as we are not playing a regional tournament, and we are not playing a 20-20. It is a test match, a test of national will, endurance and capacity for survival. We will win. We will try to ensure that Pakistan does not lose in the process, because that is the way of Indian civilisation, but that is largely up to the leaders of Pakistan. I'm not optimistic. Unfortunately they are ignorant, of limited intellectual capacity where it exists, lack any serious ability for reasoned and maximally objective analysis, and entirely dependent on the idea of a god with all the answers. We are fortunate that, given that we have this animal next door, it is constituted as it is.

nvishal ji,

India should never isolate Pakistanis from India! It is one thing not to allow them in into India due to security reasons, but we should always assert that they are part of India, zombies may be to foreign ideologies, but still part of India, and if we can take them out of the Borg collective, we would gladly do so! Pakistan is India gone mad! So we will continue to give therapy to this mad place, even if it includes electric shocks and physical restraints if needed. We will continue to kick ass to establish our authority if needed, but we will also not push Pakistanis out of the tent!

Pakistanis are genetically Indians and Pakistan is Indian land, and we will get both back someday!

Telling them they are not of our stock, and we don't want anything to do with them is childish, because history shows us, it never works! Those who are rejected in this way, end up taking over the identity of the foreigners. Sure in Pakistan there is may be 2% people who may have Turkish, Arab, or Persian bloodlines, but that is not true for the rest. The manufactured identity has to be broken.

So isolationism is not an option.

Neither is "De-partition" an option until those zombies roam around.

The only option is integration of those areas of Pakistan into India which bring more in terms of strategic advantage than they burden us for being Muslim. The rest of the people need to be contained and detoxificated.

If you are looking for options, do visit "Managing Pakistan's failure" Thread. Some options are mentioned there. Other options are spread over the whole of BRF.

[Airavat]

Baluchistan has the right of self-determination

Article has more than a 100 comments and is by a Pakistani journalist: Fahad Desmukh.

[RajeshA]

US vs Pak

X-Posting from "The US and China in Pakistan - their respective roles" Thread

The US is powerful. The powerful US supplies arms to Pakistan. Then India gets a message that says "You want this to stop?. Well then what are you going to bring to the table to offer the USA to stop it?"

It so happens that it is both in Indian interests and on moral grounds that the US should be pressured to stop supplying arms to Pakistan. It is not as if US arms supply to Pakistan looks good and attractive if India drops its moralistic tone. That is a strawman if I ever saw one.

If Indians are worried in US then they should start with a anti Pakistan lobby inside US. That way they dont need to feel frustrated with US India relations. To prevent anti american lobby in India they should start with a anto Pakistan lobby in US.

Acharya garu,

thanks for pointing in a constructive direction.

I believe however that one should tone the message of such a lobbying effort. Basing the message on simply stopping giving weapons to Pakistan, as they could be used against India, may be a message, which may not sell that well.

USA has a long history of buying influence by providing weapons. Provision of weapons is simply a well-established means to an end for them. This may be like asking Americans to not put shoes on, as these could kill the insects in their path. A bit of an exaggeration, but ...

I think, Indians must give the US Congressmen and the Administration, a far potent weapon - "American National Interest crouched in American Values applied universally"!

I would suggest a four-pronged lobbying attack - on the following fronts!

1. Baluchistan - Indian Americans should establish close contacts with Balochi expatriates in USA, fund them well, hone their message, act as advisers to them and get them to lobby US Congressmen much harder. This in an area, which can be sold to US Congressmen as important for American national interests - Access to Central Asia, Containment of Iran, etc. It is also about freedom, especially as Pakistan's claim on Baluchistan is legally quite weak. When the time comes to punish Pakistan, these US Congressmen should open the purse-strings for a Baluchistan Liberation War. Since the Indian Americans would be heavily involved in this effort, they can better orient the direction of Baluchistan Liberation Struggle.
2. Balwaristan - Same is the case with Balwaristan. Here American interest is the containment of China, and stopping China from expanding into the Gulf through Pakistan. Indians should build a lobby which emphasizes that Gilgit-Baltistan do not belong to Pakistan, and Pakistan should retreat from the area. The lobby should emphasize the human rights and native rights violations by Pakistan. The lobby should highlight the entry of China into the area. Indian Americans can join the likes of Senge Sering, from the Institute for Gilgit Baltistan Studies, and others, and get USA to focus on this area on a priority basis.
3. 9/11 Truth movement - Indians should also join the 9/11 Truth movement and its various organizations and try to highlight Pakistan's complicity in the 9/11 attacks, that it was Pakistan all along which organized and funded the 9/11 Attacks including giving shelter to the perpetrator of those attacks - Osama bin Laden. All those who were complicit in giving shelter to him, which involves the whole ISI and TSPA should be brought to justice or justice should be taken to them.
4. USINPAC - Concerned Indians should also donate to USINPAC, or some other similar organization and try to steer its direction into one that is pro-Indian. It is through this effort, that we should highlight the Pakistan sponsored terrorism against India.

Funding the Baluchistan, Balwaristan, 9/11 Truth Movement Effort, all are very pro-Indian efforts! These are not simply efforts which concern other people or just USA. Indian American should see these efforts as their own!

Then of course there is the effort of concerned citizens to write to one's Senator or House Representative or Administration about Pakistan's perfidy and terrorist nature, and demand that US avenges the death of all those US soldiers who died in the battlefield of Afghanistan.

[RajeshA]

US vs Pak

X-Posting from "The US and China in Pakistan - their respective roles" Thread

Rajesh: The Truth About 9/11 people are primarily the "inside job" / "controlled demolition" camp. They are looking at the other end of the pole. I think by now, there are not that many who doubt that TSP had a key role to play. OBL's role as a permanent guest (and potentially a visiting professor) in Abbotabad sealed the deal. The question still remains, what can they do about it.

VikramS ji,

The 9/11 Truth Movement is a channel to put pressure on the 9/11 Commission and the US Congress for the investigation and disclosure. They are also a source of conspiracy theories. Outside the Government, Truth is identified by the Most Popular Conspiracy Theory!

This movement is the most appropriate channel to make Conspiracy Theories and even Truths Rejected by Officialdom popular and accepted. It is not just the government that needs to be lobbied but the people themselves. The 9/11 Truth Movement has an established platform from where they can speak.

The idea is to build a movement in the people and US Congressmen to punish Pakistan for 9/11 and for what is happening in Afghanistan.

The idea should be thrown so often on the wall, that some of it sticks! The Election Cycle is upon the Americans, and punishing Pakistan should become the Number One Security-related Theme!

The 9/11 Truth Movement should underline that America has been fighting the wrong wars, and the right war still needs to be fought! Secondly for those critics who say, USA cannot afford it, the response should be that this war would not be for some nation-building in Pakistan or be some long-drawn out Counter-Insurgency operation, as was the case in Iraq and Afghanistan. This war would be different!

[A_Gupta]

If Pakistan somehow fails to fail, then what?

[shiv]

If Pakistan somehow fails to fail, then what?

Pakistan is actually in a state of failure already. The only way forward is to pull itself up. If it does not do that it will continue to fail. Whether it will collapse or remain on the brink needs to be seen

[svinayak]

US is going to withdraw from pakistan and will no longer be able to gaurantee its security against India. So, kung fu panda steps in, essentially replacing US as the gauranteer of paki security against India.

Will US really be unhappy with this situation? No
All they have to do is make an announcement that China will 'manage' South Asia from now on.
This is what they did.


US and China are NOT cometing with each other. They are still cooperating.
An year or so back I said that US economic crisis means they will depend on China more and more. And that China will expect political rewards in return (because US does not have the wherewithal to give economic rewards). And I had also said that India will bear the brunt of this compromise. China entry into pakistan is an instance of this 'cooperation'. Give up the thought that these two Saimese twins will ever fight each other.

India has to make China/PRC pay a huge price for having Tibet. Then this option of kung fu panda helping Pakistan does not arise.

[ramana]

RajeshA, Please consider making an e-book of all your posts in different categories. I would like them to be ready by November end. Would like to have it peer reviewed by December end. Then release them in end of January.

[svinayak]

US vs Pak
"The US and China in Pakistan - their respective roles"

The US is powerful. The powerful US supplies arms to Pakistan. Then India gets a message that says "You want this to stop?. Well then what are you going to bring to the table to offer the USA to stop it?"

It so happens that it is both in Indian interests and on moral grounds that the US should be pressured to stop supplying arms to Pakistan. It is not as if US arms supply to Pakistan looks good and attractive if India drops its moralistic tone. That is a strawman if I ever saw one.
If Indians are worried in US then they should start with a anti Pakistan lobby inside US. That way they dont need to feel frustrated with US India relations. To prevent anti american lobby in India they should start with a anto Pakistan lobby in US.

Acharya garu,

thanks for pointing in a constructive direction.

I believe however that one should tone the message of such a lobbying effort. Basing the message on simply stopping giving weapons to Pakistan, as they could be used against India, may be a message, which may not sell that well.

Rajesh JI
I dont agree with your post. Unless Indians understand how they have been shafted for 60 years they will not change. They need to be empowered by created a large global lobby which effects the foreign policy.

[RajeshA]

RajeshA, Please consider making an e-book of all your posts in different categories. I would like them to be ready by November end. Would like to have it peer reviewed by December end. Then release them in end of January.

I am on it, garu!

[RajeshA]

I dont agree with your post. Unless Indians understand how they have been shafted for 60 years they will not change. They need to be empowered by created a large global lobby which effects the foreign policy.

Acharya garu,

My post was directed at Indian lobbying of USA regarding Pakistan. I concur completely with you regarding education of Indians and instilling in them a national conscience. That in fact is BRF's mission statement (IMHO).

[RajeshA]

If Pakistan somehow fails to fail, then what?

Pakistan will have to take the examination again and again, until it passes the test, and succeeds to fail!

[rajithn]

If Pakistan somehow fails to fail, then what?

Pakistan is a state that is desperately trying to fail. And failing to do a good job of it.

[Like the person who wants to commit suicide but doesnt have the guts to do it or the brains to do it right. So they slash their wrists and end up in a hospital, try to hang themselves but the beams fall on their head leaving them with a pitiful headache, try to poison themselves but only suffer from debilitating diarhhea.]

So they keep prodding us to do it for them. Perhaps we should do them the favor.

Next time there is a terror attack, just put them out of their misery. For good.

Pakistan is a comedy of errors. But we are not laughing.

[svinayak]

Acharya garu,

My post was directed at Indian lobbying of USA regarding Pakistan. I concur completely with you regarding education of Indians and instilling in them a national conscience. That in fact is BRF's mission statement (IMHO).

I understand. I agree with you on Balochistan but before that we need to have a lobby for the Kashmir pundits and need wide support for the refugees of kashmir who are displaced inside India. Who is going to support them.
I met the KAC president in the India Independence Day today. How can we create the largest lobby for them in the world. Potentialy 1B people

[RajeshA]

Reclaiming Pakistan Territory: Mohajirstan

X-Posting from "Formation and Evolution of Pakistan : The Real Story" Thread

Published in Jun 1999,
By Smruti S. Pattanaik, Researcher, IDSA
Ethnic Aspirations and Political Power: Defining Mohajirs' Grievances in Sindh: IDSA

In 1984, the MQM was born as an umbrella organisation for the political expression of the Mohajirs grievances. The MQM which was largely a student movement emerged as a major political force to reckon with, and by 1988, it was the third largest political party in Pakistan with such a short political history. For the MQM, ethnic identity took priority over religious identity. The Mohajirs were convinced that their ethnic identity would bring them more political benefits than any amalgamation of identities. Moreover, the rise of Sindhi nationalism had questioned the political prudence and efficacy of a Sindhi political identity encompassing all ethno-linguistic groups, other than exclusive Sindhi-speaking community. Because rise of Sindhi nationalism frustrated all attempts to have a converging Sindh identity on the basis of a geography than any ethno-cultural diacritics. All this brought about a radical change in the Mohajirs political orientation. They had been supporters of a strong authoritarian government at the centre and often aligned themselves with the fundamentalist party which emphasised religious identity rather than ethnic identity. Now the Islamic affinity was underplayed and new parameters for political mobilisation was constructed. Thus, they dismissed their previously held emphasis on religion by saying, "We have not signed a contract to uphold Pakistan and Islam."

Altaf Hussain, while criticising the 1981 census, said, "We are at least 45-50 per cent in Sindh but they put us at 22.6 per cent. Karachi's population is 10 per cent of the country's total and produces 63 per cent of federal revenue, yet it gets only a 2 per cent quota of jobs and facilities. Anyone for a small bribe can get proof of domicile and compete for jobs, whereas Mohajirs have no place to go."29 Referring to the grievances of the Mohajirs, he said "When a Sindhi comes to power, the Sindhis fight us; when a Pathan comes to power, the Pathans fights us. Will whoever come to power always victimise us?"30 This perception of victimization made the MQM more militant in their activities. In their political struggle, the Biharis provided a new cadre of young activists ready to display their combat skills which they had acquired during their exposure to military activities in the former East Bengal in 1971.

The MQM cashed on its tremendous street power. It has a large following amongst the youth and educated classes and the largest urban following (given its political base) compared to any other party in Pakistan. It is surprising that a party whose leader is in London on a self-imposed exile has such a larger following and has emerged as one of the most charismatic leaders with tremendous mobilising capacity. However, it is perceived as a party which does not have a broad based ideology to include other groups within its fold, the reason being its demand for a separate province that includes the urban areas of Sindh otherwise to be known as Jinnahpur. In the absence of a broad based support it cannot fulfill its objectives. "The MQM is caught between a rock and a hard place: without cooperation or alliance with other ethnic groups, it can make little headway in the national politics; to have this alliance, it must moderate its stance...the fate of Mohajir separatism will be decided by the ability of the State of manipulate the political process, the attitude of other ethnic groups towards Mohajir nationalism and, above all, by the capacity of the Mohajir community to eschew its sense of self-righteousness." Any dilution in Mohajir stand will affect its electoral prospect and challenge its status as indisputed leaders of Mohajirs.

[RajeshA]

Reclaiming Pakistan Territory: Mohajirstan

X-Posting from TSP Thread

^^^Tweets from Marvi Sirmed:

(August 15) Thank you! Happy Birthday Pakistan )) RT @ShirazHassan Happy Independence Day

RT @ShirazHassan I had a fight in office today no one believed that 15th is actual date, even I showed Jinnah 15th August speech

+100 RT @ShirazHassan: I asked one: if a Yemeni says he is Yemeni but not an arabi. dont u laugh at him? I am Pakistani of Indian origin.

How long before Pakis start declaring themselves Indians?

X-Posting from TSP Thread

Not too long now.

Situation is quite desperate there.

They need some relief valve which is why they are seeking MMs's blessings so urgently.

X-Posting from TSP Thread

How long before Pakis start declaring themselves Indians?

It will happen in stages (the process already began when the pakis started laying claim to ancient Indian history from that region, viz. Saraswati-Indus valley Civilization). The soft approach first will include travelling exhibits. There's one doing the rounds at Asia Society in NYC called "The Buddhist Heritage of Pakistan: Art of Gandhara". Of course, hailed by NY Times as a sign of secular pa'astan. These soft images will combine ancient Hindu & Buddhist art, history, science, medicine... Wait till the pakis claim the Vedas, Puranas, Mahabharat, Chanakya, Ayurveda, Yoga, the seven Rishis, Panadavas, etc as their own. Then the hyphenation will begin in earnest. There are some pakis who have already started laying claim to the name "India".

X-Posting from TSP Thread

It will happen in stages (the process already began when the pakis started laying claim to ancient Indian history from that region, viz. Saraswati-Indus valley Civilization). The soft approach first will include travelling exhibits. There's one doing the rounds at Asia Society in NYC called "The Buddhist Heritage of Pakistan: Art of Gandhara". Of course, hailed by NY Times as a sign of secular pa'astan. These soft images will combine ancient Hindu & Buddhist art, history, science, medicine... Wait till the pakis claim the Vedas, Puranas, Mahabharat, Chanakya, Ayurveda, Yoga, the seven Rishis, Panadavas, etc as their own. Then the hyphenation will begin in earnest. There are some pakis who have already started laying claim to the name "India".

There are two tracks by Paaistan. One is to show that they are also the home to the buddhist heritage.
Also show that they have non middle east image. This is important to the american audience who have been fed the image of a pure Islamic state. The Hindu history and image has been completely downgraded in US from 1972. HK project.

Now with the global revival of asia and Indic history , Paasitan will look like an odd sore spot in this history and hence they have to fit in.

Time to revive the temples in the Indus valley and entire pakistan region. We need information on all the ancient temples and their floor plans. We need to start making maps with HINDU past and TEMPLES/NAMES in Paaistan region.

All the restaurants have started changing their names to Indian-Pakistan from the earlier on - Pakistan-Indian cusine.

X-Posting from TSP Thread

So the process of rejection of the Jinnah himself by the Paki "liberals" has started. He is already rejected by the conservatives. Got to see if Jinnah rejection gains traction.

X-Posting from TSP Thread

>>I am Pakistani of Indian origin.

Wrong. Pakistan is of Indian origin. Pakistanis are Arab and Central Asian origin, or Turkish even. Most of them are tall fair and tight-assed. And almost everybody is a direct descendant of their prophet.

[RajeshA]

X-Posting from TSP Thread

Paki honor and dignity which is protected by bandwagoning that echandee with Islam has to be battered and crushed to such an extent that Pakis will be able to join a nation that is called India. Only at that stage can Pakis become Indians. Right now Paki echandee and identity rests of

1. We are not Indian
2. We are Indian, but Muslims who would have been oppressed by bigoted Hindus
3. We were the rulers of India and Indians would do well to be ruled by us

These are the narratives that have been pushed in Pakistan since partition. I am certain that the minute a Paki acquires some wealth and some food to eat he starts believing in all this - so the only Pakis who can possibly become Indian is the poorest and most screwed up Paki.

This wealthy Paki is the very class of Paki who allied with the USA and depended on the US and now China to survive. Every wealthy Pakistani belongs to this class. They represent Pakistan's strength and Pakistan's identity.

Perhaps the best thing India can do to Pakistan is to let Pakistanis live as a separate country but hinge trade on the development of normal inter state relations like not encouraging crime and terrorism in India. Pakistan is a horrendous monster state - but its survival was greatly aided by the US "acting in its own interest". A big priority in making Pakistan a "normal state" is to force the US by hook or by crook to stop arming Pakistan. Pakistan managed armed forces that were 3-4 times bigger than its national resources would allow solely by bandwagoning with the USA. If I ever write a book again I would like to concentrate on the ways in which Pakistan has been strengthened and supported by its alliance with a USA "acting in US interest".

It does not matter if aid to Pakistan is eaten up by the wealthy and the poor of Pakistan are screwed even more - but teh powerful Paki army and LeT/Jamaat ud Dawa should not have the benefit of the latest arms that makes them cocky. I anticipate that they will enhance nuclear threats if the flow of conventional arms is reduced. But that would be bravado. The Pakistan army has to shrink to 1/3 of its current size. The assorted terrorist groups who depend on the army (which gets US support by a USA "acting in US interests") will fade in strength and influence as they get militarily weaker. Even if the US stops arming Pakistan today - it will be 2021 before Pakistan army really feels any major effect that is difficult to correct without further US arms aid.

If we can pressure the USA to quit arms aid, we will be in a much stronger position to see of the irrational Islamist threat posed by the Paki army and the dysfunctional Paki state. Whether the state remains intact or not is a different issue. I am dead certain that India's rejection of hight ticket offensive weapons from the USA is related to the US arming of Pakistan. The US may retain a veto power on the Pakistani military but will not get a veto power on the Indian military. Better India US ties, with much more trust are possible when the USA stops arming Pakistan ("out of US interest"). I have something to say about that - but in a different thread.

[RajeshA]

Reclaiming Pakistan Territory: Mohajirstan

Lessons from "Peaceful Consolidation of the Indian Subcontinent"

I once explored the possibility of integrating Bangladesh into India and using Bangladeshis as a fulcrum to overturn the raison d'être of Pakistan, and with that overturning Pakistan itself in the "Peaceful Consolidation of the Indian Subcontinent" series of posts!

The obvious weakness of the strategy was that Bangladeshis would not change their Islamic stripes, and may end up destabilizing India, rather than embrace the opportunity of making India stronger together, of subsuming Bangladeshi nationalism within Indian nationhood, and bringing about a modernization of the Muslim outlook in India.

The assumption was being made that the secular nature of Bangladesh, along with its own Bengali cultural pride, a firmly Subcontinental ethnic identification, a well-established middle-class, believing in upward mobility, etc. would triumph the demands of religion.

The problem was: there was no fulcrum to exert pressure on Bangladeshis to behave in a unified India. The golden cage prepared for them would have been insufficient to have kept Bengali Islamism locked up. Also an addition of 145 million Muslims to Indian population may prove extremely destabilizing for the polity and peace in India.

But besides all the other strategic reasons for which an inclusion of Bangladesh in India would have been beneficial, especially in the case of consolidating India's Northeast in view of the Chinese threat; Bangladeshi middle class was to play a pivotal role in the scheme, for example, in providing leadership to the Indian Muslims, who seem to have ghettoized themselves in mind and space, and are hesitant in claiming the leadership of the Muslim World for India.

This leadership is needed not to "lead" the Muslim World, as such, but to extract maximum benefit from the Muslim World, increasing our leverage there, and ultimately increasing India's ability to use that against China in Asia.

As the Muslims in India lost their elite, who moved to Pakistan after Partition, the Ulema took over the reigns and now for all Muslim issues, the polity in India has to approach the Muslim clergy as a middle man, something the clergy then uses to strengthen themselves. What would have been advantageous to Indian mainstream would have been a Muslim middle class and a Muslim Elite in India, which could have become the spokespeople for the wider Muslim community, and in fact led them to modernity and moderation, with whom Indian mainstream could have negotiated. This Muslim Elite and Muslim middle class could have provided the Muslims a bridge to Indian Nationalism, triumphing the religious pull towards Arabia, which the Islamic clergy in India try to encourage. So the other major use of a Muslim Elite and Muslim middle class would have been to provide such leadership to the Muslim masses in India.

Bangladeshi middle classes could have provided such a leadership in the aforesaid scenario. Since that scenario seems defected, it is natural to look for other possibilities.

It seems the Muslim masses of India are still unsure about their identity and loyalty. They live in India, but their elite lives in Karachi, Hyderabad, and Sukkur in Pakistan. The proliferation of cross-border marriages between the Gangetic Muslims in India and those migrated to Pakistan, just shows that the connections have not been severed.

So one could postulate, that there is still a single community striding both the countries, and until this is the case, it would be difficult to expect a singular identification of these Muslims with India and their fidelity to this land only. The connectivity between Indian Muslims and Mohajirs of Pakistan is one of the channels available to Islam to subvert India; Indian Muslims working in the Gulf region, Bangladeshi illegal migration into India and Kashmiri insurgency being the other three. In India's struggle to contain Islamism in India, these channels would have to be brought under control. But irrespective of that, India has still managed to keep a relative harmony among the Indian Muslims.

[RajeshA]

Reclaiming Pakistan Territory: Mohajirstan

The Objective & our Options

India should try to break Pakistan by weaning Mohajirstan away from Pakistan.

As many posters here, including shiv saar, has pointed again and again, USA will not help India in breaking Pakistan, nor would USA help in dismantling Pakistani Army or its anti-Indian affiliates. India has to do this on our own!

This requires that India develops her own game, independent of USA.

There are many vectors from which India can put pressure on Pakistan to break up - Baluchistan, Pushtunistan, PoK, Sindhudesh, Mohajirstan, etc. However all have their downsides.

As shiv saar explained, it is difficult for India to project strength in Baluchistan. The Baluchis themselves may not be capable of getting rid of the Pakjabi yoke, and as India does not share a border with Baluchistan, there is little India can do to help physically as was the case with Bangladesh in 1971! The Pushtuns may in fact be so Islamized and radicalized, that the call for Pushtunistan may not get sufficient traction. Besides with the upcoming China-Iran-Pakistan Axis, India may not get access to Afghanistan, to effect much change on the Pushtunistan issue. The call for a separate Sindhudesh too has died down as we have seen PPP doing well electorally at the federal level.

Besides, USA may not support the unraveling of Pakistan, either militarily or diplomatically. That is the crux of the issue. Without US support, India would find it extremely dangerous to go head to head with a nuclear power, as trying to break it, would most probably cross Pakistan's red-lines. In Baluchistan, Pushtunistan and Sindh, India wields much too little influence to really be able to do something, as per my assessment.

The only realistic place where we can do something is by placing our lever just under Karachi, and using Mohajirs as a fulcrum. I say realistic place, because it is only over the Mohajirs that India can really hope to assert an influence.

The Mohajirs still have cross-border relationships. They are still allowed to travel to India to visit their relatives.

[RajeshA]

Reclaiming Pakistan Territory: Mohajirstan

The Evolution of Mohajirs

In a previous post, we see, that there has been some reorientation of the Mohajir identity - away from their focus on defining themselves over their religion and subsuming their interests to religious considerations to an identity devoted more to the protection of the rights of their ethnicity. MQM is primarily an ethnic outfit, representing the interests of the migrants from India.

Karachi, Hyderabad were once Mohajir fortresses, but Karachi has been a magnet to migrants from all over Pakistan being attracted to Pakistan's commercial hub, and this has put Mohajirs under stress. They are afraid of losing all their influence in Pakistan's politics and are willing to shed blood for preserving the little influence they have left in Pakistan, but in the cut-throat politics of Pakistan, they are finding it difficult to hold their own, when they are put under stress from all quarters - Sindhis, Pushtun migrants into Karachi, and the Pakjabi dominated Army. The Mohajirs are steadily losing influence in Pakistan to Pakistan's native ethnic groups, as well as to the religious parties.

The situation can be studied from this article, "Karachi, Beirut of South Asia" by B. Raman from 9th July, 2011.

Perhaps we need to remember that Mohajirs were mostly well-educated, and better off Indian Muslims who migrated to Pakistan. They were the ones who took over many of the jobs in Pakistan, and also established their own businesses in Karachi. So from among the Pakistanis, the education levels of the Mohajirs should be much higher, especially among the Mohajir youth, as they are mostly urban-based and offspring of probably educated parents.

Today this youth looks towards India and sees a rapidly rising and developing India. They look at Pakistan and they see a morass of religious warfare with the economy tanking. Today this youth read the newspapers and they see praise being heaped on India and Pakistan being dished scorn after scorn! Today this youth is networked using social media and Internet and mobiles, but even on this media they can only share with each other the stories of approaching darkness.

If one looks at the Mohajirs, one would notice, that they are again trying to identify themselves with India, either when they say, that they are "Pakistanis of Indian descent", or as I have heard some Pakistanis say upon me asking them from where they come, "What is in the place, both countries belong together", and stuff like that.

Till date, I have felt, "how dare a Pakistani try to pass himself off as an Indian" or say we are the same, etc., but these are words one hears from Mohajirs often. Within Pakistan and abroad, many already feel they are Indian, but when confronted with an Indian (not the WKK types), suddenly they don't know anymore how to present themselves.

IMO, a sort of regret has already set in among the Mohajirs, for what they did regarding Partition. It is not necessarily anything to do with their treatment of Sindhi Hindus, but the fact, that they bet on the wrong horse. The shame comes from their need to appropriate the Indian identity, after having caused India's Partition. From my interaction with some from "Pakistani liberal fora", I've noticed that Mohajir youth feel comfortable in interacting with WKKs, and even the Congress nationalists. In many, gone is the swagger of being something better. But they still have a huge problem relating to those who identify themselves as Hindu Nationalists, but this is understandable as they have been all brain-washed to fear the Hindu, unable to understand him, a situation helped by India's pseudo-secularists themselves.

Given another five years, the Mohajir upward mobile youth would be begging to be accepted by India.

So as the Mohajirs are strangled in the by-lanes of Karachi, as they lose their power in Islamabad, as the woes of Pakistan increase, the Mohajirs would want to jump ship, and they will be looking towards India.