Managing Pakistan's failure

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 28 Nov 2011 23:16

ramana wrote:Looks like massa is adopting Sir Charles Napiers' slogan "Peccavi!"

"I have sinned(Sind)!"

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Nov 2011 02:21

B Raman at CLAWS site:

Pakistan: Dangers of a Subaltern's Coup

Something like what happened after Abortabad leading to PNS Mehran attack.
In retrospect the TSPA allowed the Mehran attack to let off steam and demand more baksheesh.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 Dec 2011 21:30

X-post...

Philip wrote:Iran would much prefer the Iraqi card in its hand thatn the Baluchi.Shiite dominated Iraq,with the famous of Shiite holy shrines located in it,plus its oil wealth is a far greater prize than Baluchistan.The best bet would be an independent Baluchistan,with India running the Gwadar port! This is the deal we must make with the Baluchis if we really want to go the whole hog.Karachi is too troublesome,the ethnic groups there are cut-throats of the worst order,and can be bottled up at will if need be.Without an outlet like Karachi for the Pakjabis,who will forever be at the mercy of the Mohajirs,a hiving off of Baluchistan,while the Af-Pak/FATA zones of turmoil go their tribal way,will be difficult.The dismemberment of Pak must be skillfully done ,a slice here ,a slice there.Baluchistan,FATA and POK are the extremities which can be lopped off without fatal damage to the animal,the rump of which is the Punjab.They in any case care little for the Kashmiris,mereley paying lip service to them and bomb the Baluchis and now the Af-Pak border.It would be Bangladesh all over again with more ethnic groups instead of just one "defecting".

With Gwadar under our control or available to us as a naval base similar to what is being offered to us by Vietnam,we will be able to both outflank Karachi as well as having a weather eye at the approaches to the Gulf.Pak cut to size thus would then become a more manageable and servile state that would be pleading for assistance to survive any-which-way.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 Dec 2011 23:03

If TTP is serious they have to start issuing their own currency different from the Pak rupee.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 10 Dec 2011 18:39

Sindhi Separatism

Originally posted by krishna in TIRP Thread

Published on Dec 09, 2011
By Manas Dasgupta
Pakistan business team invites Modi to Karachi: The Hindu

A trade delegation from Pakistan on Friday invited Chief Minister Narendra Modi to visit Karachi and address businessmen there through videoconferencing on the “Gujarat model of development.”

Pointing out that Gujarat always had close relations with the Sindh province of Pakistan, the delegation held discussions on how to further strengthen the bond and co-operation between the two regions. It requested Mr. Modi to use his good offices with the Centre to start a direct flight between Ahmedabad and Karachi.

The visitors presented him a replica of the Karachi Chamber of Commerce building, the foundation stone for which was laid by Mahatma Gandhi in 1934.

I consider this a significant perspective and allows us to relate to still another Model of Partition for Current Pakistan - the Scotland Model. In fact it would be ironic that both father (UK) and son (Pakistan) were to follow the same model of breakup.

In order to justify a divorce, the Scottish National Party is hinting at realigning Scotland with the countries of the North, the Scandinavian countries - Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Iceland. The Scottish have had a very close embrace with the English, at least since 1707 when they entered into a union. In fact they have been so close, that the outside world has almost forgotten that the Scottish have their own national spirit, only to be reminded every once in a while in Football competitions. The Scots and the English together built the British Empire even as it was mostly the English who had the last word on its running. So for the Scots to mark for themselves a separate path than the English is difficult. The English on the other hand have been able to put their stamp on the whole kingdom, so much so that they have forgotten that they are only a part of the Kingdom and not the whole. In UK there is one national Parliament with Scotland having its own Parliament and Wales having its own 'National Assembly'. England has no Parliament or Assembly of its own! This is significant. The English do not need their own Parliament because they feel themselves as the dominant 'nation' within the Union and consider the UK Parliament as its spokesman.

In Pakistan too one would see some similarities - there was the One Unit formula in place between November 22, 1955 till December 16, 1971. There was also the case of one language being forced upon the populace despite resistance from many ethno-linguistic groups. What we see today is that Pakistani Punjabis consider themselves first and foremost Pakistanis and identify themselves with Pakistan itself, having adopted Urdu as their language. They have subsumed their ethnic identity within the Pakistani identity. The other regions have however not done so. Sindhis still hold on to their Sindhi identity as do Baloch and many Pushtuns. The Pakistani Punjabis hold the reins of power in their hand - the Army, the Capital City, the economy!

Now just as the Scots are trying to feel their way towards Scandinavian countries in order to underscore their separate identity from the English, same way it is possible for Sindh to try to reintegrate with other powers in the region with whom they had close contact - in this case Gujarat.

As Gujarat and Sindh get closer, they renew their old relationships, it will be easier for Sindh to start seeing itself as a place which has other alternatives for its national survival, for its destiny. It does not need to keep on holding on to the union with Pakistani Punjab.

It is good that Sindh is revitalizing its relationship with Gujarat and not the whole of India. India is far too abstract and big. India is Delhi with which perhaps Punjab can identify itself better. Sindh can identify itself better with Gujarat.

Gujarat is also the fastest growing state in India, so it is obvious that Sindhis too would like to tap into the Gujarat brand and hope for investments from there.

Recently Pakistan turned down Mittals offer of investment in the Thar Coal Mines in Sindh. Who is the loser? Sindh of course. So just as England controls the North Sea Oil and Gas Revenues, Pakjabi establishment holds the veto over revenues to Sindh from Sindh's energy reserves. Scotland has learning that it may not be such a bad idea after all should it choose to go its separate way, as it would financially be better off. Sindh too can start thinking on these lines. Even if Pakistan were to allow some company to mine the Thar Coal Reserves, the revenue would still be flowing to Punjab and not going to Sindh.

Gujarat should proceed to integrate Sindh more closely with the Gujarat economy, and encourage Sindh to dump Pakjab and opt for a separate path with closer integration with Gujarat and Rajasthan.

Once the Scots decide to become independent, it would offer Sindh with other models and arguments for choosing a separate path!

If Lakshmi Mittal is really interested in tapping the Thar Coal Reserves, perhaps he should also encourage the Scots to go for independence in his country of domicile - UK!

Airavat · Post by **Airavat** » 11 Dec 2011 08:21

Sindh is Punjab's brother and Punjab is Sindh's brother: Nawaz Sharif

Sporting a Sindhi ajrak and topi, the PML-N chief was addressing a rally in Larkana, where he vowed that he would keep coming to help his “Sindhi brothers” as he had done in the past.

“Pakistan’s condition would have been better if the government worked according to the charter of democracy which was signed between Bhutto and me,” said Sharif. “She was my sister, and when we come into power the first thing we will do is to arrest her murderers,” he added.

Unfortunately for Sharif, standing between the Sindhi and Pakjabi are two more brothers (from another mother?): the Muhajir and the Seraiki.

MQM has caused wave of awakening across country: Altaf

Hussain said that the revolution is usually construed as a positive change. He said his party wants to change the oppressive feudal system with a healthy and vibrant system.

He said that the MQM had been demanding the creation of a Seraiki province from the very beginning. It had always been the part of his party's manifesto, he added.

parsuram · Post by **parsuram** » 20 Dec 2011 11:20

I am glad to see this thread. It is needed because the faliure of the paki is a matter of time. I hope to see it in my lifetime. Any way, it is a matter to which I have given considerable thought, and have come up with a (tentative) comprehensive plan, and instead of starting a new thread (these forums may be threaded to death), I am posting my thoughts here. I hope it is not too long a post to fit on here. In deference to the ancient vedic ritual of Ashvamedh yagya, and based on the reality that will await us across the western Radcliff line, I have named it Operation Varahmedh.

Operation Varahmedh

As we draw nearer and closer to the blessed day that the paki will crumble(by which ever scenario), we better hope that the Indian Republic has a clear plan, both military and political, each with both strategic depth and tactical versatility, which will come into play without too much delay, leading to achievement of the following goals:

1. Total Control and Security of External Borders

Both internal (with India) and external (with other States) borders of following former paki regions need to be addressed, keeping in mind the special needs and circumstances attached to each of these regions. This will be the first step Indian armed forces will have to take as they move to take back control of substantially traditional western Indian lands separated by the British prior to granting India independence. De facto international borders with Iran, Afghanistan and China will be secured ahead of ensuring continued security of the former borders with India, and ahead of securing internal administrative divisions within paki lands.

a. Paki Occupied Kashmir (POK). This will include the two illegally created parts of the former Princely state of Jammu and Kashmir by division of the illegally occupied parts of that State into so called “Azad Jammu and Kashmir” and “Northern Areas”. Borders of POK with India, NWFP, and China will be secured under a separate set of guidelines.
b. Pakjab (Western part of Punjab and the former Princely State of Bahawalpur). Borders of Pakjab with India, with Balochistan, and with NWFP (North West Frontier Province) will be secured under their own separate guidelines; internal borders of Pakjab with Sindh, and within Pakjab along the demarcation proposed for trisection of this province will be governed under their own rules.
c. Sindh. The border of this province with India and with the proposed city state of Karachi will be administered distinct from the rules for demarcation lines separating Sindh from Pakjab as well as Balochistan.
d. Balochistan. International rules will govern the borders of this province with Iran and Afghanistan, and different rules will apply to its borders with NWFP as well as Pakjab.
e. NWFP. The borders of this violent province that is drowning in anarchy for decades will need to be secured at the highest possible level, with distinct rules governing the borders with Pakjab, J&K, and Afghanistan. As part of this plan, it is proposed that NWFP be governed jointly with Afghanistan, initially under a joint command with the Indian and Afghan Armies to establish a uniform Military Administration in all of NWFP. This administration will coordinate fully with UN/NATO/US or other internationally sanctioned forces, if such forces are still present in Afghanistan and operating under a UN mandated anti-terrorism program, in rooting out Terrorists in NWFP.
2. Establish Military Administration (Marshal Law) through all territories secured by the Indian Army [except NWFP, where there is joint control of the province with the Afghan Army]. Under Marshal Law, the following steps will be taken in each Administrative Unit or Province:
a. Collection of all elements of the former Paki armed forces, under a single unified command,
b. Signing of a Standardized Surrender Document by the Paki Commander, and disarming of the paki armed forces.
c. Recruitment of a Para-military Police force from the former paki armed forces, their affiliation, command and control under the Indian Army clearly defined, for the purpose of establishing law and order among the pakis. The local police forces will function, and be controlled through this Para military force, while the local police are also being trained by Indian trainers.
d. Land administration and reform: This will be the first priority of the Marshal Law administrators, as Land is a large part of the civil conflict in the population, and it has been grossly mismanaged by successive paki administrations taking advantage of the feudal structure of land ownership. Land reform and redistribution has to be swift and equitable, and best done under a strong administration. Administrators from India will be brought in to equitably settle and redistribute rural and urban land holdings; Hindus and Sikhs from India will be allowed to enter into land acquisition at fair market prices.
e. Currency conversion and banking reform: The economy will ground to a halt with the paki’s demise, but very soon, a black economy will emerge unless the administration does not step up and take the lead to kick start a legitimate economy. This will require converting the paki to Indian currency, eliminating the large amounts of black paki money in circulation, standardizing banking practices to Indian standards, and allowing Indian citizens to enter the economy in a graduated rate in all sectors.

3. Developing a Constitutional Structure for Governance of all former paki territories. A constitutional blue print should have been developed even by now. This requires extensive discussion and debate among all stakeholders in Bharat. Based on prior discussions and considerations, a constitutional structure should already be developed, ready to be installed and instituted in each of the paki administrative units. At the very minimum, its introduction will follow these steps, and it will consist of these elements:
a. Balochistan: Consultation with all the tribal groups, particularly those active in the BLA, to determine their sentiments regarding transition to democratic governance. The province should have a bicameral legislature, with a strong upper house which provides representation to all the Baloch tribes, and a lower house elected by universal adult franchise, the executive being elected from either the lower house or a combination of the lower and upper house leadership. A Governor shall be appointed by New Delhi with consultation and agreement with the leadership of both legislative houses. A Provincial Reserve Bank will be established, and operate under the direction of the Reserve Bank of India. Balochistan natives shall have dual Baloch/Indian citizenship. Indian citizenship will be available to all Baloch citizens on demand. Baloch citizens will be required to carry Indian travel documents when traveling abroad, regardless of their citizenship status, and the Articles pertaining to fundamental rights in the Indian Constitution shall apply throughout Balochistan to all its citizens. While Balochistan may print its own currency, Indian currency shall always be legal tender in Balochistan, and Baloch currency must always be replaced by Indian currency on demand. The mineral and natural resources of Balochistan shall be governed under the States List. Foreign relations, including trade and commerce, shall be governed by the Central Government. Communication and transportation throughout Balochistan shall be under the Joint List, but be governed by the Central government. Additional matters relating to constitutional structure of Baloch Government will be established by deliberations of a joint task force consisting of Indian and Baloch representatives.

b. Sindh: In Sindh also, Constitutional Governance will be established in consultation with the major groups fighting the paki establishment, specifically the JS and the MQM. A major factor in Sindh is that, as a consequence of creation of the paki state, Sindhis have become a minority in their own province. At the same time, the large influx of non Sindhis from other disparate regions has made Karachi a very large, non Sindhi metropolitan area. In order to maintain the Sindhi character Sindh, and to dissipate numerous ethnic tensions, it will be best to establish Karachi as a separate city state. Borders of Karachi separating it from Sindh will be established by consultation between the two main communities affected by this move. Once established, Karachi City will become a State within the Indian Union, and governed by the Indian Constitution. The province of Sindh, on the other hand, will be structured and governed more or less in the manner Balochistan will be federated within Bharat.

c. Pakjab: This is the heart of the paki state, and this is what will give the most trouble to India when it comes to reintegrating it into India. That and the sheer size and population of this province dictate that it should be divided into smaller portions. After all, four States in India were formed from the division of East Punjab: Punjab, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh and Delhi. I propose that Pakjab should be divided into three new provinces, federated with India. The division should be more or less along the lines of the Divisions in pre-partition Punjab. To the east, there will be the province of Lavapur (Mussalman name Lahore), to the North, Takshashila (Taxila), and to the south, Kashtpur (later called Mulasthan after the Sun temple located there, and the musalmans named it Multan). These three new administrative divisions of west Punjab will have their administrative centers in the three cities of Lavapur, Takshashila,and Mulasthan. Each of these cities date back to the period of the epics, with Takshashila founded by Taksha, the grand son of Sri Ramachandra’s brother, Sri Bharat. Lavapura was founded by Sri Ramchandra’s son Lava, and Kashtpur (later named Mulasthan) was founded by descendants of sage Kashyp, rulers of the Katoch dynasty, who participated in the Mahabharta war. [All reference material on these cities is from Wikipedia]. Separate administration will be installed in these three new provinces immediately following occupation, with separate military administrators being appointed for the three regions in the three cities for which they will be named. Arguably, Multan should be named Mulasthan, as the name is similar to “Multan” though the Sun temple for which it was named is probably long gone, and will have to be rebuilt. Kashtpur, named for sage Kashyp does, however, pre date Mulasthan. The movement and settlement of Hindus, Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists into the former Pakjab province should be an extremely regulated process. Initial return of these communities should be centered on their respective prominent religious places of worship, pilgrimage and learning. There are a large number of such centers in present Pakjab, dating back to Treta yug, and it will take a large effort on part of the non Mussalman communities to recover and rehabilitate those places where they are, again, functioning according to their traditions. Thus, the large province of Punjab of colonial times will end up as seven separate administrative States in India – Takshasila, Kashtpur, Lavapur, Punjab, Himachal Pradesh, Haryana, and Delhi.

d. Paki Occupied Kashmir: The part of the state of Jammu and Kashmir under occupation by the pakis was divided by them into “Azad Jammu and Kashmir” and “Northern Areas”. This was an artificial, illegal (by UN rules) division, and India will now, that it finally has the entire State of Jammu and Kashmir under its jurisdiction, it will be organized and reintegrated with the rest of the state, prior to any reorganization of this State. However, prior to reintegration of these territories in to J&K, it will be quarantined under Marshal Law, similar to the rest of paki lands. During the transition, these areas will be brought up to speed with all current laws and regulations of the State of J&K. Any Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh families that were removed from these areas will be allowed the opportunity to return and re-settle. Land will be allotted to those families, and Punjabi families who moved into POK to take evacuee properties may be relocated to other areas, or back to Pakjab if necessary. This policy will be limited to POK as it is under UN resolutions governing maintaining the ethno-religious composition of these territories.

I suggest that the same policy be instituted in the State of J&K, so that Hindus who have been ejected from that State are relocated in that state, with their properties returned to them. This time should be used to advantage to right wrongs that have been done on both sides of the former LOC in J&K. The military administration in former POK should seal its borders with PRC and also with NWFP.
e. NWFP Administration: The Frontier region with Afghanistan has been in turmoil for decades. There are too many intractable problems here for India alone to handle. The most important objective is to bring all conflicts to end. Surrender and disarming of the paki army and jehadi groups should already be a big calming influence on the province, other than for the most rabid jehadis. However, in order to work out a realistic long term settlement for the area it will be essential that India work with Afghanistan, giving up the sanctity of the Durand Line. The first step will be to establish the rule of law. Existing law enforcement officers and additional men recruited from the military will be more than adequate to fill this need. Beyond direct contact with India and Afghanistan, the administrators and residents of this area will have no need to be in contact with any other nation; were any such need arise, it will be met through either Afghanistan or India. A Governor will be appointed for this province, for a term of two years, by rotation from India and Afghanistan, starting with an Afghan Governor. NWFP will, therefore, be an Autonomous Region between India and Afghanistan, with access to it regulated by India and Afghanistan. Its residents shall be issued ID and Resident documents with which they will be free to travel in India and Afghanistan. For travel outside these two countries, they may apply for, and obtain a passport from either India or Afghanistan. A constitution for this area for self government, and its geographical borders, will be developed jointly by India and Afghanistan.

f. Movement of Indian Citizens into Former paki Territories: With the long history of Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains living in the former paki lands, there are literally millions of Indian citizens wanting to move to those lands, and this can lead to chaos and anarchy if policies and guide lines are not in place before Indians face such a situation. Therefore, as with other matters addressed in a cursory manner, above, this subject too is considered in a short form, pointing out the issues involved. There are two areas where movement of Indians will be a relatively simple matter – Karachi and POK. That is because, in Karachi, that city State is being added directly to the Indian Union as a State, which places it in a position of being equivalent to any other Indian State. Of course it is possible to start out by working with Karachi as a Union Territory, but on balance, it is better to have it with the rights and responsibilities of a State of the Union. In that capacity, it will be rapidly integrated into the Indian main stream, and begin to contribute to the Indian economy in the quickest possible time. Movement to Karachi will be open to all Indian citizens, and Karachi residents will be the first to begin acquiring Indian citizenship. This latter process will be slow and methodical, and procedures for this will be templates which will come into play later when we have to deal with the bulk of the pakis. In POK, there is a relevant UN resolution which will allow for resettlement of non muslim and non Kashmiri families to move back into POK, and consequently, for removal of Pakjabi families (mostly from Mirpur, who were displaced from land inundated by the dam on the Jehlum) back to one of the three new Punjabi provinces. Those UN requirements also apply to the Hindu Pandit families displaced from the Jehlum valley in Kashmir, and therefore those families will be returned to their homes, whether or not it involves removal of muslim families who have occupied their properties illegally. Other than these two cases (Karachi and POK), return of Indian citizens to former paki lands will have to await policies and procedures that are developed for the potentially large scale movement of peoples between India and the former paki State.

g. Treatment of paki Citizens Overseas on Limited Visas: The fall of the paki State is likely to occur rapidly, and it will catch a lot of its citizens overseas in various countries on short term visas. It will be best for India to address the plight of those pakis because it will send a positive signal to all those countries who will look upon India’s occupation and its plans for annexing the paki State with concern, if not total hostility. If India efficiently handles the paki citizens in those countries such that those pakis do not become a burden to those countries’ social structure and services, they will be glad to support India’s actions. Therefore, plans and procedures should be in place ahead of these anticipated events to deal with these pakis. As far as possible, these pakis should be returned to their domicile in the paki lands, at Indian expense if necessary. If these people choose to apply for permanent visas in the countries they are in, those countries should be told that India was willing to accept these people back, and there is no reason for them to be applying for permanent or refugee visas, or apply for residence based on any discrimination or persecution. Ultimately, these people are a political football, and as long as they are not used by assorted Countries to score cheap goals against India, then the purpose of these preparations will have been full filled.

4. Long term Planning and Execution of Total Re-Integration

This is just a short document which covers the eventuality of re integrating paki lands and people back into India, and looks at the situation from a bird’s eye view. This just provides talking points, a starting point for discussions, and I hope it will lead to a substantial document which will cover all eventualities, and deals with the situations which arise in a thoroughly constructive manner. Even in this document, I do not spell out the details of what would constitute Marshal Law, for instance. In other instances, I have only thrown out some ideas, such as how to deal with NWFP, or with the transient administration in Sindh, et cetera. There is a lot of meat to put on these bare bones of ideas. My intention in putting this document together is to promote debate and serious consideration of all factors which will need to be addressed when the eventuality of paki reintegration into India will need to be tackled on the ground, with real problems of real people, in real time. It is therefore very important that a detailed plan, which addresses as many eventualities as possible, and which, at least foresees other eventualities which it does not address, be fashioned in plenty of time. Thereafter, the plans should be actualized to the extent of bringing together a group of people who will familiarize themselves with portions of the plan in intimate detail. These people, though their day jobs may involve far more productive endeavors, will have, in addition, the responsibility to understand and disseminate as needed the particulars of the portion of these plans which are entrusted to them. In this manner, people will be ready to hit the ground running at such time as they will be needed to execute and utilize these plans for the benefit of their country.

Vande Mataram
Jai Hind

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 20 Dec 2011 20:01

@parasuram There is a lot here to digest let alone comment. I feel generally that we need to take into account civilizational arcs of Bharat, TSP and other players. Overall, my gut tells me TSP's catastrophic failure would be a massive event beyond realistic gaming let alone managing in real life.

Hopefully, more later.

parsuram · Post by **parsuram** » 21 Dec 2011 04:51

KLNMurthy wrote:@parasuram There is a lot here to digest let alone comment. I feel generally that we need to take into account civilizational arcs of Bharat, TSP and other players. Overall, my gut tells me TSP's catastrophic failure would be a massive event beyond realistic gaming let alone managing in real life.

Hopefully, more later.

Murthy Ji: Thank you for your input. Yes, when it happens, the collapse of this artificial behomuth of an atrocity will cause multiple ripples, large and small. But it will be managable with sufficient pre planning and a clear idea of where it is that we want to end up. Numerous control buttons will be available with which to coax the population to get in line and behave in a manner conducive to reorganization and reform on the fast track. Among these are the supply of essential goods and services. We will have to look at the entire gamut of paki instituted social structures. The best way is to contain and compartmentallize the population, and that is what I have focused these initial proposals on this task of containing and segregation into compartments of managable size. When the rotting structures of the paki state fall, as you say, it will be a huge catastrophic event which will draw the world's attention immediately. India will be in a position to react almost instantly, and will have all the necessary rationale to tell the world community that it is going to go in and manage, diffuse, disarm, etc the entire disaster area. It is possible that the UN may want some other countries involved in the effort, but India should resist that, just because the end point that India needs to get to with the failed paki state are quite different from what other powers will want - possibly a resurrection of the paki state - some thing that India cannot afford to happen, as it will be repeating the nightmare of the last 70 odd years. So, it is best that India be fully prepared for this eventuality, and act on it assertively befor the rest of the world gets its fingers into the mess. As I said, the desired endpoint is what will determine how we act once the land and the people are securely contained. This is where there can be a lot of acrimoneous dissention in India. My suggestion is that a non governmental organization should go ahead and prepare for the event down to the finer details, and then step in and ask for the govt.'s backing, which they will have no choice but to give. That is how we will get to addressing the religion problem, of conversions out of islam to indic faiths, etc (I have written a bit on it here on BRF, with very acrimoneous results. You may read of it on the other thread). More later.

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 21 Dec 2011 07:10

Parsuram!! That's an excellent write up. All we need is good leadership at each level (Top politicians down to the Havaldar in charge of 4 sepoys)

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 21 Dec 2011 08:10

To manage Poak Collapse , india will require quite a bit resources which it cant afford right now. The final unravelling is not in our interest in near future but in mid and long term. beside resources , we must wait for old generation leadership to go their natural way . A nationalistic government in Delhi with actual spare resources will be able to manage and cure the Poakroge using all the bitter pills.

parsuram · Post by **parsuram** » 21 Dec 2011 09:44

Jhujar wrote:To manage Poak Collapse , india will require quite a bit resources which it cant afford right now. The final unravelling is not in our interest in near future but in mid and long term. beside resources , we must wait for old generation leadership to go their natural way . A nationalistic government in Delhi with actual spare resources will be able to manage and cure the Poakroge using all the bitter pills.

Jhujar ji; Unfortunately, it is not in India's control as to when the paki collapses. It can happen in the next six months, six years, twenty+ years - it is one of many eventualities India faces. Question is, can (yes, it can) prepare for the eventuality? It makes eminent sense to develop detailed plans, and keep them updated as conditions change. This does not require a huge amont of resources. Just Vision - (Skrt vid - from which we get wisdom, vidya, and all those words that represent the good things we should have). Vision, and dedication of people who will spend the time (preferably for which they will be paid as professionals), and something that India has in abundance - talent, intelligence (of both kinds, internal and external to the brain) and organizational abilities (also available in abundance in India). I expect that, given the investment in 1-2 dozen people, with a budget of less than what one of the Ambani brothers earns in one day, we could have as detailed a plan as is humanly possible, over a period of 6-12 months.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 21 Dec 2011 09:55

Parsuram Ji,
Unkil might push the timetable and i am afraid we wont be ready soon, both mentally and financially. personally , i feel it will be much better if we control the time line and remove the poison ivy from the roots that it is permanentally removed from the holy land South Asia. By the trime we are done , not a dog should be able to bark without receiving the arrows from Indian Eklabyas and Only few chosen Paki should be allowed to open their mouth for receiving pavitre Indian parsadam.

Samudragupta · Post by **Samudragupta** » 21 Dec 2011 14:11

Will this help????

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opi ... nt=2278388

M. CHRIS MASON
Solve the Pakistan problem by redrawing the map
Relations between the United States and Pakistan have reached an all-time low. The Khyber Pass is closed to NATO cargo, U.S. personnel were evicted from Shamsi airbase and Pakistani observers have been recalled from joint co-operation centres.

Much more importantly, senior officials in Washington now know that Pakistan has been playing them false since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and understand that Pakistan was sheltering Osama bin Laden a few hundred yards from its version of West Point. The recent shelling of Afghan troops inside Afghanistan by the Pakistani army, and the NATO counterstrike, cleared in error by Pakistan, has further embarrassed the Pakistani military.
It should be obvious by now that Pakistan has no intention of doing what the United States has wanted for the past decade. The combination of wishful thinking, admiration for the emperor’s new clothes and $10-billion in payments to the Pakistani military have accomplished nothing. Admiral Michael Mullen was not wrong when he testified recently that the terrorist Haqqani network is operating as an arm of the Pakistani army. He might have added that the Taliban is the Pakistani army’s expeditionary force in Afghanistan. Pakistan shelters, funds, trains, supplies and advises the Taliban. The simple fact is that Pakistan is the world’s No. 1 state supporter of terrorism.

Haven't seen something like this apart from in BRF...

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 21 Dec 2011 15:39

Actually. pakistan is no 4 sponsor of world terrorism.

No 1 = UK
No 2 = US
No 3 = KSA
No 4 = pak
No 5 = Iran
No 6 = China

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 21 Dec 2011 18:07

What is Terrorism?
Where innocent people (workers, mothers, children) get terrorized for their lives by physical violence.

So therefore 99% of terrorism in this world is de-facto "Islamic Terrorism"

parsuram · Post by **parsuram** » 21 Dec 2011 21:48

Jhujar wrote:Parsuram Ji,
Unkil might push the timetable and i am afraid we wont be ready soon, both mentally and financially. personally , i feel it will be much better if we control the time line and remove the poison ivy from the roots that it is permanentally removed from the holy land South Asia. By the trime we are done , not a dog should be able to bark without receiving the arrows from Indian Eklabyas and Only few chosen Paki should be allowed to open their mouth for receiving pavitre Indian parsadam.

Jhujar Ji:
I understand your concerns. International relations are in flux at all times, and all Nation States are pursuing their own interest at all times in that flux of events. The major powers, such as the US, China, Russia, etc. are particularly actice, because they have many more interests and concerns. As does Bharat, which is now atleast a medium leval regional power. So, regardless of US actions, India should act to further its own. With Balochistan, India can certainly establish contact with the main individuals who are in leadership positions among the Baloch. After that, a structured dialog can be initiated with the Baloch leadership to work towards Balochistan joining India in a federated association under it will take to come to an agreement. conditions that are acceptable to both sides. All this can be initiated today, and pursued for the weeks and months it will take to come to an agreement. This all can be done with very modest resources, covertly. After that, it is a matter of time and opportunity when the agreement can be actualized. This is just an example of what kind of planning that can be done now, and kept current as circumstances change

parsuram · Post by **parsuram** » 23 Dec 2011 09:23

What ever options are considered in a paki breakdown, nof them should involve giving away 100% jurisdiction to any foreign entity or to independence. These are Indian land paid for in Indian blood over and over. Does not matter under which Administration. at the very least. The bolan and khyber must be keept under Indian control. History. History. History.

Bharath.Subramanyam · Post by **Bharath.Subramanyam** » 27 Dec 2011 11:04

Was watching another awesome video of Edward Luttwak (2007 video, discussing Iraq war, strategy etc):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vz1BpRf3Lc

Few points:

1. Analytical mathematical economics and PhD on Roman Empire.

2. Why explaining strategy is very difficult.

3. Middle East is not that important. US should become Non-oil dependent even if oil is given free. He says non-oil GDP of
Middle East is less than Spain. So no need for a huge interest in ME by US.

4. He feels that the intervention by Western powers is due to extra power they got because of money surplus & military surplus.

5. Some conterversial point : He says democracies can't fight insurgencies, only empires can. He says that empires were able to fight insurgencies or occupy other countries because they out terrorize the terrorists/insurgents.

6. US tolerance level for casulties have gone done. Air power is not enough for any fighting insurgencies. Beautifully says that both anti-war liberals don't study war & the conservatives can't think straight.

7. He feels that China (in general) will not be occupying other countries by military means but demographically.

8. Another most important point: Obstructive religion can break any good intented interference. Gives the French interference in Spain (Napolean) and the interference by Italian Liberals in Southern Italian Fedual society. In an another video where he discusses the book ' The Grand Strategy of the Byzantine Empire', he made a very incisive point, i.e. mullah rule in Iran is making it the first post-islamic society in the world.

I think India should create a situation where all four parts of Pakistan are fighting each other, but we should not intervene militarily & occupy. Finally TTP/mullahs will come to power. What TSP needs is more islam and I think after some 15-20 years of rule by Mullahs, TTP etc, it will become a post-Islamic society. Once they are post islamic, we should military intervene to finish to all mullahs and any trace of semitic ideologies/religions. In the meantime, may be the only thing India needs to do is to get all the remaining Hindus & Christians out of Pakistan. In medical field, sometimes they let the problem to become more serious before they do surgery/operate. I think the same is needed in Pakistan. They need more Islam.

But the same strategy is not for semitic ideologies & its adherents inside the boundries of present day Indian Republic.

member_19686 · Post by **member_19686** » 27 Dec 2011 11:43

Ya that's just what we need, more ROL followers in India. Better study history.

Prominent Xtian leaders of Punjab cast in their lot for Pakistan.

Hindus and Sikhs opposed Pakistan but were thrown to the wolves by Gandhi and Nehru.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 27 Dec 2011 13:54

Dealing with Pakistani Terror

X-Posting from TIRP Thread

A_Gupta wrote:RajeshA, suppose one replied to a war of a thousand cuts with a decapitation - would the number of punches matter?

Number of punches are counted by the victim only if he intends

"Number of Punches" brings in a lot of political maths. Let's say that we do believe in the principle of "sau sunaar ki to ek lauhar ki" (Single hit by a blacksmith is equivalent to a hundred hits by a goldsmith)! How does that function in reality?

There is a lobby in India which does not want war between India and Pakistan, be it because of concerns relating to business environment, or relating to inter-communal relations inside India, or relating to some personal interests, or genuine fear of war and its toll on human life, or ideological reasons, etc.

There can be a lobby which holds an opposite view. These would be the Indian nationalists who would opt for a retaliation for the terror acts. Then there can be politicians, who could genuinely benefit from anti-Pakistani mood in India. Thirdly it is the military-industrial complex of a country which is eager to have war. For some reason or another, I don't see Indian politicians trying to milk a post-terror anti-Pakistan mood in India to make political hay. It is as if the anesthesia is strong enough for Indians to not feel too much discomfort even if India's teeth are broken through repeated punching. So politicians don't make much of an issue out of it. Neither does India have an entrenched MIC. It is all public sector. As far as Indian nationalists are concerned the Internet offers some respite and one can vent out one's frustration and anger, without much changing the status quo.

Under such circumstances, the 'Peace Lobby' is far stronger, and can ultimately fashion India's response.

Now we come to the number game, and some questions arise!

How many terror acts from Pakistan are needed before the Lauhar goes and gets his hammer?
Who would count Pakistan's terror acts?
So even as Pakistan adds to its list of terror acts against India, wouldn't the 'Peace Lobby' try to use a rubber at the other end, and start wiping off those terror acts from Indian public's memory,
1. By overemphasizing how the city and community is getting back on its feet
2. By directing the anger inwards towards the failure of own intelligence and security forces in the various marches, rather than at the perpetrator.
3. By keeping the survivors and families of the victims as faceless
4. By not commemorating the anniversaries
  1. through TV programs on the terror act
  2. by revisiting the survivors and the families of victims and their anguish
  3. by not making it an issue of how the government has delivered on justice for some terror act
  4. by not having country-wide 2 minute silence
  5. by not making the history of terror against the country a part of the education curriculum
  6. by instead bringing out "Aman ki Asha" campaigns instead
Many would dispute that some terror acts were even from Pakistan, and hence cannot be 'counted'.

The system is hardwired not to respond to the many acts of terror against the country. There is no guarantee that at the end there would be an Indian response. So even if there are a thousand or two thousand cuts, it will never add to a sufficient number to declare war against Pakistan or to do a decapitation. It is not as if a new terror attack adds to a preexisting anger among us. The old anger has been sufficiently cooled in the meantime before the next terror attack takes place.

Secondly 'decapitation' sounds good only in theory. Jihadism is a multi-headed monster. It is somewhat incredulous to think that a single reprisal would bring us the total 'decapitation'.

All that counts is that the Terrorist can space its attacks appropriately; can keep the threshold of its last attack below a certain level, behind the red line; and can manipulate Indian politics directly or indirectly to not retaliate. This game the terrorist can play indefinitely, as no counting of terror attacks take place.

The only solution is to respond to each and every terror act individually. If one does that properly, there is not going to be a thousand cuts. The lesson would reach home. The retaliation should be limited in duration - say 2-3 days, it should be surgical and it should be comprehensive on the terrorist's person, his family, his organization, his community, his country and his ideology. The retaliation should be granular. It should be the Michael Corleone way - synchronous, and thus granular! In the intervening period we collect intelligence for the next retaliation.

Such a pattern of retaliation is important, because we don't want to be in a state of constant war, only in a state of constant preparation for war. Constant war only helps India's enemies to consolidate their position within their communities and ideology.

Pranav wrote:
RajeshA wrote:Everybody needs to be told why somebody was punished.
Why? To make us feel better? Will the other rage boys be suitably chastised after that? On the other hand, what if Saeed was punished by someone even more pious?

This "to make us feel better" is getting boring! It is piskologising ourselves to a paralysis!

I am in favor of painting the Pakistan's Breakup Painting using broad brushes of such strategies - letting more pious carve up the less pious. But this should not go too far.

When Hafiz Saeed masterminded Mumbai 26/11, he branded his ass with "India"! His ass belongs to us! It would be a folly to let him die in any other way than by India's hand! In fact we should kill anybody else who takes him down before we get the chance to do so! He belongs to us!

Now the piskological brigade would start jumping up and down, telling me that that is only because I want to feel better. But that is not the whole story. That is kshatriya dharma, as I see it, and we have to do that dharma justice. Sure a hyena can wait till the lion has made his kill, get some of the leftovers and lick its tongue in contentment. But that is not how we want to be seen - as a hyena. A world power needs to be seen as a lion! We have to make our own kill.

Now of course GoI can say, they didn't have anything to do with the retaliation, as far as assassinations go or collective punishment goes, but there should be sufficient rumor in the mills to point out in our direction without there being conclusive proof.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 31 Dec 2011 11:51

The Karachi Pivot: Indo-Pak Conflict Reformulation

Continuing from TIRP Thread

shiv wrote:Because there are a section of Hindus who believe in the Two Nation theory and are out to attack Muslims, India has a bad reputation internationally whereby wars imposed by Pakistan on India are interpreted as Hindu versus Muslim war between Muslim Pakistan and Hindu dominated India The Indian government would need to be seen as going out of its way to show that this characterization of India as Hindu power trying to intimidate Muslim Pakistan is baseless.

This actually puts all Hindus on the back foot. If they want a "good reputation" then they have to agree with what the government is doing. If they don't care about the reputation, there should be absolutely no worry about the characterization and there should be an open willingness to admit that Hindus have rights and a minority of Hindus have actually indulged in violence against Muslims to claim what is their legitimate right.

This is a political dilemma imposed by the Congress on its political opponents while simultaneously earning brownie points internationally. But how do you represent a Hindu viewpoint if you deny that Hindus have a genuine grievance and have been violent on occasion? Isn't it plain hogwash to claim that all Hindus are "secular" an "tolerant" when a large number of Hindus openly say that this business is loaded against Hindus. An Indian government has to say that is is following national and international laws. It cannot represent a particular religious interest. If the international press has open evidence of violent actions by Hindus no government can say "No. Hindus are tolerant, secular, ahimsa-pasand people" This is how the world works and it is harsh.

Pakistan has been open in supporting Islamic terror groups and Pakistani spokespersons are on record saying that Hindu India is out to destroy Pakistan. This is by and large believed in most countries of the world to a lesser or greater extent.

At one level the issue is why should India care about whether the West & Ummah and the rest want to portray India-Pak conflict as a conflict between Hindu-dominated India vs. Islamist Pakistan, as a Hindu-Muslim conflict! Let it be!

At another level if India does care, the question is whether India has another option, other than "Hindu is tolerant onlee", "marginal Saffron terror groups to be crushed", "Pak Kissing on the Wagah", etc. policy.

There is another option. And that is to reformulate India-Pak conflict as a Muslim sectarian conflict, with the Hindus a passive spectator.

There was a news story earlier from India.

Published on Oct 16, 2011
By Vidya Subrahmaniam
Sufi Maha Panchayat denounces Wahabi extremism: The Hindu

Board members stressed the threat from Wahabi extremism over and over in their speeches to the Maha Panchayat, arguing that a small group of people had succeeded in giving a bad name to Islam and Muslims, most of whom were Sunni Sufis and therefore peace-loving, tolerant and intensely patriotic. Speakers also emphasised the essentially inclusive nature of Sufism which did not differentiate between Muslims and non-Muslims and allowed all communities to pray in their shrines. The Deobandis, on the other hand, did not allow their followers to go to Sufi dargahs.

“The time has come for us to come out and claim our rights. Let us take a pledge that we will never support Wahabi extremism — not today, not tomorrow. Let us take a pledge that we will work for the unity and integrity of our motherland,” Maulana Kachochavi told the gathering.

Later talking to the press, the Maulana made a strong pitch for a Madrasa Board saying: “Right now the madrasas are under the control of Wahabi-inspired organisations which run on Saudi money. The ideology they teach and spread is hardline Wahabism. These organisations have put pressure on the government not to enact the Act. We want the funds to go to the really needy and poor.”

That is one opening. But the other major opening is the upcoming MQM-Pushtun conflict in Karachi. As Imran Khan is given the crown in Islamabad, the politics in Pakistan will tilt even further away from MQM. As Imran Khan assumes civilian power, the Pushtuns of Karachi will feel emboldened, MQM will feel isolated, and there is going to be a lot more bloodshed in the streets of Karachi. Moreover the PPP reign over Islamabad would also come to an end, and the Sindhis would move closer to MQM on this, especially if Zardari feels threatened or his tenure is brought to any abrupt halt.

When the Karachi killings start next time, what we need to do is bring out the Indian Muslim masses on the streets of India in open support of MQM, their ethnic brethren living across the border. The more the atrocities on the Mohajirs in Karachi, the deeper can be the purge of Wahhabis from Muslim power elite in India. Simultaneously India too can take a more belligerent attitude towards Pakistan citing Pakistan's open state support to the "oppression" of Mohajirs from India. We can also keep some sections of the Pakjabis tied to the "Aman ka Tamasha" campaign, not to look partisan.

We need to make Altaf Hussain into a Hassan Nasrallah, and MQM into Hezbollah, an unbudgeable urban militant group and supply it with both training and arms. We need to sharpen the divide and make the pro-Indian side infallible.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 10 Jan 2012 01:46

From newinsight.net

All for one...
Pakistan's democracy faces its toughest test now, says N.V.Subramanian.

9 January 2012: While Pakistan's president, Asif Ali Zardari, may defy the odds and survive, democracy in that country is being choked to death. And the institutions that stand arraigned for this are Pakistan's Supreme Court, the army and the notorious Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).

Since "memogate", the Pakistan army and ISI have been gunning for Zardari. They forced the resignation of the Pak envoy to the US, Hussain Haqqani, who is now hiding in the prime minister's bungalow in Islamabad. He told a wire service he would be killed like the Punjab governor, Salman Taseer, if he left his sanctuary.

Haqqani does not have the obvious advantages and immunities Zardari enjoys. But if he goes down, it would be a blow to Zardari, and it would tell the world that Pakistan's democracy is gravely imperiled.

Pakistan's Supreme Court chief justice, Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry, has had reservations about Zardari from the beginning. He has sought to pursue his corrupt wealth stashed abroad. The law must take its course here. But he cannot become party to the destabilization of the Zardari regime in tacit collaboration with the Pakistan army and ISI, which is what the judicial inquiry into "memogate" amounts to.

The Pakistan army and ISI have particular reasons to oppose the Zardari government, but it doesn't take away from their generic aversion for democracy. The military and intelligence establishments blame the government for the sorry mess Pakistan is, and accuse it of being excessively pro-American. "Memogate" has come in handy for them.

As an elected government, the Zardari regime has a mandate to run the country, and it is finally its own best judge of its foreign-policy angularities. The National Assembly is there to correct its tilts and check its powers. And if the people of Pakistan disapprove of the regime, they will vote it out. How can the Pakistan army and ISI become arbiters of good governance in the country? Who has elected them?

What the Pakistan army and ISI are basically doing is buck-passing. Their image has been destroyed by the American operation that killed Osama Bin Laden in Abbottabad and the Al-Qaeda revenge attack on the Mehran naval base in which an Orion was gutted. Meanwhile, terrorists have overrun large parts of Pakistan. Its nukes are unsafe. To deflect the hard questions, the army and ISI have taken on the elected government, aided by a capricious judiciary and an ultra-nationalistic section of the media.

But Zardari is a hard nut to crack, as this writer has ventured to say in the past. Knowing they are on shaky grounds, the army and ISI have not moved to depose the government. It would be a most unpopular move. And whatever his faults, Zardari has proved a fighter, and he is backed by the powerful Bhutto legacy.

Which is why the anti-Zardari forces have turned their wrath on the lesser Hussain Haqqani. They have cornered him like a rat in the prime minister's house in the capital. They wish to make a terrible example of him. Through him, the Pakistan army, ISI and the Supreme Court want to wound Zardari. But it is Pakistan's democracy that will be maximally damaged.

However you look, "memogate" is not about treason. Since Pakistan's National Assembly is already investigating the matter, a parallel judicial commission is uncalled for and indeed undemocratic. And Hussein Haqqani's asylum in the PM's house brings shame to Pakistan. It's the worst PR for Pakistan when he says he fears the fate of the Pakistan Punjab governor who was gunned down by his bodyguard for standing up for minorities.

Anything India says would have the opposite effect in India, but the media should take it up vigorously. And led by the United States, the rest of the democratic world should apply pressure so that Hussain Haqqani is secured and, if he wants, evacuated to safety overseas.

But the larger threat is for Pakistan's democracy. There is nothing in "memogate" that warrants penal action against Zardari or his government. His government must be allowed to complete its term and face the electorate, as it happens in natural course in all democracies.

The Pakistan Supreme Court should disband the judicial commission in good faith, and deny cover to the Pakistan army and ISI to advance their anti-democratic agenda in the country. All political parties should rally to the side of the government because, divided, they will all fall.

His listing of symptoms is right. His prescription is not.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 10 Jan 2012 04:47

RajeshA ji,

there is no need to "bring out India's Muslim masses". whatever we decide to wrt inter-Pakistan rivalries and hates, it has to be from an India standpoint. we cannot risk another Khilafat. the very notion of "bring Indian Muslims out on the streets" is a dangerous thing. it gives credibility and face value to all and sundry Islamist demands. today it might be Sindh, but tomorrow it will be about Shariah in "hindustan".

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 10 Jan 2012 11:49

devesh wrote:RajeshA ji,

there is no need to "bring out India's Muslim masses". whatever we decide to wrt inter-Pakistan rivalries and hates, it has to be from an India standpoint. we cannot risk another Khilafat. the very notion of "bring Indian Muslims out on the streets" is a dangerous thing. it gives credibility and face value to all and sundry Islamist demands. today it might be Sindh, but tomorrow it will be about Shariah in "hindustan".

devesh ji,

one needs to do whatever one needs to get the job done. People often forget that we are facing a nuclear-armed Pakistan which is using terror under nuclear cover against India. It is a mortal enemy and it needs to be brought down with the least amount of fallout for us.

If you want to do that "from an Indian standpoint", you are proposing a nuclear war. If you are not proposing taking them on "from an Indian standpoint", but rather just tolerating them "from an Indian standpoint", then you are willing to live with the terrorist, be willing to be blackmailed by the terrorist, and be willing to take frequent terrorist hits. Besides the regional and global ramifications of taking on Pakistan "from an Indian standpoint" is such that every two-bit Jihadi from Morocco to Mindanao would come flying to India, Middle-East would bankroll the Jihad against India, Western countries would give us sanctimonious lectures and rejoice their staying above the fray, and China may take another bite off India.

If we wanted to do anything against Pakistan "from an Indian standpoint", we would have done that years ago. There is nothing to the adage "from an Indian standpoint" other than some hollow dreaming by a few Indian nationalists.

In 1971 we got some results because we were not squeamish about cooperating with the Muslim Bengalis from East Pakistanis. If we had had the view that it has to be "from an Indian standpoint" we would have thought any cooperation with Muslim Bengalis would have meant, that at some later day they would be demanding Khilafat or another Partition, and we would have done nothing. There would still have been flanked by Pakistan on both our East and West.

Coming to notion that "bringing out India's Muslim masses" is tantamount to another Khilafat, I can only say that that is way off the intention. "Bringing out India's Muslim masses" in this case is in support of the "Divide and Rule" policy, whereas Khilafat was about "Unity of the Muslims of the World", the exact opposite.

The "Indian Muslim masses" can come out and challenge Indian state anytime they wish. They showed that amply during George W. Bush's visit to India. They don't need our encouragement to do so! Whenever that happens, India would have to deal with them in the best way possible. But keeping them at home on the question of support to the Mohajir cause in Pakistan does not dampen the possibility, not even in the least bit, that they may still come out against the Indian state someday.

What we need is a deep division between the Indian Muslims and the Pakistani Muslims, and secondly a real political division of Pakistan, a break up of Pakistan. If setting up Indian Muslims vs Pakistani Muslims on the question of treatment of Mohajirs helps India's cause, we should use it.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Jan 2012 23:43

Looks like there is rethink in various options for TSP failure.

Restitiching the subcontinent

How do you solve a problem like Pakistan?

Restitching the Subcontinent
How do you solve a problem like Pakistan?
Austin Bay
November 28, 2011, Vol. 17, No. 11

The post-World War Two partition of British India was a blood-drenched mess. Since partition, India has prospered. Bangladesh, the 1971 Indo-Pakistani war’s ******** child, remains wretched. For three decades a low-grade civil war has afflicted Pakistan, pitting urban-based modernizers against Islamist extremists reinforced by militant hill tribes. The Taliban attack on Pakistan’s Karachi naval base in May 2011 reprised the hill versus urban paradigm. Pakistan’s civil war divides its intelligence and security services, which is one reason the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff can argue (with confidence) that an element within Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency supported the September 2011 Taliban assault on America’s embassy in Kabul.

In retrospect, splitting British India into East and West Pakistan and India may have been one of the 20th century’s greatest geostrategic errors.

I got a hint of this in the 1970s when I was injured at Ft. Benning, Georgia, and befriended by two Pakistani officers attending an advanced military course. My leg-length cast made walking to the mess hall a pain, so the Pakistani major and lieutenant-colonel took turns chauffeuring me in their car.

One evening, in slow traffic, the major and I passed an Indian Army colonel standing on the sidewalk. The major cracked his window, yelled, and waved. The Indian colonel smiled, raised his left hand, and wiggled his fingers. The major glanced at me and with a soft chuckle said, “That man—he is my enemy.”

Despite their recent war, I knew better. On at least two occasions the Indian colonel had dropped by our bachelor officers’ quarters to watch television with the Pakistanis. I had found a corner chair, propped my cast on a crutch, and learned that on the subcontinent cricket matches are a very serious matter.

The major knew I grasped his irony and added, with a wistful, startling sadness: “You know . . . we were once the British Indian Army.”

Yes sir, you were. And you were very, very good. That great Indian Army (“British” being colloquial, not official) fought and defeated first-rate, first-world enemies: Germans in North Africa and Italy; the Imperial Japanese in southeast Asia. Stripped of Commonwealth camouflage, the Indian Army of 1945 was, in its own right, a veteran combat outfit with global experience.

Today, when the U.N. seeks crack peacekeeping troops, that old army’s components, now split among India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh, top the wish list. In the eastern Congo’s chaos, Indian Air Force helicopters fly support missions for Pakistanis and Bangladeshis. To tacticians this demonstrates the value of British military training methods; to military historians it testifies to the British Indian Army’s tradition of excellence maintained by its fragmented descendants.

The Indian and Pakistanis at Ft. Benning shared more than professional interests—they were friends. If religion and state politics divided them, culture, common sense, and common decency united them. But reuniting India’s fragments? Political fantasy. Blood has spilled, in torrents.

Two remarks made 30 years later by Benazir Bhutto in March 2005 led me to reconsider. Before an interview with four or five writers, someone in conversation mentioned Kashmir. Bhutto said India and Pakistan had too many common interests not to make peace, and that meant resolving Kashmir’s division. “It will happen,” she said. An optimistic nonanswer by a politician? I respected her forceful tone. But how do you resolve it?

Bhutto also mentioned India’s expanding economy and her belief Pakistan would emulate India’s success. I knew forward-thinking sub-continent business leaders favored a robust common market. India liberalized its economy and created wealth; so could Pakistan. English is India’s business language, as it is Pakistan’s. India’s economy could lift Pakistan’s. Their economies might merge—but why pursue the thought, given the spilled blood?

Two years later Bhutto was assassinated, by Pakistani Islamist extremists likely linked to the Taliban and al Qaeda.

{Wrong. BB was killed per TSPA instructions to avoid giving US more say in TSP.}

I was dining with an Indian businessman. “My family came from Karachi,” he explained, now Pakistan’s largest city. “We are Hindus. When partition occurred there was violence. My parents fled to India. To what is now India. . . . I finally came to the United States. And I got a job working for a broker on Wall Street.”

“Did partition have to happen? In retrospect.”

He thought a moment, shook his head. “In my opinion? No.”

Biographer Stanley Wolpert contends Mahatma Gandhi opposed partition. Wolpert wrote that Gandhi never accepted the partition plan and “realized too late that his closest comrades and disciples were more interested in power than principle.” A Hindu extremist assassinated Gandhi. Spilled blood.

But young Pakistanis are now reconsidering partition—because the bloodletting continues. Oh, those thinking the unthinkable are the well-educated, the next generation of Benazir Bhuttos pursuing college degrees in the United States and Canada, or manning ex-im offices in Singapore, Abu Dhabi, and London. Bhutto’s murder and the 2008 Mumbai massacre by Islamist terrorists in league with ISI officers spurred harsh moral reflection and intellectual reappraisal.

Pakistan as India’s rival? Only in cricket. India has six times Pakistan’s population and about 10 times its GDP. Year by year Pakistan decays amid corruption, Islamic terrorism, and economic rot. India’s economic surge has made it a global power. Bollywood entertains Asia. India’s Hindus and Christians and Sikhs and, yes, despite Mohammed Ali Jinnah’s contrary claim, Muslims, too, have economic opportunities. Jinnah, leader of the Muslim League and Pakistan’s first post-partition governor general, contended Muslims would never prosper if yoked by a Hindu majority. Jinnah was intellectually and politically gifted, a sophisticate with cosmopolitan taste. Sixty years of history have shown he was dead wrong.

And the new reunifiers know it. Their idea is preposterous, a fantasy, but it has on its side a deeper history than the last six decades. They argue that a reunited India would give Pakistani modernizers strategic depth: economically, demographically, socially, and geographically. The geographic argument has old roots. For millennia the “tribal threat from the mountains” has vexed northern India, from the Indus valley (Pakistan’s heartland) and east beyond Delhi. The reunifiers see the Taliban and other violent factions as tribal raiders attacking the wealthy lowlands, with the goal of seizing urban wealth, imposing tribal rule, then pushing east. Antiquarian? No, insightful. Al Qaeda promotes a 10th-century misogynistic social order; it glorifies beheadings but says little about jobs. A reinvented pre-partition India would have the economic, social, and demographic depth to buffer and absorb the tribes and their turmoil. Pakistan alone does not.

{So the Paki reunifiers want Indian strength to stave off the Taliban. They need the economic Indo-Gangetic subsidy to keep afloat. They fear the US-UK subsidy getting choked off.}

Two years ago, while discussing the idea of a reunited India with a faculty member at the University of Texas, I pointed out that the reunifiers know they are engaged in a protracted, low-grade civil war, pitting Pakistani modernizers against militant Muslim religious fundamentalists. The modernizers believe a reunited subcontinent would give them instant allies. But consider the obstacles. Indians might balk at absorbing Pakistan’s basket-case economy. (South Koreans fear a generation of paying for North Korea’s poverty post-reunification.)We’ve also had six decades of hateful propaganda spewed by jingoists in Delhi and Islamabad—the heirs of Gandhi’s “comrades” hellbent on personal power. They stoke enmity between Muslims and Hindus for political advantage.

The professor replied that the Pakistani intellectuals he’d met acknowledged re-creation might take a generation—but they raise the possibility and see its value.

Meanwhile, Pakistan risks collapse. Lawrence Solomon, in an article in Canada’s Financial Post, argued that British India requires further “unstitching.” Solomon’s scenario had Pakistan splitting into Pashtun Afghania, Baluchistan, a Sindh state, and an independent Punjab. Solomon asserted that, with the possible exception of current “top dog” Punjab, “the new nations to emerge from a breakup of Pakistan likely would soon become more prosperous as well as more free.”

Likely more prosperous and free? Maybe. A stand-alone Sindh might do well, for a while. In A Quick and Dirty Guide to War (2008), James. F. Dunnigan and I speculated that a Punjab-Sindh state might be more stable than Pakistan. But Pashtun and Baluchi states? I see a squalid future: These suddenly independent confederations slip deeper into misery, plagued by unmitigated clan violence while continuing to provide, with even less intelligence scrutiny, bases for well-financed terrorists. Punjab and Sindh still confront the threat from the hills. Where do they look for help? To India? That’s the argument for restitching, not unstitching.

Abandoning the hills to their despair is a mistake. The tribes deserve peace and development. A dysfunctional Pakistan cannot provide either. A restitched India could, in time.

{So they want India to bear the burden of revitalising the TSP and they want to grant it as afavor to save their sorry a$$es!}

The Pakistani major at Ft. Benning repeatedly told me the lieutenant-colonel was an unusual man. The day the leg cast came off the lieutenant-colonel and I went to the mess hall. Over dinner he explained the major’s comment: “I come from a hill tribe. We plaster bricks with goat sh— to keep the wind out.”

The lieutenant-colonel assessed my reaction. “You know I attended graduate school in Europe. . . . I started life in the 12th century. I’m now in the 20th. That’s what the major means.” Then he flashed a wry smile. “He comes from the cities. I suppose, to him, I am living proof that it can be done.”

Austin Bay is the author, most recently, of Ataturk: Lessons in Leadership from the Greatest General of the Ottoman Empire.

Now makes sense the US scholar waxing about Nizam's Hyderabad being the last bastion of ganga jamini culture in Hyderabad !!!

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 18 Jan 2012 04:24

We need to remove all their fantasies quickly
US scholar waxing about Nizam's Hyderabad

Klaus · Post by **Klaus** » 18 Jan 2012 04:40

Re-stitching will have to happen according to India's preferences and wishes and our time of choosing. The article also hints that Nehru's "heirs" (Nehru-Gandhi dynasty) will have to exit the scene for this to happen.

Proponents of further "un-stitching" such as Lawrence Solomon need to be put under the microscope. These proponents indicate that the Brits will make another attempt at power politics in the sub-continent.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 18 Jan 2012 04:54

No foreigners should be allowed to dictate India about its future.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 18 Jan 2012 05:11

The Great Game is all about controlling India. Anglo-Americans will try the Dravidian-Dalit-Tribal-Northeast Victimization cum Evangelism route by setting up players there to influence Indian policies. They will try to control major political parties through foreign-born players. The fact that English has become India's operating system also plays into their plans. Now they seem to be trying to infect India with Pakistaniyat by getting Pakistan to be restitched with India, thus enabling Pakistanis to get involved in the politics of India. Through the Pakistanis they want to control Muslim politics and the Muslim vote banks of India as well.

With so many pivots in India, it is no wonder that India would become vulnerable to the loss of its traditional non-alignment.

Dharmic Renaissance makes India an independent pole in the world. What they are trying to do is to smother that outcome by setting up alternative pivots.

If at all, India needs to digest Pakistan bit by bit, taking the next bite only after the first bite has been chewed and digested. Throwing in the whole of Pakjab and Pushtun areas into India would overload our digestive tract.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 18 Jan 2012 05:56

Realistic policy choices within meaningful time frames are restricted to economic integration and security alignments and these two alone would be HUGE steps. Necessary for India herself to more forward. India cannot be a pole, without resolution to TSP and better control of South Asia.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 18 Jan 2012 10:02

India will become a pole by taking the Pak by the horn and the process of fixing it

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 18 Jan 2012 10:12

I'm sure Brihaspati ji has a very interesting take on the article. but IMO, "restitching" cannot take place without finding a solution of the Islam problem. India must not and will not accept any portion of Pak without solid steps to roll back Islam and eventually exterminate this Middle-Eastern mind-virus from the psyche of the Pakis.

restitching is only possible when Bharat finally decides to acknowledge and confront the problem of the institutional basis of Islam which preserves the genocidal fantasies generation after generation. until Bharat decides to tackle this bull by the horns, there will be NO restitching.

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 18 Jan 2012 10:18

Acharya wrote:India will become a pole by taking the Pak by the horn and the process of fixing it

That is why destruction of Pakistan is the key to India's rise. And the rescinding the Indus Water Treaty is the key to destroying Pakistan.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 19 Jan 2012 20:10

It occurs to me that "Managing Pakistan's failure" is about "Managing Pakjab". Everything else is manageable. Pakjab has wealth, population and radicalization.

Apart from the rapist army that is manned mostly by Pakjabis, Pakjab's political parties also support radical Islamist groups. When you aid Pakistan, Pakjab benefits from the aid and Pakjabi's internal foes be they from Sindh, Baluchistan or Pashtun get nothing.

One of things that needs doing is a division of Pakistan into Pakjab, Seraikistan, Baluchistan and Pakhtunistan apart from Pakjab. "Norther areas" should be reintegrated with J&K. Increasing 'Pakistani strength" vis a vis india by military and eco aid (as the US did for over half a century) only increases Pakjabi strength vis a vis others. The Pakjabi army has always told the others "Don't be scared of us - India is the enemy". Fact is the Pakjabis are seen as the enemy by a lot of Pakis. They do not fear India so much and India can actually extend a hand towards them with the caveat that Pakjab has to be controlled. But that is largely dependent on the US which keeps the army ion good health and therefore Pakjabis in good health.

The US remains a key player in Pakistan as long as they keep buttressing the largely Pakjabi army. There seems to be a strange homo-erotic relationship between TFTA USA and the Pakjabi army. Progress towards making Pakjab lose its grip on the rest of Pakistan revolves around US policy. India can play bigger role only if the US is either somehow removed from being able to support the Pak(jab)i army, or figures out what is wrong on its own.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 19 Jan 2012 23:09

Destruction of Pakjabi wealth , health and new generation will cook their murgi for good. So far Indians have shown no inclination to punish these particular BCs woth the exception of short period in 47. They escaped both Maratha and Khalsa wrath. NSA s hired in Afghanistan will love to Love Pakjabis in Peshawari style. Question of Indian political will only.

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 20 Jan 2012 00:16

abhischekcc wrote:
Acharya wrote:India will become a pole by taking the Pak by the horn and the process of fixing it
That is why destruction of Pakistan is the key to India's rise. And the rescinding the Indus Water Treaty is the key to destroying Pakistan.

Neutralising Pakistan is also the key to managing China.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 20 Jan 2012 07:53

Poaqoons spend next 2-3 years with the present tussle between Milliroaches and Civiroaches. In the mean times Dekhonomy goes down the tube along with FE reserves. IMHO, it will take another 4-6 years before they can get stablized with the expected generous donation from both Massa and Chaxxa.By this time Sindh and Baluch desh will be on the verge of Azadi and another BD scale genocide on the way. They must be kept on the path where they go from crisis to calamities and from calamities to Karbala. In the meantime Indians must keep the psychological preassure by reinforcing the true idea of Paki Dumbness in their mind. Make them realize they have lost the capacity to think right and have truley lost their soul by licking alien Joote 24/7.By the 16th Dec of 2022, we actively move in to manage these brain dead Poakanimals. Go in with cash first and then slowly buy the choicest maal and dump the rest in Indus. Start anew by cleaning the ganda khoon.

member_20617 · Post by **member_20617** » 20 Jan 2012 20:58

Jhujar wrote:By the 16th Dec of 2022, we actively move in to manage these brain dead Poakanimals.

Why 16th Dec 2022?Any significance?

Just curious!

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 21 Jan 2012 04:15

Shankaraa wrote:
Jhujar wrote:By the 16th Dec of 2022, we actively move in to manage these brain dead Poakanimals.
Why 16th Dec 2022? Any significance?

Just curious!

On Dec 16, 1971 the Instrument of Surrender was signed between Lieutenant General Jagjit Singh Aurora and 'Tiger' Niazi. That will 51 years from this date!