Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

Managing Pakistan's failure

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 31 Mar 2013 11:51

ISI Blackmail of USA

Cross-posting some posts from the 'TIRP' Thread

Rudradev

Rudradev wrote:
shiv wrote:
CONGRATULATIONS RUDRADEV! My compliments to you. This is EXACTLY what you said with too may people arguing against you. The Paki intel agencies can help the west keep a tab on their own agents in the west like the New York bomber. That is what Lieven says here

The help of the Pakistani intelligence services to Britain has been vital in identifying the links of these potential terrorists to groups in Pakistan, and to preventing more attacks on the UK and elsewhere in Europe. Islamabad therefore has been only a partial ally in the “war on terror”—but still a critical and irreplaceable one. For we need to remember that in the end, it is only legitimate Muslim governments and security services that can control terrorist plots on their soil. Western pressure may be necessary to push them in the right direction, but we need to be careful that this pressure does not become so overwhelming that it undermines or even destroys those governments by humiliating them in the eyes of their own people.

shiv wrote:And Lieven urges the US to give into blackmail, saying what the US ain't seen nuthin yet

This should serve as a stark reminder of just how much more Pakistan could do to help the Afghan Taliban (and other anti-Western groups) if the Pakistani state and military, or the relationship between Islamabad and Washington, were to completely fall apart. It is this terrifying outcome that present U.S. strategy in the region risks producing.

shiv wrote:Vinasha kaale vipareetha buddhi


Thank you Shiv. I had no doubt whatsoever that I'm right about this 8) Any thoughtfully considered review of the so-called "near-miss" terrorist attacks in the US since 9/11, year after year, leads to the same inescapable conclusion.

The mighty whitey US wets its starry-stripey pants whenever it thinks what might happen on its own soil, if it didn't continue to give the Pakis more and more baksheesh. That is the leash on which the ISI has managed to keep the US, through its repeatedly successful indoctrination, infiltration and facilitation of terrorists into American cities, followed by dramatic tip-offs issued to the Dept of Homeland Security, just in time to "thwart" an attack.

As long as the ISI keeps up this successful calibrated demonstration of its capacity to hurt the US, the US already knows what it needs to do to stay safe... it does not need Lievens to spell out the demand in so many words :mrgreen:



RajeshA

RajeshA wrote:If one wants to make Pakistan a problem for the whole world then the way to do it is to pay the Afghans to destroy the ISI.

Thinking in Rudradev ji's model!


venug

venug wrote:Rajesh ji, pl. don't forget the Baluchis, they want their pound of flesh too, we should rope them in.


RajeshA

RajeshA wrote:venug ji,

according to Rudradev ji, ISI is responsible both for increasing the jihadi danger to the USA as well as in giving concrete intelligence on any operations planned by jihadis, thus proving its usefulness to USA. If ISI is out of the loop, the threat to USA from AfPak trained Jihadis become REAL, as nobody then has control over the Jihadis. Then USA would have to take care of Pakistan directly.


Rudradev

Rudradev wrote:
RajeshA wrote:venug ji,

according to Rudradev ji, ISI is responsible both for increasing the jihadi danger to the USA as well as in giving concrete intelligence on any operations planned by jihadis, thus proving its usefulness to USA. If ISI is out of the loop, the threat to USA from AfPak trained Jihadis become REAL, as nobody then has control over the Jihadis. Then USA would have to take care of Pakistan directly.


Excellent point Rajesh A ji. In fact, there is proof of concept to show that things WOULD in fact work exactly as you predict.

The proof lies in the case of Abdulmuttalab, the Underwear Bomber. His attempt to blow up a Northwest Airlines aircraft in Detroit stands completely unique from most cases of jihadi terrorism attempted against the US homeland since 9/11, for an important reason: no direct connection to ISI. He was a Nigerian recruited by AQAP in Yemen, and indoctrinated/trained by an Al Qaeda cleric of American birth, Anwar Al-Awlaki.

So in contrast to the dozens of Pakis and Bangladeshis who have formed the bulk of terror "threats" against the US homeland since 9/11... which were in fact calibrated demonstrations of ISI capability, never intended to succeed... Abdulmuttalab represented a REAL threat such as you describe above.

What was the outcome? The US ordered a drone strike and, ignoring the whines of human rights types who argued that Al-Awlaki was a US citizen and deserved "due process"... they directly, personally gave Al-Awlaki his 72. Khatam! No dancing around with pots of financial and military aid, no major non-NATO ally, nothing. They knew that Al-Awlaki wasn't shadowboxing with calibrated demonstrations of capability designed to blackmail Washington for aid. They knew that he really meant to hurt the US if he could, and they took him out.

That may well be what would happen if the ISI, as you suggest, got removed from the equation. The US would begin to perceive the Paki jihadis as a genuine, immediate, lethal threat rather than a shadow-boxer's puppets. And probably take appropriate action, on a far larger scale than Al-Awlaki.

Shiv has been right all along! Total, unmitigated jihadi takeover of the Bakistani state is what is needed.


RajeshA

RajeshA wrote:Rudradev ji,

Exploring your model further ...

for a long time on BRF we were accustomed to looking for ideological differences within the TSPA. We used to differentiate them as the bearded-type and the whiskey-swirling type faujis.

As far as hate towards India is concerned, we felt, both are one and the same. But still there was this American prism which was difficult to escape, that there is indeed a difference between the two.

It seems more and more likely that the differences are not ideological but rather transactional.

1) "Bearded-Type Faujis" - do not have active dealings with USA.
2) "Whiskey-Swirling Faujis" - have an active intelligence cooperation with USA

The beards and the whiskey are basically simply for show for their US intelligence partners and needed to calibrate American ease and discomfiture. The beards in TSPA are intended to increase anxiety among the Americans, the whiskey is there to remove that anxiety.

The convincing creation and removal of anxiety of the Americans and the West and now China too is the whole business model of TSPA. TSPA would not tolerate a structural change in this capability including from America.

What ISI-branch of TSPA does is control all the resources and networks required for making good on the threat - the middlemen, the handlers, the bomb material, the tanzeem heads, the mullahs, etc. Many in the Gulf, UK and elsewhere are part of the ISI network.

So if any true believer decides to become terrorist, he is guided the whole way by ISI and its global network, and in the end often delivered into the arms of the FBI or CIA.

The whole Command & Control of this global ISI network is in Pindi and perhaps to some extent in UK/Dubai. If that were to break, the whole network unravels and becomes truly cellular and amorphous. When that happens the threat increases to the West as the chances of intelligence failure also increases especially with a whole ocean of radicalized Islamic youth. The West thinks it can continue to enjoy control over them through their friends in Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Jordan and Pakistan.

I think the other thing that the West is afraid of is China taking over patronage over this Islamic alliance. Chinese footprint in the Gulf and Pakistan has increased a lot.

Of course to some extent USA is mired in their vested interests in the Middle-East. But it is also now becoming a susceptible to Islamic terrorist threat with many Muslims now spread out throughout the West, especially in Britain, so one can presume that some policies of the West, e.g. in Syria, in Iran could be a direct consequence of this blackmail.

Since Saudi Arabia provides the ideology and the money and the ISI provides the manpower and logistics, Saudis are not willing to break off their cooperation with Pakistan either. It allows the Sauds to be a big part of this blackmail of the West and thus to profit from it besides having other means of persuasion, e.g. money, investments.

What we really need to do is to provide a parallel logistics network for the Jihadis so that they can bring down the ISI CnC.

I think one reason USA was uneasy with Indian presence in Afghanistan was exactly for this reason. If we were to develop our own relations and equations with the Afghan Pushtuns, they would know how to influence the Taliban within Pakistan itself, and we could have eroded the whole ISI CnC through the "Bad Taliban". That is also one reason why the Americans were not only targeting the "Good Taliban" in AfPak but also the "Bad Taliban", even though "Bad Taliban" were not fighting US forces in Afghanistan at all, for that is in the interests of both ISI and Americans. Americans now cannot afford to have the ISI lose control over the Islamists, and the "Bad Taliban" could crack this control.

The whole Kerry-Lougar-Hermann Bill is Jizya for protection against Islamic attacks.

The funny part is that USA cannot really do anything against this monster. If they crush the head - the ISI, then the body would fall apart into milions of snakes, all with their independent heads. If they crush the body, the head would continue producing more and in fact helping Americans kill little parts of it. All the while the snake expands!

India really loses nothing by crushing the head. It is a game India would have to play alone, because everybody is on the other side, either as the threat or as the compromised.


ramana

ramana wrote:A picture is worth a thousand words etc. etc....


ramana wrote:Thanks to Shiv!

Image


Updated cartoon:

Prem wrote:Image


Looks like US cartoonists have caught on!!!


RajeshA

RajeshA wrote:ramana garu,

An interesting dynamic is that Americans are willing to feed the Sapera and let him breed more snakes, rather than crush him and have to face the snakes without Sapera's help, despite knowing about Sapera's duplicity in this game!

The cartoon is I believe wrong in that it presupposes that Americans are not aware of TSPA's treachery. It is just that Americans would rather pay jizya than go after the Islamics!

It is true that Americans use Pakis for their strategic objectives, but parallel to this also runs the constant blackmail.


Pranav

Pranav wrote:
Rudradev wrote:The proof lies in the case of Abdulmuttalab, the Underwear Bomber. His attempt to blow up a Northwest Airlines aircraft in Detroit stands completely unique from most cases of jihadi terrorism attempted against the US homeland since 9/11, for an important reason: no direct connection to ISI.


The 3 most important aspects of the Underwear bomber case are -

(1) The "well-dressed" man who pulled strings to put Abdulmuttalab onto the plane in Amsterdam, even without a passport. This man is probably a bigger fish than Abdulmuttalab himself
(2) The way in which this man was subsequently totally ignored by the US mainstream media, so much so that most folks are quite ignorant of him.
(3) The Headley-like manner in which US agencies had been given multiple warnings about Abdulmuttalab, long before the bombing incident.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umar_Farouk_Abdulmutallab

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47301
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby ramana » 02 Apr 2013 21:15

TSP is clearly on a path to self-induced instability.
India should do nothing that halts the progress along this path.
If at all India should manage the accelerated instability in TSP.

The big impediments for India to do nothing are
- the self deluded elite in Indian political parties who seek Nobull prizes and
- US interests to preserve this Islumist hellhole due to oil dependence on KSA and their pro-Israel stance in Middle East.

With the discovery of fracking and abundant supply of natural gas, hopefully the US can wean away its oil dependence from KSA.

Thats still leaves the Tallyrandean quest for stability.

At same time the current trajectory of instability in TSP is irreversable. No amount of Indian appeasement will keep them stable.

And as Indian economy grows the carrot and stick hopefully at the wrong ends can induce a change in Eurocentric outlook.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4956
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RoyG » 02 Apr 2013 21:31

ramana wrote:TSP is clearly on a path to self-induced intability.
India whould do nothing that halts the progress along this path.
If at all India should manage the accelarated instability in TSP.

The big impediments for India to do nothing are the slef deluded elite in Indian political parties who seek Nobull prizes and US interests to preserve this Islumist hellhole due to oil dependence on KSA and their pro-Israel stance in Middle East.
With the discovery of frackign and abundant supply of natural gas, hopefully the uS can wean away its oil dependence from KSA.

Thats still leaves the Tallyrandean quest for stability.

At same time the current trajecotry of instability in TSP is irreversable. No amount of Indian appeasement will keep them stable.

And as Indian economy grows the carrot and stick hopefully at the worng ends can induce a change in Eurocentric outlook.


Yeah, what's new? We've been hearing this sort of talk since the late 80's. Pakistan is a jelly state and will survive as long as China and Saudi Arabia are around and they have nuclear weapons. US reserves are only expected to last a decade at the current rate of consumption and they need a presence in the Middle East to ensure that the almighty dollar reins supreme.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47301
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby ramana » 02 Apr 2013 21:40

You tell me whats new!

Meanwhile X-post...
Cosmo_R wrote:@RajeshA: ^^^: "...India should team up with Afghani Pushtuns and run the biggest, most vicious Jihadi network in the Subcontinent"

A slight variation. If the objective is to harness the violence of the Pashtuns and direct it, then it is better to work through the mullah outsourcers who are equal opportunity aggregators of suicidal young men. For them it's money not ideology.

That said, nobody can control these guys and eventually it blows up in one's own face every time.

A more subtle approach is to fan the flames of Pashtun nationalism. That would go beyond the Durand Line issue because Pashtuns are a majority now Baluchistan and increasingly in Karachi.

The pakis know the Pashtun time bomb is there and that is why they've sought to bring them under the banner of Islam (One Ring to bind them all...).

In the short run IMHO, the antidote to the Jihadis is Pashtun nationalism. These guys need a sense of victim hood to nurse a grudge—any grudge.

Turn the focus on to oppression by the pakjabis.



Cosmo_Rji may be its happening without any Indian help?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47301
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby ramana » 02 Apr 2013 21:44

CRamS wrote:
Bheeshma wrote:Both uneven cohen and reidel are retards that no one in Delhi takes seriously. Pakistan is in a race to civil war India can wait and watch or act and accelerate the process.


I respectfully disagree. For us long-time India-TSP-US watchers, several things are clear:

1. No Indian govt, BJP bluster aside or eunuch/RNI Cong, is going to take TSP head on when it comes to terror, and both (recall Vajpayee's inviting MushRat to Agra) believe India must "do more" to induce TSP good behavior. (And the reasons for this are plenty, TSP's India specific nukes are one thing, but Indian Muslims and vote bank politics are a key factor in India's TSP policy)

2. US does not want TSP to fail (they need TSP as an India balancer) which would be the natural course without US lifeline. And in achieving this objective, TSP terror against India is considered "local" and not "global" and hence passe. (Note, the respectable tone that Uneven exudes in talking about TSP, TSP's state sponsorship of terror does not even figure in his narrative).

3. Many Indian elites, at least those with money and power do not have the courage nor the wherewithal nor the brains to challenge #1 and #2. (As an example, consider that ToiLet monkey who interviewed Uneven and couldn't summon the blood brains to put one tough question to Uneven. India media is filled with such filth).

Uneven has the right pulse on "South Asia". And the entire New Delhi elite will do shastaanga namaskaram to this scum bag. We nationalists, and a very minuscule tiny fraction of Indians may not like it, we can see through the fraud, we can cry and howl till will turn blue, but thats the reality, too bad. Our only hope is TSP itself self destructs before it destroys India despite all the support it is getting from all and sundry.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47301
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby ramana » 02 Apr 2013 22:45

RoyG wrote:
........
Yeah, what's new? We've been hearing this sort of talk since the late 80's. Pakistan is a jelly state and will survive as long as China and Saudi Arabia are around and they have nuclear weapons. US reserves are only expected to last a decade at the current rate of consumption and they need a presence in the Middle East to ensure that the almighty dollar reins supreme.



A lot has changed since the 80's.

There is only one superpower and that too is limping from 9/11 and its aftermath.

In Middle East there is no Baathist Iraq and that has exposed Wahabi KSA to Shia Iran. Nasserite Egypt is no more. Its under MB rule now.

If US acts against Iran it will make Sunni Arabs even more powerful. So there will be managed instability for while in ME. IOW the "wells of power" are unstable any way.

Its clear except to the most idiotic morons that TSP used Wahabi Islamist Arabs to stage 9/11. The result of the US invasion of Taliban Afghanistan and the escape of the Taliban dual virus* to TSP has taken the instability inside TSP and is eating the host.

* I said this before eslewhere. Islam has always had a Janus face: Ethnic Nationalism vs Islamism. The examples of former are the displacement of early Arab usurpers by Persians and later Ottomon Turks and the replacement of Turks by Mughals in India etc. All these are ethnic nationalist assertions in the Muslim world. Even original Pakistan is a Pakjab, Muslim Bengali, Sindhi and other nationalist assertions under the toe nation umbrella. After 1971, Pakistan adopted Islamist identity (Nazare-ya-Pakistan) as ethnic nationalism was found to be insufficient.

Islamism is the original dogma of the Arabs after Islam was founded and was revived by the British to overthrow the Ottomons and was nurtured by US against the FSU. And this remained as AlQ in its various forms all over the WANA and even in SE Asia. Islamism at its core is based on Arab primacy in Islamist society. By same token Islamism has taken over from Arab Nationalism in Egypt.


Taliban is dual virus:its based in Pashtun nationalism and Deobandi Islamism.
The latter meme led to their adulation for OBL. When it entered TSP it led to the rise of Pakiban type Pashtun identity in the border regions. These are dubbed 'bad Taliban' where as by deeds its the so called 'good Taliban' who are the bad and TSP the ugly Islamists!


The US still wants to preserve the Ugly for their use against FSU and India. And India has willing elite in INC and BJP that wants to be self deluded about US and TSP. Hence all these piss moves and Aman ki Tamasha ventures.


My take is do nothing that keeps the TSP state strong.

If possible accelerate the instability in TSP.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47301
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby ramana » 02 Apr 2013 22:52

Good X-Post...
johneeG wrote:
Cosmo_R wrote:Tarek Fatah is no different Irfan Husain or Kamran Shafi or even our own MJAkbar. All 'moderates' who bemoan radical Islam and partition but are closet Mughalistas. Undivided India under Muslim rule is their utopia.


+108. Very succinctly put. These people seem to want to have their cake(Malsi) and eat it too(no green on green) and also dream of ghazwa-e-hind.

Essentially, these people seem to want a reformation of Malsi. What kind of reformation? A reformation where the sharia is not insisted upon, where one need not grow beard or wear short pyjamas, where one need not insist on hijab, where one can swill whisky(if one wants to)...etc. In short, they want the Malsi to learn from west(and its EJs) and become 'sophisticated', instead of being 'crude'.

These kind of reforms do not in anyway divert from the ghazwa-e-hind. And it does not change anything as far as Kaffirs are concerned. These reforms are only to make the life of the followers of Malsi easy and bearable(particularly the elite ones, who can afford to have comforts). Generally, these privileges are already bestowed upon the elites in all the lands where Malsi is dominant. The elites are free to indulge in whatever their fancies are, as long as they pretend to be pious in public. But, in Pakiland(fortress of Malsi), this trend is changing. In pakiland, strict adherence to Malsi principles is being demanded from various quarters. This phenomenon is more pronounced in Pakiland, but is certainly not limited to that place alone.

There has been a steady and gradual increase in demands for more adherence to purest form of Malsi. The problem is compounded by the fact that there is disagreement on the purest form of Malsi. And this is not really new. It started long back as soon as the Mughals came.

brihaspati wrote:^^^The Mughals provided second of the two fronts within Indian Islamism. The previous period was a single front with intra-front competition for leadership. To a large extent the mughals were the late arrivals, the neo-converts - who retained their west-Turkmenistan+pre-Islamic Persian + Indo-Buddhist-CAR-pagan threads.

Its the kind of frontal conflict between two sides in Islam, that arises when one front is a late-convert and is unable to completely relinquish pre-Islamic foundations. This was the conflict that created BD. In a way, the Mughal-TurkoAfghan competition destroyed the power basis of Arabic Islam in India.

Neither came with "sympathies" or identifications with pre-Islamic India. The Mughals by successfully centralizing Islamic control over much of India, thereby denuded it of resources, destroyed the economy eventually - and cleared the way for Brit takeover.

Link to original post

Both Mughals and Sultanate were equally bad as far as the Kaffirs are concerned. But, there is an internal conflict of ideas.

Mughals represent late-converts who want to retain some of the features that are not related to Malsi. They are the ones who do not want to follow Malsi in letter(like beard, pyjama, whisky), but they want to follow it in spirit(Ghazwa-e-hind).

Sultanate represents the other side who want to follow the Malsi both in letter and spirit.

Sultanate(early-converts) where replaced by the Mughals(late-converts). This created curious reaction. It gave rise to people like Sirhindi(during Akbar's time) and Waliullah. These people not only insisted on Malsi, but went ahead and made it more dictatorial and tyrannical(yes, they actually made the theory even more strict, because the practice was not up to the mark in their perception).

It does not mean that Mughals were benevolent towards the Kaffirs. Absolutely not. The jihad was on(with Rajputs, Vijayanagara, and later Sikhs and Marathas). But, it did not meet the high expectations of the people like Sirhindi and Waliullah.

So, there are two strains:
a) Hard version(hard on followers)
b) Soft version(soft on followers)

Both versions are vicious towards infidels and unbelievers within.

Should one follow the letter or spirit? That is the debate. The rest all(particular jihad) is same same only. Hard version insists on adherence to letter. The insistence on letter translates it into insistence on sharia. Soft version wants to adhere merely to spirit. Insistence on spirit means they can be hypocritical in their personal lives(beliefs), but do pious(jihad of Kaffirs) deeds in larger Malsi structure.

Sirhindi and Waliullah are the forerunners of the modern day Malsi(particularly in Sub-continent or South Asia, as the western media likes to call). The modern Pakiland is born from this strain of Malsi. The talibs also are the inheritors of this strain. They are goading the rulers, just as Sirhindi and Waliullah had done during earlier times.

Though the pakiland was born from the hard strain, the leadership was always by the Mughali ones(soft strain). People like Tarek(and the entire pakjabi elites) represent the Mughals(soft strain). The Mughals liked to enjoy themselves with their whiskies and all other pleasures. They also had to make some compromises due to geo-political realities to make their empire survive. The modern day pakjabi elites want to replicate the Mughals.

Both sides(hard and soft) have the same attitude towards the Kaffir. The difference is in how the green on green should be handled.

What is happening right now: The last strong emperor of Mughals, Aurangzeb, had to accept the hard version of Malsi, so that his rule was acknowledged by the followers of Malsi. In the short run, this saved the empire from dismantling into smaller fiefdoms and also allowed Aurangzeb to remain the ruler. In the long run, it made the Kaffirs take up active revolution against the Mughal rule. It resulted in creation of Maratha and Sikh empires.

The action of Aurangzeb was not out of blue. The hard version of Malsi was slowly being accepted by the Mughals. It seems to me that Babar was much more un-malsi like in his personal beliefs, then the later Mughal ones. Each successive generation of Mughal rulers had to accept and acknowledge that hard version was the pure version(and had to pretend to follow it). This phenomenon reached its zenith with Aurangzeb. And the hard version also became more and more hardened.

The same game is being played out in pakiland. It is like the rule of Aurangzeb right now. No more pretensions are being allowed. Absolute insistence on letter. This is allowing the nation to survive as single entity, for now.

People like Tarek want to reverse the whole thing and go back to the beautiful days when Kaffirs alone were hunted, while enjoying whiskey. Of course, if we see history, it is not possible. The soft version(the diluted version) always loses to the purer version.

It seems to me that Malsi today is much more purer than it was, when it started out. The definition of 'pure' in Malsi culture is the most narrow-minded and hard-core interpretation. So, the one who comes up with most narrow-minded and hard-core interpretation has the upper hand. Then, based on this interpretation, they can demand the elimination of all 'munafiqs'.

Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby Agnimitra » 03 Apr 2013 22:44

Poll: Pakistani Youth Disenchanted with Democracy
A larger number of young Pakistanis believe the country should be governed by Islamic law or military rule rather than democracy, according to a survey released Wednesday, weeks before historic national elections.

Pakistan is scheduled to hold parliamentary elections on May 11 — the first transition between democratically elected governments in a country that has experienced three military coups and constant political instability since its creation in 1947. The parliament’s ability to complete its five-year term has been hailed as a significant achievement.

But a survey by the British Council found that young Pakistanis — defined as those between the ages of 18 and 29 — have grown more pessimistic about the future over this period, as the country has struggled with a weak economy, high inflation, pervasive energy shortages and a deadly Taliban insurgency.

About 94 percent of young Pakistanis believe the country is going in the wrong direction, compared with 86 percent in 2009, the study found. Less than a quarter believe democracy has benefited themselves or their families.

Given these figures, it is perhaps not surprising to find relatively low levels of support for democracy among the youth. Only 29 percent of young Pakistanis believe democracy is the best political system for the country, according to the poll.
...

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 26 Apr 2013 19:08

Who said Cricket Spirit cannot help solve Pakistan?

First posted by Bharath.Subramanyam in "Afghanistan News & Discussion" Thread

Published on Apr 21, 2013
By Yoshita Sengupta
More power to IPL in Afghanistan: Daily News and Analysis

Almost every household in the country goes to extraordinary lengths to watch matches.

Rizwan Ull-Hayat doesn’t think twice before tanking up the generator. It’s the night his favourite Indian Premier League (IPL) team, Kolkata Knight Riders (KKR), will take to the field. And he doesn’t want to miss seeing his favourite players in action for even a second; not even an erratic power supply could play spoilsport.

Ull-Hayat could easily pass off as just another Indian bitten by the IPL mania bug. Except that the 23-year-old lives in Nangarhar province of Afghanistan.

For a country — and its people — who are still in the process of rebuilding themselves after over 30 years of war, IPL is the stuff that dreams are made of.

Shafiqullah Asmat Stanikzai, the Afghanistan cricket team’s manager, claims that “almost every person” in the country is glued to the TV set each time an IPL match plays out.

Ali Ahmed Darwish, 26, a manager in an oil company in Kabul, suggests a more modest figure. “Almost 80% of Afghans watch the IPL religiously. We have even managed to get a satellite TV connection at work to watch the afternoon matches.”

In other parts of Afghanistan, fans like Ull-Hayat raise the zeal up a notch. “Everybody here (Nangarhar) watches the matches and since the power supply is not regular, all of us arrange for enough oil just before a match to run our generators till the end of the game,” explains Ull-Hayat, who works as a finance manager at a company in Nangarhar, casually, like it’s no effort at all.

Darwish agrees. “Kabul is the only city where there is a regular power supply. I know so many people in other places who watch matches through fuel-run generators.”

And on days when even the generators fail, some fans head to a neighbour’s house or get an over-by-over update from friends or relatives through mobile phones.

Who are they cheering?
KKR seems to be the toast of the nation. But the fondness has more to do with team owner and Bollywood actor Shahrukh Khan's Pathan lineage (his paternal grandfather was from Afghanistan) than the line-up of players.

Another team, Royal Challengers Bangalore (RCB), has begun to slowly gain popularity, riding on the shoulders of one player — Chris Gayle. “I really wish they (RCB) win this time. But before that, I wish I could go to India, watch them thrash Chennai and avenge the recent defeat,” says Sohail Yusufzai, 23, from Kabul.

The opinion is divided within the national cricket team. While the manager is rooting for KKR, he says each team player’s preference differs on the basis of whom he looks up to in the Indian squad. The wicketkeeper-batsman, for example, is rooting for Chennai Super Kings just because he is an ardent fan of captain MS Dhoni.

Why the fuss over IPL?
Love for Indian actors and cricketers apart, the IPL craze is fuelled by the belief that it is a way out of a despondent state of affairs in a war-ravaged country. Under the Taliban rule, sports were banned.

“Afghans love Indian cricketers, from Rahul Dravid to Dhoni. Our players watch almost every match and they want to be part of the IPL,” says Stanikzai. “We’re in desperate need of help to change the face of the game in our country, which we’ve sought from the BCCI (Board of Control for Cricket in India). We look up to the Indians and we’ll be grateful if the BCCI backs us the way Ireland and Scotland are backed by the ECB (England and Wales Cricket Board).”

To most Afghans, the smallest chance of seeing their players in the IPL simply offers a ray of hope for putting their lives back together.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 26 Apr 2013 19:10

Who said Cricket Spirit cannot help solve Pakistan?

Cross-posting from "Afghanistan News & Discussion" Thread

Why the fuss over IPL?

Love for Indian actors and cricketers apart, the IPL craze is fuelled by the belief that it is a way out of a despondent state of affairs in a war-ravaged country. Under the Taliban rule, sports were banned.

“Afghans love Indian cricketers, from Rahul Dravid to Dhoni. Our players watch almost every match and they want to be part of the IPL,” says Stanikzai. “We’re in desperate need of help to change the face of the game in our country, which we’ve sought from the BCCI (Board of Control for Cricket in India). We look up to the Indians and we’ll be grateful if the BCCI backs us the way Ireland and Scotland are backed by the ECB (England and Wales Cricket Board).”

To most Afghans, the smallest chance of seeing their players in the IPL simply offers a ray of hope for putting their lives back together.


Now this is really worth following! Pakistanis are kept out of IPL but Afghan players get to compete! That would be such a wicked Thapparh on Pakistan, they will cry every time and still watch IPL to try to forget their own despondency! :lol:

JE Menon wrote:Fantastic idea... I hope Afghan players are purchased next year at the auction.


JE Menon saar,

If Afghans start playing in IPL, when Taliban returns to Afghanistan and they start closing down on sports and TV, the Taliban would be in a rude shock. They will get an insurgency of cricket fans against them!

Cricket craze is a great way of ensuring that TVs and Satellite Dishes in Afghanistan are not banned, and through them Afghanistan continues to receive entertainment programming from India.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 03 May 2013 10:30

Solving Pakistan: Solution 13

Currency War

Published on May 02, 2013
Ansar Burney demanded Rs. 25 cr for Sarabjit Singh's release?: India Today

Sarabjit Singh's sister Dalbir Kaur on Thursday accused Pakistani human rights activist Ansar Burney of being a 'fraud' and said had she paid "Rs. 25 crore to Burney, Sarabjit would have returned to India."

Kaur alleged that Burney had demanded Rs. 25 crore to help Sarabjit. "Had I paid Rs. 25 crore to Ansar Burney, Sarabjit would have returned to India. I am poor so could not pay him. Burney had told me that at least pay Rs. 2 crore to get Sarabjit. He told him that if I will give him the money in the morning, Sarabjit will be released by evening," she alleged.
The allegation are startling as Burney has been over the years pleading for clemency to Sarabjit. After the assault, he said to a news channel from Karachi: "The attack looks suspicious. Someone could be behind this. No bricks or other material can reach the place where Sarabjit had been kept. This must be thoroughly investigated".

Burney, who frequently visits jails across Pakistan to take up the issues of inmates, described the section of Kot Lakhpat Jail where Sarabjit was being held as a "jail within a jail".

However, Ansar Burney has refuted all the allegations and tweeted, "I was shocked to hear nonsense & false accusation by Dalbeer Kaur, sister of Sarbajit Singh, I was the one who helped her every time."

"How can I ask for any demand from a lady from whom even I have never asked for a cup of tea and for whose family I was helping on humanity," he said.


What is obvious is that there are enough Pakis in Pakistan willing to "help" the outside world if the price is right! I think we should start helping Pakis to "help" the outside world. All they need is some money, right?

So here is how to do it!

Pakistan has been a huge source of counterfeit Indian money, which they smuggle in through various channels, often over Nepal, and they use the money to pay their agents in India, and to finance terrorism.

It is wrong to think in terms of what impact this counterfeit money has on our economy. It probably doesn't make too much of an impact. We should think of what impact it makes on promoting Pakistan-e-Nazariya, Islamic extremism, Jihadism, Ashrafism, etc. in India. There the impact could be substantial. Supporting a network of Pakistan supporters in India costs much money, but all of that can be financed through counterfeit money and does not need hard and real cash. That is a big help to Pakistani establishment.

So of course India should move to make all big currency bills in India counterfeit-proof.

Other than that, what however India can do is to pay Pakistan in the same! We too should print Pakistan currency bills and push Pakistani counterfeit money across the border.

In fact we should be distributing fake Pakistani currency in large amounts to the Pushtuns living along the Durand Line.

What better way of supporting the Afghans than this? We should give them real purchasing power and help trade along the Durand Line!

At the same time we should push Pakistan to accept MFN status for India, which would allow India to export food stuff and other things to Pakistan. Pakistanis should pay us in dollars, not the fake ones, but real currency.

Then the Afghans should be able to buy this stuff using fake Pakistani currency. Not just this, they would be able to buy a lot of stuff from Pakjab too. Also the Afghans can buy up the hard currency in Pakistan, which comes from the remittances of Pakistanis working so hard abroad.

Of course for this largehearted help from India, the Pushtuns along the Durand Line would also be favorably disposed to "helping" out India to solve some of the tricky problems we have with Pakistan, e.g. Pakistan establishment-sponsored terrorism in India.

Thus we come to an old solution - of opening Supari Plantations in AfPak region! [1] [2] [3] [4].

While we at it, we can of course also buy the freedom of Indian prisoners languishing in Pakistani jails courtesy of such human rights activists like Mr. Burney! But let's use counterfeit Pakistani currency to do this.

Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby Agnimitra » 04 May 2013 03:36

In this discussion in India, Tarek Fatah wants to re-define the India-Pakistan struggle as an ideological/civilizational struggle rather than one between nation-states.
In another talk somewhere else he mentions that the protesters at Shahbagh (BD) look to India for support, but there is a massive demonstration in Kolkata in support of BD Islamists. He says this is ironic.

"Not Calling Me An Indian Is An Insult To Me" - Tarek Fatah Bum Raps A Leftist



The only thrust of the Leftist Pinko's argument is to accuse Fatah of being in league with the RSS and American neo-Cons.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 06 May 2013 20:56

Solving Pakistan: Solution 8 (Cont.)

Close the Paki Factory

Cross-posting from the "Indian Interests" Thread

Atri wrote:We need more ladies in dharmik fold, especially in north and center.. RajeshA ji's model of bringing wives from TSP into Hindu families should be pursued by any nationalistic government. Aman ki asha can be used in this way, if steered properly.. the 2011 census data is not very encouraging..


Instead of Samjhota Express, we should try a Pakeezah Express! :wink:

Actually it would not be bad if there are considerations of Jāti in any match-making! It keeps the connection strong and the Pakeezah would be much more willing to fit in.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47301
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby ramana » 09 Apr 2014 03:11

X-Post...

Jhujar wrote:Resetting relations with neighbours
Miskeen, Bhangi Ajlaf Dreaming Ashrafiat:Nauqar Dreaming Maliki

Our rivalry with India is rooted in several factors, foremost being the unresolved issue of Kashmir, lingering fear of its hegemonic designs and competing views of nationalism. Besides, Pakistan’s use of asymmetric forces to countervail India’s economic and military preponderance led to India’s contention that Pakistan breeds and exports terrorism. This perception was exploited after 9/11 and got deeply embedded in the Indian psyche after the Mumbai terrorist attack that is alleged to be masterminded by the LeT and secretly supported by elements in the establishment. Nuclear rivalry is another source of tension and distrust.
Despite Pakistan’s sincere efforts to allay Afghanistan’s misgivings, deep distrust characterises the relationship. Kabul refuses to accept the Durand line as the international boundary. The Afghan perception is that Islamabad pursues a dual policy of seeking good relations, while supporting the Taliban directly or discreetly. Unless the insurgency in Afghanistan subsides, Pakistan will remain a villain in the eyes of Afghans. India’s growing influence in Afghanistan, especially close links between their militaries and intelligence agencies, further complicates matters.Interestingly, Iran and Pakistan consider each other rivals as well as partners in the region. Relations frequently run into trouble with Tehran blaming Islamabad for not being able to contain sectarian violence and not managing the border efficiently. Pakistan could become a battleground for proxy wars between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Another major area of divergence with Tehran is that both see each other supporting rival groups in Afghanistan. Prospects of a breakthrough between the US and Iran on the nuclear issue will hopefully provide relief for Pakistan. A classic demonstration of this indecisiveness is reflected in the way our governments have been vacillating on the Iran gas pipeline project. Moreover, permanent nuclear agreement between the US and Iran could invite the ire of Saudi Arabia with consequences for Pakistan.



If this continues expect Iran to destabilize TSP to reduce KSA power.
Iran has contiguous border with Balochistan. And thats the pathway to Sindh which is Shia majority.

I think new ways fro TSP to fail are opening with Allah's blessings despite Surrender Singh's magnificient efforts to keep them afloat.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21352
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby SSridhar » 09 Apr 2014 05:55

Though the Islamic Republics of Iran & Pakistan had often come together against the Kafir India, the murderous anti-Shi'a programme that is now well established in Pakistan and whose intensity will only increase in coming months and years has already irreversibly affected the Iran-Pakistan relationship. The increasing proximity between KSA and Pakistan in Syria, with KSA taking advantage of the latter's dire economic situation, will further set the Iran-Pakistan relationship apart.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47301
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby ramana » 09 Apr 2014 06:01

I don't care for their relatiosnhip. I want them to support the Balochs to get back at KSA.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21352
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby SSridhar » 09 Apr 2014 08:48

Looking at the Shi'a history and the presence of Sunni Baluchis in the Sistan-Baluchistan province of Iran, I doubt if the Iranians would go all out to do that.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47301
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby ramana » 09 Apr 2014 09:00

Iran now has expertise developed in Lebanon and Syria to stunt and maim their opponents. If US drawdown occurs and or Syria hots up expect Iran movement in TSP.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 30 Apr 2014 14:52

#SaveBSOAzadLeader ‏@Zarina_Baloch 4h
I,m Requesting For #India Peoples Please Vote For Modi Je #SelfieWithModi #AbkibaarModiSarkaar Modi Je is Good leader,s Modi Plz Help Baloch

Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby Agnimitra » 07 May 2014 08:05

X-post from STFU-Pak thread:

Agnimitra wrote:Blogpost by Omar Ali has this:
Here is my summary of who may be in a position to save us if the Pak army fails (I sincerely pray to Allah that they do NOT fail)

Punjab can only be saved by the Khalsa.
Pakhtoons can only be saved by Afghanistan.
The Baloch can only be saved by China (i.e. if the Chinese switch sides)
The Sindhis can only be saved by? ...India? I dunno. I await input on this one.

Interesting that he doesn't see "Khalsa" as part of the Indian family.


Paul wrote:It is Punjabi nationalism. They want to remerge the two Punjabs, fall back on their east Punjabi brethren as a fall back option.


Jhujar wrote:This was predicted 4 years ago. They wont to Hindus but ask Sikhs to rescue them . Too much water gone down the Satlej with Hindus. Beseeching the Khalsa proterction they think save their face. Paki still distinguish their "win"in 71 among General Arora, Jacob and Shaw. They did not want to be seen surrendering to Jew, Christian or Hindus.


Agnimitra wrote:That's right. Also points to special significance of the 10 Gurus' creation.

Anyway, when Omar Ali was asked for clarification on teetar, he said this:

Image

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 21 May 2014 03:10

Continuing from "STFU Pakistan" Thread

Jhujar wrote:http://tribune.com.pk/story/710880/the-real-threat-from-namo/
The real threat from NaMo
As a Pakistani, my concern is not that Modi will be nasty to India’s Muslims. My concern is that he will continue to dismantle the sclerotic legacy of Nehruvian socialism and in turn vault the Indian economy to an even bigger lead ahead of Pakistan than it has now. I am, of course, happy for the prosperity that my Indian neighbours will enjoy if Modi succeeds. I am just afraid of my own country being left behind. We are not exactly good at dealing with economic resentment.To their credit, the Nawaz leadership has avoided the kind of populist rhetoric that has been all too evident in the media. The prime minister himself appears dedicated to improving ties with India, in particular economic ties.As the two countries move the dialogue forward, it will be important for Pakistani negotiators to focus on our core economic strengths. That means acknowledging that as trade opens up with India, some industries will benefit while others may suffer or even perish. As Modi takes office, Pakistanis should focus on the economic opportunity his inauguration represents, not any potential impact on civil liberties in India it may have. We do not exactly stand on the moral high ground when it comes to the treatment of minorities.


Actually Indian Govt. needs to only favor only a couple of Pakistani industries, which are in Army hands, let's say cement. In return India can get all sorts of market segments in Pakistan for Indian goods - manufactured goods, textiles, processed food, vehicles, etc. thus basically killing all local Pakistani industry as well as the skill sets.

Then if one day India chooses to stop cement imports, then Pakistan is left with neither industry nor a customer for their cement.

Key is to give some market concession to the power brokers in Pakistan in return of letting India have them as captive markets.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4956
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RoyG » 21 May 2014 03:20

It's only a matter of time before the Iranians are at our doorsteps through the Shias of Balochistan. They are ultimately our enemies as well, although they many times less virulent than the Sunni strain. We may have to play games to ensure that the Balochis remain independent should Pakistan balkanize. Keeping the iranians at low grade war with the sunnis will play to our advantage. The russians are already drifting away from us and will ultimately side with the chinese and iranians to counter nato.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20204
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby Prem » 21 May 2014 03:26

Shut Cement Import( Build Cement Factories in Iraq & Kurdistan)
Shut Cotton Export to Paw Kiss Thaan. Subsidize Indian export to kill PKST' export
Covert Opeation at Sea to Sink their export shit

Best Decision recent GOI to share Afghanistan Defence Expenditure. The idea originated"hare" at this forum.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 29 Oct 2014 11:21

Continuing from "Sunni Terrorist Fragments of Unstable Pakistan - 10 Oct 2014" Thread

Jhujar wrote:Abb Terra kya Hogga paakiyya

London- British Prime Minister David Cameron has reiterated that the United Kingdom wanted deeper ties with India while also making it aptly clear that his government would never interfere in the highly vexed Kashmir issue.The Conservative Party leader was today quoted as saying to a TV news channel,“We are two great democracies that face many of the same challenges. We need more economic growth; we need more investment in trade. We both have to fight extremism and terrorism. These are shared challenges that Britain and India should face together."The British Prime Minister, who is seeking re-election in the 2015 polls, also sought to woo the vast Indian population living in UK by calling for greater ties between the two countries.Cameron indicated that Britain did not intend to intervene in the Kashmir dispute between India and Pakistan by saying, "It is the engagement between the two nations and that was for these countries to lead these debates on this issue and not for others to interfere."


As long as Indian Establishment used to look up to Mama Britannia for affirmation and was peeved when Mama Britannia used to show preference to its other child, Pakistan, so long, Britain could play this role of massaging Pakistan's ego and have both Soothe Asian nations come running to its porch. Pakistan too treats UK as one of its four fathers, and likes to compete with Secular India there for parental love.

With Narendra Modi in power, the danger for UK is that it be taken by the collar and be pushed up a wall for its past deeds, and in fact be shown its smallness and irrelevance for all to see. So UK is quick to wash off its hands over its past policy of getting such a large diplomatic say on the Indian Subcontinent on the cheap.

No matter what shenanigans UK indulges in in the background and whatever logistical and strategic support Pakistan receives from UK clandestinely, at least UK would now desist from supporting Pakistan publicly and would be a lot more forthcoming on India's concerns.

Supratik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4745
Joined: 09 Nov 2005 10:21
Location: USA

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby Supratik » 29 Oct 2014 11:53

Baloch are overwhelmingly Sunni.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47301
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby ramana » 01 Nov 2014 08:55

To put things in historical context

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

Nineteenth and much of twentieth-century Spanish and Portuguese historiography stressed the existence of a continuous phenomenon by which the Christian Iberian kingdoms opposed and conquered the Muslim kingdoms understood as a common enemy from the early eighth century to the late fifteenth century.[1] However, the ideology of a Christian reconquest of the peninsula started to take shape at the end of the 9th century.[2]

A landmark was set by the Christian Chronica Prophetica (883-884), a document stressing the Christian and Muslim cultural and religious divide in Iberia and the necessity to drive the Muslims out. However, Christian and Muslim rulers commonly became divided and fought amongst themselves. Co-existence and alliances between Muslims and Christians were as prevalent as frontier skirmishes and raids, especially in the earlier periods.[2] Blurring distinctions even further were the mercenaries from both sides who simply fought for whoever paid the most.

The Crusades, which started late in the eleventh century, bred the religious ideology of a Christian reconquest, confronted at that time with a similarly staunch Muslim Jihad ideology in Al-Andalus: the Almoravids and even to a greater degree, in the Almohads. In fact previous documents (10-11th century) are mute on any idea of "reconquest".[3] Propaganda accounts of Muslim-Christian hostility came into being to support that idea: most notably the Chanson de Roland, a highly mythical 12th-century French re-creation of the Battle of Roncevaux Pass (778) dealing with the Iberian Saracens and taught unquestioned in the French educational system as of 1880.[4][5]


vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5337
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby vishvak » 01 Nov 2014 16:17

Supratik wrote:Baloch are overwhelmingly Sunni.

What we need is a new Smart City on coastal Balochistan so that Indians can take rest on the way to Iran, Iraq, and so on. Therefore as a state Pakistan has to be completely rubbed off the map. We need Shia corridor to Iran and Sikh corridor to Afghanistan on land - for oil import and cultural exchange.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 06 Nov 2014 14:56

At the time of Partition Pakistan was called the "Laboratory of Islam".

This means all Pakistanis are Lab Rats, Guinea Pigs and Test Monkeys. Now if the Lab Rats get lesions, become blind, hysterical, mad, die, go up in smoke, or smash their heads together, it doesn't mean that Islamic Research is not making progress.

Lab Rats have neither rights, nor a future, nor an expectation on the researcher to go easy on them. They are there to die, in all the various ways possible.

In that way, Pakistan has been a brilliant success.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 07 Nov 2014 12:26

Cross-Posting a post by Raja Ram from "Sunni Terrorist Fragments of Unstable Pakistan - 10 Oct 2014" Thread

shiv,

I have been giving a lot of thought on your writings over the last few days and I believe that you were one of the first people to zero in on one simple fact - the artificial entity's survival or demise is not something that is an outcome of what the artificial entity called Pakistan does or does not do. It is more of what its benefactors do or not do with regard to Pakistan. In that sense, should India's strategic objective be more towards doing whatever is necessary to Pakistan to push it to its logical conclusion which is the dissolution of the artificial entity? Or should it acknowledge the reality that what it does or does not do with Pakistan is not the key but what it does with the benefactors will have a greater outcome?

These questions are playing on my mind for a few days now. Of course, I am no expert when it comes to these things like your or SSridhar saar, but I have been reading up some of the old books and articles on the policy of RN Kao - "Let them stew in their Own Juice" doctrine that India adopted along with the speech Shri Doval made at SASTRA University where he classified options broadly into Defensive, Defensive Offence and Offence when it comes to response to Pakistani strategy. It made me think if institutionally GOI and our political leadership have been far more realistic in their assessments than they have been given credit for.

India probably has long decided that they have to work towards a long attrition battle across multiple fronts to make the cost of supporting Pakistan become untenable for the Maai Baaps of Pakistan - including the biggest one of them all the US. Therefore, the GOI decided to take the less glamorous, more boring path of inexorable progress and development, building national consensus albeit inefficiently, investing heavily in social infrastructure and just about doing enough to keep a gap in terms of strategic and military power to deal with a slow disintegrating Pakistan. Of course, there were miscalculations along the way in terms of not reading China or playing into the hands of political expediency in terms of turning a blind eye to sectarian extremism at first in terms of Punjab and Kashmir. But by and large, GOI seems to have had an institutional approach that reflected a better understanding of who we were really against, our powers and capabilities with regard to them and hence followed a calibrated policy.

That is the part of me thinking that Indian babudom and political class can and do have the ability of thinking objectively and strategically. But the other part of is doubting this. Piskologically speaking, can one really believe that we have that kind of vision or capability amongst our elected rulers and appointed rulers? Do their track record of utterances and actions back up that kind of an assessment that they are indeed capable of thinking through things? I get confused when this "doubting Thomas" part of me asserts itself.

The reason I address this ramble to you, is because you are as good a piskological guru as you are a strategic guru and I felt that you have been amongst the first to break free from conventional thinking when it comes to thinking about Pakistan. So if you can, please do clear the cobwebs that are in my head and show me the light. Thanks

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 07 Nov 2014 13:23

Pakistani Army => Jihad with Teeth

Whereas Somalia, Afghanistan, FATA etc. are Islamic lands where the government has weakened or faded away, Pakistan and Turkey, at least the current Turkey under Erdogan, are countries with a strong Islamic Establishment in power, considerable modern military muscle, with access to Western technology and business, with a certain Western dependence on them due to their geo-strategic location and apparent willingness to work with the West on regional politics. A certain Westernized social layer or even an indulgent elite layer is presented to the West by these countries, to imply a certain congruence of interest and understanding.

Whereas the greater Ummah, the Arab Street, the Tribal Areas, the overcrowded run-down towns of Pakistan and the rest of the Muslim world, they can provide an unlimited supply of Jihadis to various Islamic causes in the world, military establishments like those of Turkey and Pakistan can supply those Jihadis with funding, banking, communications, Internet presence, weaponry, logistics, documents, modern military training, intelligence, medical treatment, transit hubs, etc. all the while pretending to be working with the West to curb the Jihadis.

Thus these Islamic military establishments make the Jihadis of this world a lot more potent, a lot more dangerous.

Either the West wishes to use the services of these Islamic military establishments to oversee the use of Jihadis against their other global military rivals, or they want to use their services to curb anti-Western Jihadis. In both cases, the West strengthens the hands of these Islamist Military establishments, say Pakistani Army and Turkish Establishment, who then facilitate Jihad's potency.

In case of India, it is that we haven't really had the ability lately to either use such Islamic military establishments to either hurt our enemies, nor have we been particularly able to curb Jihadis through cooperation with these Islamist military establishments. As such India has not really made ourselves prisoners of our transactions with these Islamic military establishments.

What this means is that India is basically free to hit out at these Islamic military establishments and weaken them, and most appropriately the Islamic military establishment where we ought to start this is the Pakistani Army.

Breaking down Pakistan into 4-5 parts would go a long way in weakening and disbanding of Pakistani Army, and thus making Jihadis in the region toothless.

It is true, that as the standard of living in an Islamic country goes down, as is happening in Pakistan, and poverty and population increases, it would be much easier to recruit Jihadis. They would be willing to join various causes for much less money.

What that means is that the potency of Pakistani Army would remain same even as Pakistan becomes poorer, i.e. as long as it has access to modern weapons, modern communications, and political access to the West, because even as Pakistani Army has less financial resources, its outlay to recruit Jihadis also decrease because of overall decreasing Jihadi "wages".

Pakistan's threat to India is not so much in the frontal military confrontation, because as time goes the differential would increase. India would start becoming military stronger and Pakistan military weaker. The bigger weapon systems for Pakistan does not really help Pakistan, i.e. as long as they are still weaker than those of India, e.g. if India can neutralize all this Pakistani weaponry in a couple of days.

What is more threatening to India is the logistical support Pakistan can give Jihadis, the way it did for Mumbai 26/11 attacks. Far more threatening is the ability of Pakistan to brainwash and recruit Indian Muslims for terrorism. Pakistan retains the ability to conduct asymmetric war against India using so-called non-state actors and various proxies.

The ability to conduct asymmetric warfare against India coupled with the proclivity to do so, is something that Pakistani Army retains simply through its mere existence. So Pakistani Army must go. So Pakistan must go.

4 to 5 new Muslim states instead of Pakistan, with establishments hostile to one-another, and inability to sustain Jihadis in India, can be the only solution to stopping Islamic terrorism against India as emanating from Pakistani lands.

deejay
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3362
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby deejay » 07 Nov 2014 15:28

While acknowledging my own limited understanding on the subject, I have often wondered whether Pakistan is the only sate ever to be run and managed by 'spies'. While the PA might be to Pakistan what GOI is to India, the real deal, or the ultimate decision makers are the ones heading ISI and the Chief of PA working primarily through the bureaucracy of 'spies'.

The Plausible deniability, the Double speak, the Peace flag in the right hand with left hand pressing the Terror button are kind of games that 'Spies' would play on regular basis. The use of terror' as an arm of offensive strategy, holding the Nuclear 'ace' as a threat, friendships with global outcasts like NoKo are in line with developing "assets' for all emergencies in the worlds of Intelligence Agencies.

They have a finger in almost all global trouble spots, they have cultivated 'double agents' even in US, they are NATO allied and the bestest of friends of China. These are things traditionally armies would find hard to deal with but 'Spies' would use with ease.

A 'hit' on Paki strengths would have limited benefits without targeting ISI in particular and weakening it. A weak ISI will weaken the PA and hence the entire Paki State. As long as the 'spies' are strong and in cohesion they will cobble together a response. If the ISI falls apart - the challenge in Kashmir, the control of Jihadis, the funding programmes, etc will fall apart.

While it may be contested that targeting the PA means targeting the ISI, I am trying to further concentrate the focus to reduce the CEP.


RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 07 Nov 2014 15:48

Even if Pakistan is broken up into 4-5 parts, the strategic depth of Pakistani Army in the form of an international network of assets, influence, funding, weapon dealers, narcotics traffickers, Islamic brainwashing centers, transit hubs, sanctuaries and safe havens, document forgery, currency forgery, jihadi recruitment centers, and so on can continue to survive despite a breakup of Pakistan.

However such a break-up means that Pakistani Army-ISI does not retain a monopoly on influence in any given fragment of erstwhile-Pakistan or can hide behind international sensitivities on violation of sovereignty. It allows others, like India, to jump into the game and neutralize this monster.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17260
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Pakistan-sponsored Terrorism - India's Options

Postby RamaY » 07 Nov 2014 17:03

RamaY wrote:XPosted
Gagan wrote:All this talk of 30 million turning up on the Indian border for food is unduly dramatic. I don't think it will quite happen this way. Pakistan is straining to remain a single unit. The strings that bind them together are weaker by the day, as the economic situation gets more desperate. Happily, their desperation to maintain their hollow H&D will prove to be their undoing.


RamaY wrote:
Gagan-ji

I do not think so. As the internal violence increases mango-abduls will try to sneak into India. Before their liberation Bangladeshis were Pawkis and they did the same.

Hopefully future Indian PM replays IG's game plan. But then we will be left with another BD land in our west causing slow immigration drain into India as BD is doing now.

There is no easy solution to this problem.

* As long as India keeps them outside, they will become pawns in external players' hands (look at BD and PRC relationship).

* If you bring them in, you are destroying your own house.

My recommendation is to
- Keep them out and separate from Bharat.
- As part of the liberation strategy, build complete reliance on India w.r.t vital food/energy/water supplies
- Support military dictatorships in these states (Islam is not compatible with democracy) and make sure that the dictators die every 3-5 years.
- Install 100% hold on their education and civil-laws.


Smokers’ Corner: The punishing verdict
By Nadeem F. Paracha

... the same survey finds broad support for harsh punishments: [b]78 per cent favour death for those who leave Islam; 80 per cent favour whippings and cutting off hands for crimes like theft and robbery; and 83 per cent favour stoning adulterers to death.

http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/daw ... -760-hh-05

RamaY wrote:I strongly recommend that this law is passed in Pakistan and implemented 400%. This will solve 99.8% of the population problem that is in discussion past two pages...

- Define Islam. All Shias and Ahmedis are kind of left that pure islam == KILL THEM
- Cutting of hands for theft and robbery. 90% of TSPA/ISI qualifies for this claim/crime == AMPUTATE THEM
- Stoning Adulterers to death. 100% RAPE class falls into this category == STONE THEM TO DEATH

This leaves PURE Sunni Muslims. Declare war on them and kill them.

Change Hindu laws (== Secularism) to allow polygamy and convert those living muslim women. Every Indian who marries a converted woman will get 10 Acres of land in West-Indian states of SindhuDesh, Taksasila, Madra, and so on...


RamaY wrote:Guys... please think...

All your plans expect Yindoo-Baniyas to do the hard work and you forget that Yindoo-Baniyas are weak and timid.. Let the martial races of Pakistan do your work.

Please see my post above. Support Taliban - Encourage them to install the purest of pure (purer than brophet and even allah if needed) form of Islam. Ask them to Kill all non-believers amongst them. Amputate thieves and robbers. Stone to death all adulterers.

Let the purest man come forward and demand India to submit. Let the strongest man win. If Allah is happy with those purest of pure Pakis, he will take them to Jennat, far away from these filthy kaffirs.

abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4267
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
Contact:

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby abhischekcc » 08 Nov 2014 18:01

RajeshA wrote:Even if Pakistan is broken up into 4-5 parts, the strategic depth of Pakistani Army in the form of an international network of assets, influence, funding, weapon dealers, narcotics traffickers, Islamic brainwashing centers, transit hubs, sanctuaries and safe havens, document forgery, currency forgery, jihadi recruitment centers, and so on can continue to survive despite a breakup of Pakistan.

However such a break-up means that Pakistani Army-ISI does not retain a monopoly on influence in any given fragment of erstwhile-Pakistan or can hide behind international sensitivities on violation of sovereignty. It allows others, like India, to jump into the game and neutralize this monster.


Not necessarily.

Only the Punjabis in Pakistan want war against India, because it helps turn the locals' attention from the total failure of the government of pakistan (GOP). The jihadi infrastructure (as well as the drug infrastructure) is mostly located in northern pakistan (Pashtun areas) and in POK. The controlling networks are in W.Punjab. Breaking pakistan will separate the functional part of jihad from the controlling part of jihad. It will also deprive jihadis of forward bases such as Sindh and Baloch areas.

The money laundering parts of narco-trafficking are located in the more urban areas like Sindh and Punjab. Western banks like HSBC and Stanchart are part of the money laundering cycle and are responsible for transmitting the ill-gotten gains from lower levels of narco-trafficking to the global (western dominated) financial world. Of course, they are also responsible for money laundering at higher levels also.

Breaking pakistan will divide the controlling part from the functional part from the financial part of the jihad/drug industry.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 08 Nov 2014 19:19

Cross-Posting a post by shiv from "Sunni Terrorist Fragments of Unstable Pakistan - 10 Oct 2014" Thread

Raja Ram wrote:That is the part of me thinking that Indian babudom and political class can and do have the ability of thinking objectively and strategically. But the other part of is doubting this. Piskologically speaking, can one really believe that we have that kind of vision or capability amongst our elected rulers and appointed rulers? Do their track record of utterances and actions back up that kind of an assessment that they are indeed capable of thinking through things? I get confused when this "doubting Thomas" part of me asserts itself.

The reason I address this ramble to you, is because you are as good a piskological guru as you are a strategic guru and I felt that you have been amongst the first to break free from conventional thinking when it comes to thinking about Pakistan. So if you can, please do clear the cobwebs that are in my head and show me the light. Thanks

:lol: Thanks for the kind words. This has ended up being a very long reply. My apologies.

I think we do have the basic human material (smartness, knowledge) to handle things sensibly. We also have had in my view a "stroke of luck". India and Indians do have a streak of civilizational consciousness. I use the expression despite the difficulty in explaining its meaning - but ever since I started thinking about it - I have seen it as a common set of cultural traits(morality and human values) , a common set of sacred icons (geography, mountains, rivers, sacred places) and a common civilizational memory in terms of stories and legends that connect up the core Indian nation. Whether anyone likes it of not these traits have a firm Hindu color and many are hardly "religious" in nature.

The existence of such commonality has been denied by all invaders, who have tended to be of a more restricted religio-cultural background and cannot see the common skein, or the common skein ends up being antagonistic to their aims, but I digress. What this national commonality gives us is a common idea of what is good and what is not good. These are the factors that have given rise to a large number of nationalistic leaders. I have criticized the word "nationalist" in another thread. I think in India, "nationalist" is a pseudo-secular word that is used in place of "Hindu culture" so that people are not offended. But Hindu culture is not a religion. It is a common thread of behavior, morality and allegiance to a geographic region. A Christian or Muslim can show this behavior without fear or guilt, and they do. But it is the religions, Christianity and Islam which are at the forefront of denying that their followers can be called "Hindu" or that they can show allegiance to geography or morality that is out of their book. But people can and do act that way and can be nationalist/Hindu. Disputing who is Hindu is at the heart of the tactics used by invaders who have sought to break India. It is the pseudosecular fear of offending my Muslim compatriot that stops me from pointing out that India is steeped in Hindu history and culture and Indian nationalism is loyalty to the entire nation with its geographic boundaries that are described in literature and folklore going back 5000 years. That folklore happens to be Hindu, and losing that is losing our identity as a nation.

India has had the good fortune of having a sufficiently large body of Indians who are fully aware of its history and what makes it a nation-state today. Pakistan is only a subset of the issues faced by the nation - although it is an important subset. In 1947 Jinnah and Iqbal played a confidence trick on the country in the ultimate dispute against the concept of India as a nation. The con job was to deny that India could be a nation and that it was islam that is the real glue. India and Indian had no way of confirming or denying this. It was a geo-strategic "you farted" act and although Indian leaders (and even Maududi IIRC) had their doubts no one could do anything about it.

The Pakistani founding fathers, largely the educated ashraf elite were very "modern" in the way they were able to forge very "European" alliances with European and post European powers. "Alliance" means I fight your wars, you fight mine. It is not about dance and cultural exchange. It is about you helping me when my survival is at risk. Pakistani leaders constantly took the line that they would ally with the biggest powers and fight their battles (which the great powers needed to fight for their survival) in exchange for aid that would ensure Pakistan's survival, In other words Pakistan's survival as a nation was not a consequence of history, culture or geographic boundaries which had all been rejected in favor of Islam . It was assumed to be Islam but needed to be held together by force (ultimately the Paki army). And that army forged strong alliances with great powers to ensure its own survival.

I think this information has always been clear to Indian leaders, and facts stood out even more starkly after 1971 when Islam was proven not to be the glue for an intact Pakistan. Also obvious to Indian leaders was the fact that Muslims in India did not rise up en masse in response to Pakistan's call for rebellion starting from before 1965. This much information is enough to chart a path for India. Maintain harmony and justice and keep defence just strong enough to resist Pakistan attempts to revise borders. This latter requirement has made India stumble and scramble on several occasions. Every time Pakistan acquired game-changing military capability (always from foreign sources) India faced open threats and had to scramble to keep up. We had to "catch up" with Pakistan nuclear weapons - tested for them in China in 1983. We had to scramble to match the game changing acquisitions of F-104s in the late 50s and F-16s in the 80s. To the Indian government that had to fund all this it was obvious that we were fighting a sort of proxy war against the US and China via Pakistan. We could not hope to defeat Pakistan comprehensively given its network of allies, and given that Pakistan really was playing mercenary for those allies and earning their profound gratitude.

What amazes me is that none of this information was deliberately kept secret from the Indian public. It was all out there in the open, and the government and defence apparatus were doing pretty much what was appropriate and adequate under the circumstances to cope with such pressures. But the Indian public and Indian media (including BRF in the early days) was guided entirely by our flawed education, by western media and a western way of looking at India by Indians themselves. There was also a conviction that India should deal with things like the west, in order to become like the west. What this meant on the ground was that Indians were unable to see Pakistan's hostility to India. Indians simply suspected that it was their own hostility to Muslims. Furthermore educated Indians felt that we should deal with Pakistan like Israel's Entebbe raid or the way the US handled Pakistan.

As I found out for myself on BRF when I tried to say how Pakistan and the US were allied, my words were regularly stonewalled and I was told that this was nonsense, and that the US was a superpower that could do anything and would make Pakistan do its bidding in an instant. The truth in fact was somewhere in between. the US could and did use Pakistan to "balance" India, but it was also being conned by Pakistan and did not have Pakistan under its control.

The difference for India between these two possibilities is huge. If Pakistan is totally under US control and Pakistan is totally devoted to propping up US actions against India, then we have to fight the US ultimately, to break free.

But if Pakistan is not totally under US control and is actually manipulating and using the US, then we need not end up fighting the US. We only need to bring Pakistan's hostility and antagonism to the US out in the open and let the alliance break up.

For these and a host of other reasons I believe that the key element has been access to accurate information. GoI has that information. We (the lay public) too have access to information provided we look at all sources rather than restrict ourselves to some Paki media that may be designed to simply fool us. The Pakistani establishment and ISI are 100 times smarter than BRF as a group. They also have the power to plant information that is believed by a huge number of Americans and Indians, let alone BRFites. Therefore we need to look at all information from Pakistan with care and to check if alternate sources and different views are available.

Strategizing and planning are all about information. If you take planted information or ignore available info, the ideas you get will be wrong. The subject is huge and I must point out that many of my thoughts have been guided by knowledge of some military history. I commend the GoI's drive to see that it is documented

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 08 Nov 2014 19:20

Cross-Posting a post by Raja Ram from "Sunni Terrorist Fragments of Unstable Pakistan - 10 Oct 2014" Thread

Thanks shiv, that was a sweeping exposition on the idea of India from an Indian perspective. While I am reading and re reading it to get the nuances correct, I would like to present a few points to consider to you and other gentle rakhsaks in the forum

1. One of the key takeaways, therefore is that Pakistani entity has used its benefactors as much as they have used them. It is not just a pure master-slave relationship, but the slave has also used the masters.

2. I have always had a hypothesis, post WWII era is one that ushered a few new paradigms. Large scale wars were not the norm, but it is also a fact that the whole world has been subjected to many localized wars. The Cold War had the two super powers being the source, the arbiter and sometimes direct participants in conflicts. Post Cold war, the surviving sole power is also stretched beyond its limits in playing the role on its own. Pakistan was a shrewd exploiter of the Cold War era and engineered for itself a level of usefulness for its benefactors. India, on the other hand, made a conscious decision of not being part of any camp, but committed itself to pull itself out of the conditions that it found itself in.

3. With the emergence of India and China along with other powers, there is an ongoing evolution into a multi polar world. This rise is at the expense of the benefactors and status quo powers. They would rather have this rise moderated and made in a manner that India plays by their rules. This is again used well by Pakistan for its own survival.

4. However, it now appears that India has now reached a momentum that will make it more and more difficult for Pakistan to justify its usefulness as an instrument of containment of India for the benefactors. In addition, the cost of using Pakistan is going to be unaffordable for the benefactors. Furthermore, it is also getting clear that the ability of the sole super power and its allies are to exercise their overwhelming capability superiority has to be tempered by the fact that the world is far more complex to exercise that superiority.

5. In light of the above, I think the Indian strategic space and response is undergoing a phase of very significant recalibration and the leadership that is in place in India will not shy away from exercising its options and further its national interests. I believe, that this is not lost on powers that have made Pakistan possible and are underwriting its survival. The Pakistani elite are also increasingly getting nervous on what is store for them and they are in for a storm that will blow their own entity away. The benefactors will be forced in the next decade to limit their exposure and cut their losses in Pakistan.

6. In conclusion, the GOI is now in a position to take advantage of a series of options that will open up. It can achieve two strategic aims. Getting rid of the Pakistan problem by getting rid of Pakistan is the first. The second is to neutralize the major benefactors ability to keep India down and restrained into a sub-regional box.

It is this window of opportunity that has now emerged and it is unto India to seize the moment and push through with its agenda.

Just my thoughts for what it is worth

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 08 Nov 2014 19:21

Cross-Posting a post by shiv from "Sunni Terrorist Fragments of Unstable Pakistan - 10 Oct 2014" Thread

Raja Ram wrote:6. In conclusion, the GOI is now in a position to take advantage of a series of options that will open up. It can achieve two strategic aims. Getting rid of the Pakistan problem by getting rid of Pakistan is the first. The second is to neutralize the major benefactors ability to keep India down and restrained into a sub-regional box.

After I read your post, a thought that occurred to me was with reference the statement "A stable Pakistan is in India's interest"

The strongest (and perfectly valid) argument we have had against that is that a stable Pakistan, or for that matter Pakistan, stable or unstable, has never ever, not even for a minute, been in India's interest. A collapse of, or getting rid of Pakistan is a desirable outcome for that reason. (As an aside, maybe the Pakistani army's "survival is victory" is a result of this desire, but I digress.)

The question that arises in my mind is whether we can ever have a stable state that is not inimical to India in that region. To me this seems unlikely. I cannot see in any scenario a state bordering Kashmir, Punjab and Rajasthan that is stable and friendly to India.

We owe it to the country to ensure maximum security to the nation - and surely it can't be fun to live in the border regions so the fact that a stable state across the border is unlikely is bad new. However - it is mostly a continuation of what we have seen for 67 years. Maybe something needs to be done or made to happen to reduce the risk further.

I have felt for some years that a very populous failing state next door - where people are starving and ridden with disease and jobless would be a good outcome for Pakistan. They seem to be meeting at least some of those requirements on their own. The problem of course is those parts of Pakistan that are coherent - the "establishment" and the "army" - that parts of Pakistan that constitute the Kabila. The Kabila receives aid from the US and China and that is what has been a problem. The Kabila needs to be rendered ineffective.

i stated many years ago that India can do deals with a proper Islamic state next door - but we have to be able to punish them militarily at will. We can deal with super-pious Muslims - but rabble rousing mullahs will need elimination. Rabble rousing/criminal Mullahs backed by clean shaven armies supported by the US is what we have now - and I don't see any easy or quick end to that.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 08 Nov 2014 19:31

shiv wrote:I have felt for some years that a very populous failing state next door - where people are starving and ridden with disease and jobless would be a good outcome for Pakistan. They seem to be meeting at least some of those requirements on their own. The problem of course is those parts of Pakistan that are coherent - the "establishment" and the "army" - that parts of Pakistan that constitute the Kabila. The Kabila receives aid from the US and China and that is what has been a problem. The Kabila needs to be rendered ineffective.

i stated many years ago that India can do deals with a proper Islamic state next door - but we have to be able to punish them militarily at will. We can deal with super-pious Muslims - but rabble rousing mullahs will need elimination. Rabble rousing/criminal Mullahs backed by clean shaven armies supported by the US is what we have now - and I don't see any easy or quick end to that.


A very poor populous Muslim state next door works both ways. If the Kabila is still in tact, then their recruitment costs for Jihadis decrease and such Jihadis can be sent to India to cause terror.

However a very poor populous Muslim state next door, where India decides to finish off the Kabila, again on the one hand the recruitment costs for Kabila-hunters is low, and secondly the Shuddhi costs for the population are also manageable.

The Kabila - Mullahs, Ghazis, Jihadis, Jernails, and their next rung of leaders would have to be taken out. So it really depends on what India decides, plans for and prepares for.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33290
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby shiv » 09 Nov 2014 06:35

If you look at the tactics adopted by the west (or even Pakistan) when it comes to troublesome areas of the world, the idea is usually to "bring stability" by installing a puppet government. The US had the Shah of Iran as a puppet; they tried to install a puppet in Vietnam; hey had Marcos in the Phillippines. Pakistan itself had a puppet in the Taliban inside Afghanistan

The unique feature of Pakistan was that the army acted effectively as a US puppet earning them lasting US gratitude and tens of billions in aid.

So when I say that I would like to see a chaotic, infighting, poor, disease riven state next door I could be asked why it would not be better to copy the tactics used by states over centuries and try and install a puppet government in Pakistan. The main reason is that leaders of people cannot simply be conjured up. Puppets can be installed but they will soon be deposed or dethroned because they are puppets. The other problem is that currently the Pakistan army is a puppet of the US (and China) and the Islamists who fight the army are against the US and India.

To repeat what I have said many times
1. The Pakistan army and its own Islamist puppets are wholly ant India and are not anti-US or China
2. Splinter groups of Islamists are anti US, anti-China and anti India

If you were an American planner which would you prefer?
If you were an Indian planner which would you prefer?


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests