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.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby ramana » 16 Sep 2010 18:44

Lalmohanji, Exactly, there is historical precedent in the Bahmani Sultanate. Hoever the TSPA is a Pakjab Army so difficult to see a regional or sub-national revolt like the East Bengal Regt in 1971. Even the Baluch Regt has Pakjab soldiers. So need to think of different mechanism. Lodi Sultanate nawabs invited babur to takeover< Shahwalliullah invited Abdali. So most likely another pious one will be invited. That rules out Karzai as he is not pious at all. So someone from the AlQ or Pakiban will be the Amir Ul Umra. In that situation the corps commander in charge of the maal will turn pious, if he has the maal and become the Kabila commander.
Meanwhile M. krepon moans...

The Flood
By Michael Krepon

The Soviet Union was dying long before its collapse, but few took serious notice. Sovietologists in the United States were too threat-oriented to recognize grave weaknesses. And those who benefitted so much from the perks of state in the USSR were, for the most part, disinterested or incapable of reversing negative trend lines. To be sure, the Nomenclatura knew that new energy was badly needed at the top, which accounted for the elevation of Mikhail Gorbachev. But the rot was so far advanced by that time that Gorbachev's attempts at reform unhinged the state.[/url]

All of the nuclear weapons and fissile material accumulated by the Soviet security apparatus - stockpiles so large that no keeper of this treasure had an accurate count - helped not one bit to change this outcome. These surpluses were more than sufficient for deterrence, but worse than useless for what ailed the Soviet Union. Nuclear weapons could not reform a culture of corruption, political institutions or the agricultural sector.

[b]Pakistan now faces an existential crisis that requires, for starters, clear thinking. A country in desperate need of water has been deluged by it. A political system that justifiably receives low marks for governance in the absence of crises could not possibly begin to cope with a natural disaster of this magnitude.
President Asif Ali Zadari, now emblematic of what ails Pakistan, chose not to let the onset of flooding interfere with his travel plans to France, where he reportedly checked on his real estate portfolio, and Great Britain, where he planned to choreograph a public appearance by his son, recently graduated from Oxford, to help secure another family inheritance, one of Pakistan's major political parties. This seminal event was shelved in lieu of a fund raiser for disaster relief.

For Pakistan, as well as India, the future now holds a million mutinies. Indian security forces are used to managing mutinies; Pakistan's security forces are not. With an economy in decline, croplands and power grids destroyed, and a ruling class that does not believe in load sharing, micro-level revolts over land and electricity are likely to pile on to the macro list of Pakistan's woes. Sectarian violence has not taken a holiday during Ramazan and the flood; militant groups are threatening U.S. aid workers, and the hollowing out of Islamabad's writ over the country is accelerating. As if this weren't enough, the pride of Pakistan - members of the national cricket team - have been credibly accused of fixing matches.

Disease gets a blank check when existential threats do not prompt a re-thinking of root causes. Pakistan's military leaders now face very hard questions, the result of poor decisions made at earlier, critical junctures. Pakistan's Kashmir policy, which was once viewed as a low-cost way to keep India off-balance and foster national unity has done far more damage to Pakistan than to India. Military takeovers have stymied political development without promoting sound governance. The Army's expansion into economic domains has restricted economic growth and entrepreneurship. It is hard for Pakistan's military to prepare to defend national territory when it is trying to run Pakistan's government, agriculture and economy

The cost of defending Pakistan would be significantly less if Pakistan pursued reconciliation and economic trade with India, but movement along these lines in the past has been stymied by assaults on iconic Indian targets by young men trained and equipped in Pakistan. New Delhi's political leaders should have the wisdom to understand that seizing and holding Pakistani territory would be like trying to swallow a porcupine. But continued mass casualty attacks by militant, Islamic groups based in Pakistan beg the question of New Delhi's continued forbearance. India's armed forces have the responsibility of developing punitive plans and are acquiring the capabilities to execute them if given these orders.

Pakistan's military is therefore caught between a rock and a hard place. The conventional balance is tipping more and more in India's favor, which means relying increasingly on nuclear weapons that, if used, would be Pakistan's ultimate disaster. (In the midst of current travails, Pakistan's Ambassador to the Conference on Disarmament, Zamir Akram, reaffirmed his country's veto on starting negotiations on a fissile material cutoff treaty.) Militant groups remain a double-edged sword. The Army is taking on one group, the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan that has blown up mosques, markets and military installations, at significant cost. Other outfits, such as the Lashkar-e-Taiba and its parent organization, are inconvenienced only after major explosions in India. They are poison to Pakistan's political and economic development, posing a threat to the state that Muhammad Ali Jinnah envisioned -- but they are also likely to become the Pakistan Army's allies in the event of an Indian attack triggered by their actions. The longer this dilemma continues, the harder it becomes for the Pakistan Army to address. Taking over governing functions would only add to the Army's headaches, but it is once again evident that Pakistan's political leaders have done well for themselves and poorly for their country.

So what, in current circumstances, does it mean to defend Pakistan?


Michael Krepon is the co-founder of the Stimson Center.


This is where modernism veils your thinking. Islamism has only one answer. To defend Pakistan is to defend the extreme elements of the society who are the core needed for revival. All else is fluff. The kabila can move on and start fresh if the core is preserved.

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1506
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby Pulikeshi » 16 Sep 2010 21:08

Krepon uvacha:
They are poison to Pakistan's political and economic development, posing a threat to the state that Muhammad Ali Jinnah envisioned -- but they are also likely to become the Pakistan Army's allies in the event of an Indian attack triggered by their actions. The longer this dilemma continues, the harder it becomes for the Pakistan Army to address. Taking over governing functions would only add to the Army's headaches, but it is once again evident that Pakistan's political leaders have done well for themselves and poorly for their country.


Therefore it follows that getting the Mullah-Jihadis to align and or become the only political entity in TSP will guarantee its collapse.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby ramana » 16 Sep 2010 21:21

The TSp and LeT(Mullah-Jihadis) are already allied in a covert or latent basis.

This is the houbara of TSP. The goal has to be to make it run and show itself.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 16 Sep 2010 22:12

When we discuss the fault-lines of Pakistan we need to discuss the Establishment and Society somewhat separately, e.g. sectarianism may be a fault-line in the Society, but in the Establishment it could, if at all, only be exploited at an individual's level, and not as a group.

As far as the Establishment is concerned, i.e. the TSPA, the fault lines in Pakistan lie not really between the Army and Islamists, but rather Army + Pakjabi Islamists and Pushtun Islamists. So there where it is important to exploit these fault lines - ethnicity remains more important than religion. Of course, for the sake of PR (e.g. in the case of an external threat), there is often a show of unity amongst all of the above, as Muslim Chauvinism is the common denominator, and everybody wants to be seen as the protector of Islam, not just Islamists but all Pakistanis.

So if India has to seek friends within the Establishment and exploit for example the ethnic (Pakjab-Pushtun/Pakjab-Mohajir/Pushtun-Mohajir) faultlines, then in any conflict or fomentation of internal strife within Pakistan, India can make all sorts of agreements with various factions, we have to make sure of only one thing - that India's 'allies' get to get some recognition and applause for having caused major takleef to the Hindu Kufr.

So if India can let some desolate warehouse on the border go up in the air with big explosions and gives out a press release that 13 jawans died in the terrorist attack, and let some 'allied' group take credit for it, then there is sufficient room for services that the group can do for India.

This dynamic would be valid both in 'peace' with terrorism, and a hot war with Pakistan. So in case of war, some Hakimullah Mehsud or some Hafiz Gul Bahadur can publicly claim to wage jihad against India, make claims on having fiercely fought with Indians in so and so sector, and then proceed to kick the TSPA from behind in all places where it hurts them.

There would be no difficulty in arriving at some understanding with the factions, if sufficient money is made available, and some promises are made not to hurt their interests, but rather to further those interests viz-a-viz the Pakjabis or establishing Pushtunistan, or some share in some mining/timber or other business.

Even some Pakjabi Islamists can be hired for limited and specific purposes. One just need good handlers from the Indian side.

Even in the current circumstances, where there are Islamist and anti-Indian slogans being shouted left and right in Pakistan, there is much scope to exploit the Pakjab-Pushtun divide.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby ramana » 16 Sep 2010 22:29

One thing to clarify the Pak Army is already a Pakjabi Army. Atleast in the combat formations. So the nexus of Pakjabi Army and Pakjabi Islamists is one of regionalism under Islamist umbrella. The Pushtun Islamist aka TTP are also unified except they dont have any formal govt military formations with them. The Frontier Corps is not strong enough to defect. The only thing going for the Pushtun Islamists is they are more pious than the Pakjabi Islamists.
A day will come when a combat formation in armed contact with the Pushtun Islamists will decide to go over. The TSPA fears that and ensures only Frontier Corps i.e. para-military are in armed contact. However they are not effective as they are in shadow war phase. So US wants TSPA to use regular troops to check the TTP. Hence all this threat from Eastren front charade.

Another step TSP is taking is using air force a la British in Waziristan and Saddam Hussien at Basra. Since US interests are invovled there is no outcry from usual suspects like Amnesty Int. which are Dupli Ceety Non State Actors.

So one can campaign to make this holy cows make noises about using Air Force to put down insurgencies.

Indnia needs her own NGOs!

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 16 Sep 2010 23:39

At any given time in the Army+Mullah+Jihadi Establishment there are currents of greed, regionalism/ethnicity and religious piety.

The Pushtuns of the tribal areas have found out, that they could structure their defenses better using Islam. Islam provided a template for social behavior, order and stability. Needing to protect their freedoms from richer tribes of the plains, the Pushtuns saw a solution in Islam. A greater level of piety on the part of the Pushtuns would act as a durable levy against the influential pressure of the richer tribes from the plains, because it would weaken the resolve and unity of purpose of the warriors of the pre-Pakjabis as Islamic Piety provided a wonderful PR instrument, useful for that purpose. Of course Islamic Piety was also useful for the motivation of own warriors, as ethnicity alone was not considered an impenetrable firewall. We Indians see that everyday with the likes of Commies, RNIs and DIE. Hence the stronger piety. Because it is useful.

Now these tribal/ethnic/regional interests persist nevertheless, only they are now fought over under the umbrella of Islam and using the instrumentation of Islam. Now this instrument of Islam has taken deep roots in that culture. Any exchange we have with the tribal Pushtuns would have to take this under consideration. This veil of piety has become a second skin to the tribal Pushtuns. We can make any deals with them on business or on security interests, but at all times we would not be allowed to disturb their veil of Islamic piety. The veil of Islamic piety is not for sale (normally).

If that condition is satisfied, the Pushtun tribes can be India's de-facto partners in the region during any conflict or for that matter also in 'peace'. For that we will have to be very discrete in our dealings with our 'partners'. We should remember that they have their compulsions of the Veil of Islamic Piety, Tribal interests, and Personal greed. We should be able to take care of all three.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby ramana » 17 Sep 2010 02:21

Philip's solution:

Merge TSP with KSA and make the TSPA officer cadre the new royalty!

viewtopic.php?p=930177#p930177

Then Kashmir pops up and everything is back to square one.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby shiv » 17 Sep 2010 08:29

Everyone who is frustrated with the US's lack of progress in AfPak now says that Pakistan's compliance is required from progress. Pakistan's compliance has been linked to milking India on Kashmir. India refuses to get milked on Kashmir and so Pakistan is unstable. The anti-India lobby in Pakistan swallows a large part of the budget and keeps a huge part of the Pakistan army tied down. In other words India holds the key to Pakistan's stability.

Both the US and China have supported Pakistan against India for what they feel is their self interest. But Pakistan is still unstable. Making India unstable is what Pakistan is still trying - with the help of its friends and that effort only encourages India to keep Pakistan off balance.

The the to Pakistan's stability is India but not in the way people say. The key to Pakistan's stability is not by handing them Kashmir. The key to Pakistan's stability is by telling the pipsqueak Pakis that they had better stop rocking the boat and mend fences with India. That will not only allow Pakistan to be used for whatever the US and China want to use it for - it will also stop India from threatening Pakistan militarily and financially.

Ultimately the Paki army and establishment may tie their honor to this and not do it. They will have to be brought down. Preparing for an independent Baluchistan and Pashtunistan would be one way of putting the Pakijabi generals in their corect qibla.

Guddu
BRFite
Posts: 935
Joined: 01 Dec 2008 06:22

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby Guddu » 18 Sep 2010 17:54

Guys, I think BRF is failing in one important respect wrt to pakeeland. We need to do something about it.
TSPA, TFTA, RAPE, musharraf and other BRF terms are not easily found on Google search. Any strategies to make these acronyms part of common usage.

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2538
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby darshhan » 19 Sep 2010 01:26

^^Well for one you can use these abbreviations in the comments sections of news items pertaining to Pkistan and war on terror for various journals and websites.For eg Foreign Policy,Wall street journal,nytimes,rediff etc.This is the best way to popularise these terms.Always remember to expand the abbreviations by the way.

D Roy
BRFite
Posts: 1176
Joined: 08 Oct 2009 17:28

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby D Roy » 19 Sep 2010 02:41

We all know that there is a core of RoPers who simply haven't come to terms with the defeat of the Mughal empire and the eclipse of Islamic power on the sub-continent.

The hated yindoos merged together and have created such a concentration of national power that now not only puts Hindustan far beyond the RoPers collective status but puts it on the path to global eminence. Some would say even pre-eminence if not in 50 than 100 years from now. Which by the way is not a very long time.

As of now the RoPers hang onto two straws :

1. "others" who are deeply interested in either "managing" or "impeding" the path to global influence.

2. the "crown jewels" of the TSPA.

Over the years instigation has come from a section of the west. A section of that section continues to try the old gimmick of using Islamists to bother India. This is also the section that most often "eruditely" recommends the twin prescriptions of an early US pullout from Af-Pak and mediation on the Kashmir issue.

But the world has changed and so too have the views of a lot in the Yamriki establishment. They do not buy this theory of "buying" out Jihadis in this way anymore. They know an existential element is involved.

I digress a little bit, but the existential element stems from the bitter hatred of many RoPers towards Hindoostan in the sub-continent which in turn stems from both the caste as well as class issue in the Yindooo vs RoPer debate.

Many of those who turned "believer" in the sad 800 year history of RoPers in Hindoostan feel cheated now even more than they did in 1947. For them the "success" of Hindoostan will be the final slap on the "momentous chance" ( although it spanned eight centuries) to destroy the yeeevil Brahmin-Kshatriya- bania combine. of course some yeevil converted brahmin - Kshatriyas- banias have done more than their bit in propagating this hatred ( but that is a different matter)

Why did I digress? Well I simply reiterated what some here would agree with - the actions of a whole section of RoPers will not be restricted by a MAD rationale. It seems funny to say this but money, sex and drugs will not define or drive the "madness" of a section of RoPers.

Many of them really are bitter. And worst of all, many of them see certain yindoo populations as weak and therefore the urge to try demographic aggression.

Despite that, they are painfully aware that the numbers stack up against them overall. hence the temptation for the "crown jewels".

Those "crown jewels" are not just India's greatest "national security" issue but an existential problem. And even as we continue to talk about strategic stability, some RoPers continue to pine for their use.

asprinzl
BRFite
Posts: 408
Joined: 08 Sep 2004 05:00

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby asprinzl » 19 Sep 2010 02:56

Pakistan has already failed and currently is still in state of failure. It has not disintigrated in official parlance but in reality it already has. It has multiple families and private militias in control of cantons all over the land where official edict don't apply. It has military garrisons that don't obey the command of the GHQ. It has commanders in open revolt against the power center. It has military commanders and police commanders colluding with private militias and terorists in trying to eliminate a general or politician or a businessman or another army commander. This is not a nation. This is not a country. This is a land being inhabited by prehistoric humans with modern gadgets. This is a failed land. The only thing that used to hold it together was the hatred for Hindus/Jews. But that is also wearing thin everyday. The facade of united military power on the Indian frontier is just a facade. It is rotting at the core.

Again I repeat: Pak Is Satan has failed. The world is currently managing it. This includes India. The question of the hour: Is there a better way to manage Pakistan's failure than currently being done?
Avram

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby shiv » 19 Sep 2010 07:50

May I point out that the use of the term RoPers is laziness at best and intellectual dhimmitude at worst. It is impossible to tell which is being displayed on reading the acronym.

I think that it is worth taking the trouble to type out the whole phrase "followers of the Religion of Peace" so that those who do not know the acronym do not need to be puzzled and those who are feeling too secular to type the whole expression take a firm decision to say it or not say it rather than hiding behind a hijab of correctness.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11638
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby A_Gupta » 19 Sep 2010 08:24

Yes, Shiv, I agree. The Amish Mennonite Church in the US is a religion of peace; they have exemption from being drafted for military service. They lead a life generally based on 19th century amenities (e.g., read through http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amish ). As far as I know, nobody has a problem with them, and they don't have a problem with anybody. They live within driving distances of major American cities.

The point being that if people indeed want to live in the 7th century or 13th century (instead of the 19th like the Amish, or the 21st), we and the rest of world can accommodate them. The problem is that the desire to coexist has to be mutual, it cannot be one-sided.

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby brihaspati » 19 Sep 2010 17:23

There is a problem even in the vague coexistence theory. The Amish cannot contravene state laws where they reside unless they have been granted a specific exemption - and most such exemptions are not so as to infringe on the fundamental rights of citizens within the US Constitution. "Coexistence" has to be qualified with a cut-off which says that the community cannot physically impose restrictions or penalties to prevent any member of their community to exercise rights granted to them as citizens if they choose to do so.

Manishw
BRFite
Posts: 756
Joined: 21 Jul 2010 02:46

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby Manishw » 19 Sep 2010 17:50

A_Gupta wrote:The point being that if people indeed want to live in the 7th century or 13th century (instead of the 19th like the Amish, or the 21st), we and the rest of world can accommodate them. The problem is that the desire to coexist has to be mutual, it cannot be one-sided.


A_Gupta, since you have posted this in an open forum I must bring to light other opinions which people like me have about people who wish to live in seventh century while this being the year 2010.

We have no intention of accommodating people who like to live in the 7th century.According to this point of view these people would be better off in a mental asylum or worse.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 19 Sep 2010 20:41

X-Posted from Understanding the Great Game and role of India & Asian stability Thread


Pratyush wrote:The pipe line is a pipe dram onleee. Why, just look at the map. Traversing through the NWFP Balochistan and teh POK. The most unstable regions of TSP. Yet the people are hoping that the pipelines will not be targeted?
RamaY wrote:I too call them Pipedreams. But wouldn't it be wise to advance our interests based on those pipe dreams, until they become pipelines?

Isn't it unwise to postpone things forever?


For India it is almost impossible to get sufficient assurance that Pakistan would not allow politics to enter the operations of Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline. They can always use any pretext to blackmail India.

India would have found the money to build the pipeline through Pakistan. It is good that we did not. PRC has got an old understanding with TSP. After India had invested sufficient money and built the pipeline, Pakistan would have brought up some issue or another and the project would have stopped, perhaps even before a fart of gas had moved through the pipeline. Then they would have waited a year, and let PRC use the built pipeline to pump gas to Western China.

India would have been ass. It is good that we did not fall for the trick.

We know that there are fractures in Pakistan that are becoming ever more visible, and Baluchistan and Pushtunistan could break out, if provided some help. The part of Pakistan, we have given little interest till now is Sindh.

With the IPI, India could entice Sindh as well to break ranks and go for Azadi. If an Iran-Pakistan-China Pipeline is built it would go through a depopulated or heavily subdued Baluchistan and Pakjab and then through PoK to Western China. Sindh gets nothing out of it. But if an Iran-Baluchistan-Sindh-India (IBSI) Pipeline is built, Sindh does get transit fees, and they can keep them.

Sindh must know that in the new Pakistan they will be getting no share of the bounty - Whatever China, USA, Relief-Aid money goes to Pakistan would be snatched up by Pakistani Army and Pakjab. Nothing for Sindh. So if the Sindhi Elites and Sindhi Middle Class still want to stay solvent, they will have to look for new ways.

If Sindh agrees to a partnership with India, then India could also divert some of the waters of the Indus to a canal and provide them with water and they will not be dependent on Pakjab anymore.

Sindh provides us with Gas and we provide Sindh with Water.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby Lalmohan » 20 Sep 2010 18:44

some excerpts from the current UK strategic defense review, in particular one of the future strategic scenarios that the UK forces (are signalling their political masters) want to be prepared for

Telegraph: Future Scenarios - Pakistan 2018

• Crisis: A civilian government has been elected after five years’ military dictatorship but the generals have refused to hand over the codes and keys for the nuclear arsenal. The ousted military seize the missile silos. The Pakistan army splinters, with those loyal to the generals joining a pact with the Taliban who are sharing power with a new government in Afghanistan. Most of the country is overrun by the rebels. A main supply route is cut off to the remaining Nato troops in Afghanistan.

• Response: The UN authorises a multi-national stabilisation force led by a US division and fleet, with a Chinese task force with its new aircraft carrier in the coalition. After three years of recovery from bloody fighting in Helmand, Britain agrees to send one of its five new manoeuvre brigades, equipped with tanks, mine-protected vehicles, armed drones and a fleet of attack and transport helicopters. In the Indian Ocean, two Type 45 destroyers, re-equipped with new anti-ballistic missiles from the US Navy, act as a last-ditch defence against a nuclear missile launch.

• Outcome: F35 Joint Strike Fighters (pictured above) are launched from US and British aircraft carriers against the missile silos. But the rebels manage to launch two nuclear warheads at an installation near Karachi towards Mumbai, 300 miles away. Both are shot down, one by a US warship and one by a Type 45 destroyer. A joint US, British and Chinese amphibious assault storms ashore to the west of Karachi and captures key airfields. In all, 10,000 men are flown in by the RAF’s new transport fleet. An international force of more than 100,000 troops retakes rebel-held areas. The UN force agrees to maintain security for two years while it trains up a stable Pakistani military.

• Likelihood: Very likely

• Readiness: Almost ready



some politically correct positioning (which we can discuss later) but the immediate scenario so publicly stated, must be a bit of an H&D slap

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 21 Sep 2010 04:24

India considering deepwater gas pipeline from Oman: Report: PTI
DUABI: India is actively considering building a 2,000-km-long deepwater transnational gas pipeline from Oman for transporting natural gas sourced from Turkmenistan, Iran and Qatar, a leading industry official has said.

The proposed sub-sea pipeline will meet the additional gas requirement of the UAE, Oman and India, besides easing gas transportation issues of producing countries like Turkmenistan, Iran and Qatar, Subodh Kumar Jain, Director of South Asia Gas Enterprise (SAGE), told Times of Oman.

SAGE, a joint venture between the Siddhomal group, UK-based Deep Water Technology and an Indian firm, is a special project vehicle for building the 2000-km long-sub-sea pipeline.

"We are trying to create an energy corridor. It is a grand scheme of several pipelines. It will connect energy producing countries like Iran, Turkmenistan, Qatar, and will pass through the UAE and Oman, all the way to India," Jain told the newspaper.

As per the plan, the pipeline will originate from Oman and will end either in Gujarat or Maharashtra.

For the gas to be routed to Oman from Qatar, Iran and Turkmenistan, additional pipelines will be needed.

Gas sourced through this will carry an additional transportation tariff, which will accrue to SAGE.

India imports around 26mscmd of LNG. The country is short on natural gas. It needs around 180mscmd, while the supply is 106mscmd.

Jain said the main sub-sea pipeline between Oman and India will cost between $3 to 4 billion.

"We are now discussing with Iran, Turkmenistan and Qatar for sourcing gas for the proposed pipeline. That is the biggest challenge. Besides, there are a lot of geopolitical and security issues involved," Jain said.

After ensuring gas, it will take five years to completed the project. The pipeline will be designed and built by an international consortium.

Demand for gas in India will continue to exceed supply from domestic sources and imported gas will play an important role in bridging the demand-supply gap in the Indian market.


SAGE bless you for saving India!

If USA does not want India to source gas passing through pipelines passing through Iran, India should tell USA that they have the option of breaking away Baluchistan from Pakistan, and if they do it, India would consider dumping this project and opting for a Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Baluchistan-Arabian Sea-India Pipeline (TABAI :mrgreen: ). Otherwise USA should buzz off.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7719
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby rohitvats » 21 Sep 2010 05:24

Lalmohan wrote:
<SNIP>

• Response: The UN authorises a multi-national stabilisation force led by a US division and fleet, with a Chinese task force with its new aircraft carrier in the coalition. After three years of recovery from bloody fighting in Helmand, Britain agrees to send one of its five new manoeuvre brigades, equipped with tanks, mine-protected vehicles, armed drones and a fleet of attack and transport helicopters. In the Indian Ocean, two Type 45 destroyers, re-equipped with new anti-ballistic missiles from the US Navy, act as a last-ditch defence against a nuclear missile launch.

<SNIP>



Two things - (a) Chinese being the local Cop (b) The British day dreaming - maneuver brigade and large TpT a/c fleet? Yeah! sure......I hope British Armed Forces survive till then as a professional fighting force worth the name................

Venkarl
BRFite
Posts: 933
Joined: 27 Mar 2008 02:50
Location: India
Contact:

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby Venkarl » 21 Sep 2010 07:10

3rd---India treated as a lady to be rescued by firangi and chini maachos

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby svinayak » 21 Sep 2010 09:40

Lalmohan wrote:some excerpts from the current UK strategic defense review, in particular one of the future strategic scenarios that the UK forces (are signalling their political masters) want to be prepared for

Telegraph: Future Scenarios - Pakistan 2018

• Crisis: A civilian government has been elected after five years’ military dictatorship but the generals have refused to hand over the codes and keys for the nuclear arsenal. The ousted military seize the missile silos. The Pakistan army splinters, with those loyal to the generals joining a pact with the Taliban who are sharing power with a new government in Afghanistan. Most of the country is overrun by the rebels. A main supply route is cut off to the remaining Nato troops in Afghanistan.

• Response: The UN authorises a multi-national stabilisation force led by a US division and fleet, with a Chinese task force with its new aircraft carrier in the coalition. After three years of recovery from bloody fighting in Helmand, Britain agrees to send one of its five new manoeuvre brigades, equipped with tanks, mine-protected vehicles, armed drones and a fleet of attack and transport helicopters. In the Indian Ocean, two Type 45 destroyers, re-equipped with new anti-ballistic missiles from the US Navy, act as a last-ditch defence against a nuclear missile launch.

• Outcome: F35 Joint Strike Fighters (pictured above) are launched from US and British aircraft carriers against the missile silos. But the rebels manage to launch two nuclear warheads at an installation near Karachi towards Mumbai, 300 miles away. Both are shot down, one by a US warship and one by a Type 45 destroyer. A joint US, British and Chinese amphibious assault storms ashore to the west of Karachi and captures key airfields. In all, 10,000 men are flown in by the RAF’s new transport fleet. An international force of more than 100,000 troops retakes rebel-held areas. The UN force agrees to maintain security for two years while it trains up a stable Pakistani military.

• Likelihood: Very likely

• Readiness: Almost ready



some politically correct positioning (which we can discuss later) but the immediate scenario so publicly stated, must be a bit of an H&D slap


Money to do this $100B of Indian def budget. The scam priceless.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby Lalmohan » 21 Sep 2010 12:41

rohitvats-ji
no way the UK is going to get a big transport fleet, though a manoevre brigade may not be entirely unfeasible
however, one of those and two aircraft carriers... looking dicey
and then trident...
anyway - this is the MoD telling 10 Downing Street what it would like, not what 10DS will approve
this chini rescue thing is interesting, this is not the first time that fantasists have included chinis in international rescue efforts - i think it betrays a very naked fear that the chinis are going to issue them kanadian vijas in the coming years

all that aside, lets focus on the pakistani meltdown...

crore commander split off - check
TSPA-taliban merger - check
pak-balkanisation - check
independent baluchistan - check

what else?

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7719
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby rohitvats » 21 Sep 2010 18:00

While reading Sarila's book on partition, I remember reading about plan to divide India as early as 1919. That is how far these nations have been conditioned to think.

So, I'd not be surprised if the above scenario came from the core of British Defence Establishment. And it betrays the actual intents. The present developments and comments from 10DS or White House seem to be just platitudes. They are trying to delay the inevitable. Some where, they have gamed this scenario and post scenario situation. And given place to PRC in this puzzle. And IMO, cut India to size.

I'll keep this line in mind while evaluating the future scenarios, development potentials and current happenings.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby Lalmohan » 21 Sep 2010 18:34

i am not sure that in the new world order the west will assume india is to be split, that puts china in a more powerful position. in the old calculations, china was initially as pliable as india, but they have changed the game. besides, if they want to exit afghanistan, why wouldnt they make it a yindoo problem?

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 21 Sep 2010 19:46

X-Posted from Oil & Natural Gas: News & Discussion Thread

Published on Sep. 20, 2010
India, Oman mull sub-sea pipeline to pump Turkmen and Iranian gas: RiA Novosti
DUBAI: India is actively considering building a 2,000-km-long deepwater transnational gas pipeline from Oman for transporting natural gas sourced from Turkmenistan, Iran and Qatar, a leading industry official has said.

The proposed sub-sea pipeline will meet the additional gas requirement of the UAE, Oman and India, besides easing gas transportation issues of producing countries like Turkmenistan, Iran and Qatar, Subodh Kumar Jain, Director of South Asia Gas Enterprise (SAGE), told Times of Oman.

SAGE, a joint venture between the Siddhomal group, UK-based Deep Water Technology and an Indian firm, is a special project vehicle for building the 2000-km long-sub-sea pipeline.

"We are trying to create an energy corridor. It is a grand scheme of several pipelines. It will connect energy producing countries like Iran, Turkmenistan, Qatar, and will pass through the UAE and Oman, all the way to India," Jain told the newspaper.

As per the plan, the pipeline will originate from Oman and will end either in Gujarat or Maharashtra.

For the gas to be routed to Oman from Qatar, Iran and Turkmenistan, additional pipelines will be needed.

Gas sourced through this will carry an additional transportation tariff, which will accrue to SAGE.

India imports around 26mscmd of LNG. The country is short on natural gas. It needs around 180mscmd, while the supply is 106mscmd.

Jain said the main sub-sea pipeline between Oman and India will cost between $3 to 4 billion.

"We are now discussing with Iran, Turkmenistan and Qatar for sourcing gas for the proposed pipeline. That is the biggest challenge. Besides, there are a lot of geopolitical and security issues involved," Jain said.

After ensuring gas, it will take five years to completed the project. The pipeline will be designed and built by an international consortium.

Demand for gas in India will continue to exceed supply from domestic sources and imported gas will play an important role in bridging the demand-supply gap in the Indian market.


If India can bypass Pakistan and get Middle Eastern and Central Asian Gas, and all of it, India would be on her way to becoming a truly world power.

Pakistan on the other hand, which hopes to use its strategic location would have its best card neutralized. If it cannot be a conduit for Oil & Gas, its existence is worthless and useless. Whether they exist or not, nobody would care.

So in 2015 when the SAGE Pipeline comes online, India would have freed itself from the Pakistani Lock on India's Subcontinental prison. Add to that the Chahbahar Port with transit facility to Afghanistan and Central Asia, and Pakistan really becomes useless for India.

Without any hope of getting an alternative money spinning enterprise, Pakistan will simply collapse.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 21 Sep 2010 20:38

X-Posted from Oil & Natural Gas: News & Discussion Thread

Published Sept 21, 2010
By Judah Grunstein
India-Oman Pipeline: Redrawing the Connective Map: World Politics Review
This proposed India-Oman deepwater natural gas pipeline represents a potential major shift in the connectivity networks linking Central Asia to South Asia. Once laid, pipelines help determine geopolitical realities for decades, as a glance at the legacy impact of Soviet-Russian pipelines on Central Asian politics reveals. If the Gulf serves as an effective workaround to bypass the Afghanistan-Pakistan transit route, it would dramatically reduce the strategic logic of stabilizing the Af-Pak region. The fact that Iran is involved in this deal as a source country is also a major plus, as it applies additional commercial constraints on Tehran to keep the Gulf open and stable.

Ironically, Iran's participation in the IPI (Iran-Pakistan-India) pipeline route would have further reinforced widely shared interests in a stabilized Afghanistan. But the Pakistan-India rivalry proved even stronger than the U.S.-Iran enmity toward scotching that deal. This strikes me as an even better alternative, because it doesn't come attached with the need to maintain a dodgy and unreliable strategic partnership with Pakistan. And though the U.S.-Iran relationship moving forward is far from a cakewalk (see this Marc Lynch post that deserves all the attention it's gotten), I think Washington and Tehran have a better chance of reaching a modus vivendi than New Delhi and Islamabad do.


So there you have it - if India does go ahead with this deep sea Gas Pipeline, even the USA would lose interest in Pakistan and would stop stuffing it with aid dollars. No more money for the beggars.

Hari Seldon
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9240
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 12:47
Location: University of Trantor

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby Hari Seldon » 21 Sep 2010 20:56

^^^If and when the India-Oman undersea pipeline thing actually comes to pass bypassing Papistan, expect Taliban-Al qaeda combine to scrumptiously and mysteriously develop naval and submarine capabilities all of a sudden.

Oh, there'll be multiple confirmations of identity - with Al zawahiri's recorded taps broadsided via Al jazeera and khanate op-eds screeching a "blame al keeda only" tune.

Then of course, TSPA will ask for naval and submarine technology to take on the new al qeeda navy threat only. The cycle will continue.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 21 Sep 2010 21:05

^^^

This would give Indian Navy a bigger impetus to develop and deploy deep sea underwater mobility and defense technology and to create a SIGINT intelligence gathering network all over the Arabian Sea.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RamaY » 21 Sep 2010 21:10

^
:rotfl:

RajeshA-ji, you are getting carried on... When did India punished a terrorist ( :oops: non-state actor) outside its borders?

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8188
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby Pratyush » 21 Sep 2010 21:15

^^^

It is the thought that breeds action. Rajesh keep it up, at least some of your thoughts will be result in action.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 21 Sep 2010 21:37

RamaY wrote:^
:rotfl:

RajeshA-ji, you are getting carried on... When did India punished a terrorist ( :oops: non-state actor) outside its borders?


What we need is Paki-sniffing technology deployable everywhere - on land, in air, under sea and in space! :D

No those suggestions were actually to ward off threats from the Pakistani Navy, and other sympathetic groups to it, as well as from the Chinese Navy. We need 100s of small submarines manned by 5-6 naval officers each, criss-crossing the whole of the Indian Ocean. We need specialized deep sea craft with cranes, drilling equipment, mechanical arms, able to carry out repair work on those pipelines at any time. We need several very high speed boats able to tackle any non-state adventurers who come too close to the pipeline. We need anti-mine ships and other anti-mine defenses to be at hand deployable at short notice.

India has got an ocean to protect. We should be the most technologically advanced marine power in the world. In 20 years we should be able to make colonies on the ocean floor. Somehow I can't stop thinking of SeaQuest DSV. :wink:

We need an ISRO for our Ocean!

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 21 Sep 2010 21:39

Pratyush ji,

Thanks. Will do! :)

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby shiv » 22 Sep 2010 09:05

RamaY wrote:^
:rotfl:

RajeshA-ji, you are getting carried on... When did India punished a terrorist ( :oops: non-state actor) outside its borders?



Link 1
Link 2
Link 3

Dhiman
BRFite
Posts: 527
Joined: 29 Nov 2008 13:56

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby Dhiman » 22 Sep 2010 10:22

shiv wrote:
RamaY wrote:^
:rotfl:

RajeshA-ji, you are getting carried on... When did India punished a terrorist ( :oops: non-state actor) outside its borders?



Link 1
Link 2
Link 3


http://indiannavy.nic.in/cactus.htm

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby ramana » 22 Sep 2010 23:30

X-post...
Anujan wrote:Terrorists have gotten bolder because we are lobbing dossiers.

Lobbing are few artillery shells would have the desired effect. So will lobbing the swiss bank accounts of Jernails, Kernails, Lotas and Presidentes. One page with list of Swiss bank accounts will accomplish what no crate loads of bums can.



Is it posssilbe to study which of likely the Swiss banks and their health ?

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1506
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby Pulikeshi » 23 Sep 2010 00:06

Ramana/SSridhar,

Will be posting another one called "Mughals don't work for a living" next.

Please advice on the next steps for the Chandra one below...
Final version after some minor edits based on feedback from a couple more outside reviewers:

Pakistan’s “Chandrasekhar” Limit


The maximum mass allowed for a stable star is referred to as the Chandrasekhar Limit, so named after the eminent scientist of Indian origin who discovered it. Any star above this mass would explode as a supernova, become a Neutron star or degenerate into a Black Hole. Prominent British Astrophysicist Eddington’s obdurate incredulity, when faced with Dr. Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar’s meticulous mathematical proof of relativistic degeneracy that presupposed a Black Hole is now legend. You may ask what does this have to do with developing countries and the challenges they face. It would indeed be fanciful to compare nation-states to stars and find parallels in theories on stellar dynamics. However, in spite of solid proof of progressive degeneracy in the Pakistani nation-state, various global powers have expressed obdurate incredulity and refused to consider the obvious.

Nation-states are no less complicated than stars in that they exhibit different degrees of success depending on the mass -- population, resources, geography, etc. They could be characterized as Strong, Weak, Failed, Nominal, Virtual, Rump or Collapsed. One could argue, at a point in time, the success of a nation-state is the result of intrinsic mass and external environmental conditions it is subject to. All states expend energy and must have sustainable resources and mass to ensure stability.

To begin, the success of a state can be characterized by measuring its ability to deliver politico-economic goods. This includes governance, security, infrastructure, health care, financial institutions, environment, etc. Strong states are good at the delivery of the said goods and Weak states have room for improvement. Failed states, are not beyond repair, but are at risk of becoming Nominal or Collapsed states. Collapsed states, similar to Black Holes, are beyond repair and require overwhelming measures. Virtual and Rump states form when territory is either partially or completed lost. Finally, Nominal states, are states that have either failed or collapsed, but are nominally held up by external powers to pursue realistic geo-political goals in a neighborhood.

What type of nation-state is Pakistan? By most measure, commentators from Pakistan and the world over have concluded that it is a failed state, even if no one wants to say it out loud. Governance, healthcare, education, financial institutions, infrastructure, etc. all exist in various states of decay and degeneracy. However, it would be difficult to make the claim that Pakistan is a collapsed state, given the nature of security and civil society has not reached the levels we see in Somalia, Sierra Leone, etc. External military aid sustains and holds the security apparatus in place to give them an apparition of a nation-state to claim their own. The response of the civilian apparatus to recent floods, continuing sectarian and terrorist violence removes any doubt one may have on the nature of this state. The state today exists nominally, with fewer and fewer areas under its control, supported by external players who bend the state to pursue their geo-political interests in the region. Pakistan’s geography is more crucial to external powers than her citizens or their well being. We see evidence for this in the disparity between the aid and assistance provided to the military versus that provided to civil society.
What is Pakistan’s “Chandrasekhar” limit? The Chandrasekhar limit approximately determines that for a star to remain stable it ought to be less than 1.4 times the mass of our Sun. It is much more difficult to determine a crisp limit for nation-states. However, if we were to establish a limit based on the ability to deliver politico-economic goods, then where does Pakistan fall in terms of such a limit? What is the intrinsic mass and what forces should one consider in determining the eventual stable point?

Pakistan was set up hastily by the British as a Muslim homeland. Yet, today there are more Muslims in secular but Hindu majority India. It seems tenuous, given the evidence over the last 63 years, that we will see a well adjusted nation-state in Pakistan. If such a miracle were to occur, then what would the raison d'être be for a secular democratic Muslim majority state right next to India – a secular democratic Hindu majority state with an even larger Muslim population than Pakistan. The conundrum is deeper especially given the common culture and civilization that the two countries share. Thus religious and political ideology has not provided enough mass to sustain the state.

Writer Fatima Bhutto estimates that 27 families control Pakistan a nation of 170 million citizens. If this is true and even if one were to assume 6-7 people in each family, roughly one person controls the destiny of a million people in Pakistan today. The top ruling feudal elite includes generals and military brass. Indeed, the whole country today is run by rent-seekers who service the geo-political needs of the highest external bidder. Therefore, the final state of Pakistan is much more dependent upon the geo-political desires of external powers, such as the United States of America, United Kingdom, China, Japan, Saudi Arabia and India among others. Given the intrinsic nature and external forces acting on the Pakistani nation, one can see evidence for two distinct end states. One where the inherent contradictions in the state leads it to collapse, the other option is the support provided by external actors causes the state to stabilize and nurture itself back to Weak state.

Collapse, similar to Somalia or Sierra Leone is possible. However, major external powers, including India surprisingly, do not seem interested in this becoming a reality. A Black Hole in this region has large implications for wider regional stability. Further, the cost of recovery from collapse provides sufficient incentive to all parties, to work together, to prevent this very unpalatable option. India in particular seems too anxious in preventing this situation, given the possibility of a major refugee crisis and the subsequent need to provide economic aid and stabilize the region. India has outsourced foreign policy to other external players and wants to be left alone to pursue 8-10% economic growth for the next 15 years. It is uncertain if India will be allowed this luxury by the other external players, or by a belligerent Pakistan that uses terrorism as an instrument of state against India.

The other possibility is where Pakistan turns itself around using external aid successfully. The dictator cycles of Ayub, Yahya, Zia, Musharaff and perhaps Kiyani does not instill confidence in this eventuality. Given such dismal history, one other less considered option is a restructuring that enables a more stable solution. This requires us to look briefly at the Indian sub-continent prior to the Mughals and British arrival in India. Traditionally, since the very beginning, the Indus valley culture including the culture that dotted the Saraswathi river and the later culture that flourished along the Ganga have had strong linkages. The drying up of the Saraswathi River and the slow process of desertification that set in subsequently caused the Indus culture to become increasingly cut off from the Ganga and susceptible to foreign invasions from North and West. This has established a culture of love and hate that predates organized religion, governance structures, etc. Today, it is only further exacerbated with the rise of modern India. On the other hand, Pakistan today with a 2% GDP growth and a 5% fertility rate presents strong evidence for a further declining Indus culture.

Understanding these cultural undercurrents and the rivalry for scarce resources that has now morphed into a religious and geo-political problem gives us a different perspective. This could explain why India has hesitation in allowing a breakup of Pakistan, as India understands the nature of this rivalry which is going to increasingly evolve into a fight for scarce resources especially water, better management of arable land and demographic pressures. India, till date, does not seem convinced that the cost of managing a Pakistan broken down into components of Baloch, Sindh, FATA and Punjab as lower than an engagement of the whole. Even though, there remains some confusion on who to engage in the whole. The question remains open on India’s patience and how many Mumbai like challenges or worse it will tolerate into the future. The other external players view the breakup as a collapse, not a change for a more stable alternative. Further, even if there are some who could tolerate a loose confederacy of states, the external actors including India suspect that the cost of managing unified policy would be more difficult with multiple actors.

Finally, the evidence so far seems to suggest that Pakistan will disintegrate into ethnic components, but for the external scaffolding providing a veneer to maintain a nominal state. Indeed collapse is likely, in spite of the best efforts of external powers. India, better realize that the security of the Gangetic plain is assured only when they provide good governance and influence if not control over the Indus plain. Ultimately, India’s economic dream will come to a naught if a Black Hole emerges to the West due to cultural reluctance to do what is necessary to maintain stability. The external powers are welcome to utilize their scarce resources, as long as their taxpayers indulge them, to intervene on Pakistan’s behalf. However, like Eddington, they vainly hope that Black Holes are mathematical fiction. It may be too late by the time they realize a collapse is inevitable. The cost of resurrecting a collapsed Pakistan will be far greater than the cost to manage a loose confederacy of states in strong politico-economic alliance with India.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 26 Sep 2010 22:04

X-Posting from Managing Chinese Threat Thread
shiv wrote:It is in Pakistan that US efforts to check India are the most powerful and detrimental to India. The US makes, and has made no effort to stop nations (like China) who help Pakistan, but protects Pakistan against its sworn enemy India. Pakistan is one place where China-US cooperation is directed against India. With regard to Pakistan - India is on its own - all alone. Making war with China may be fine for anyone but India as the US will ensure that its whore remains untouched. Ultimately it is the US, and not China or India that controls the sea lanes via Pakistan

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby RajeshA » 26 Sep 2010 22:15

shiv wrote:It is in Pakistan that US efforts to check India are the most powerful and detrimental to India. The US makes, and has made no effort to stop nations (like China) who help Pakistan, but protects Pakistan against its sworn enemy India. Pakistan is one place where China-US cooperation is directed against India. With regard to Pakistan - India is on its own - all alone. Making war with China may be fine for anyone but India as the US will ensure that its whore remains untouched. Ultimately it is the US, and not China or India that controls the sea lanes via Pakistan


Destruction of Pakistan becomes all the more necessary because it is not only the country which is spreading terrorism in India but it is also the country which acts as China's paw in the region.

The only way to establish a duopoly between China and India is to take down all those pawns of PRC, which are being used to keep India down and boxed-in in more ways than one.

If we have to put similar constraints on PRC, as India's geography puts on India, thereby restricting PRC to one ocean only, PRC's land access to Indian Ocean would have to be restricted. Myanmar is one route, and Pakistan is the other route. Secondly a direct access between PRC and Pakistan creates a security nightmare for Delhi. Simply put, it allows Pakistan to indulge in terrorism against India at a level of its choice without any fear of retaliation, as it enjoys the protection of both Chinese-made nukes in its custody plus the added strategic depth enabled by PLA presence in Gilgit-Baltistan and Tibet.

India cannot let this Chakravyuh to take hold. India needs to act now.

Either India has the choice of retaking PoK over which India has legal rights thereby cutting off the land and air route between PRC and Pakistan, or India has to destroy Pakistan itself.

Any failure of GoI to act with determination on this issue would be a burden and punishment for the next generation of Indians.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Managing Pakistan's failure

Postby svinayak » 27 Sep 2010 02:46

RajeshA wrote:X-Posting from Managing Chinese Threat Thread
shiv wrote:It is in Pakistan that US efforts to check India are the most powerful and detrimental to India. The US makes, and has made no effort to stop nations (like China) who help Pakistan, but protects Pakistan against its sworn enemy India. Pakistan is one place where China-US cooperation is directed against India. With regard to Pakistan - India is on its own - all alone. Making war with China may be fine for anyone but India as the US will ensure that its whore remains untouched. Ultimately it is the US, and not China or India that controls the sea lanes via Pakistan


The long term plan after 1972 was complete support to Pakistan. Making Khyber pass as the COG of control by the west was the strategy. This pincer movement which JS is talking about started in the 1970s. Pakistan and China just joined US into this strategy.
POK control by China is support to this COG control of the Khyber pass.

Traditionally, the West saw India as a threat. During the Cold War, the closeness of Indian with the USSR prompted the US to seek a better relationship with China.

Unless this COG is dismantled this is not going to change.

There is controversy and debate on the US policy over India and Pakistan even after 40 years

http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=2736
On the other hand, Bundy regards U.S. policy toward the 1971 war between India and Pakistan as a fiasco. His emphasis on this conflict seems surprising, but it is justified in his mind because it illustrates the fundamental errors under which both Nixon and Kissinger operated. Both men misread the nations involved, including China. In his analysis of the Nixon-Kissinger "tilt" toward Pakistan, Bundy concludes that Kissinger's moves reflected a balance-of-power policy rather than one to protect American interests. He states that no American policy can be based only on the balance-of-power and must take other factors into consideration. The resulting alliance with Pakistan was not in American interest, he concludes, because that nation was completely preoccupied by India. Of course, Kissinger made good use of his close relations with Pakistan, a point Bundy neglects in this interesting section of the book.



http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20050629/index.htm

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/LDE6891UP.htm
And both India and Pakistan have for decades vied for influence in Afghanistan, an unstable, but geopolitically vital, country both see as important to their security.
As secretary of state under Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, Kissinger shaped policies behind major world events of the 1970s, like the Vietnam peace accord, the reopening of U.S.-China relations, growing Arab-Israeli contacts and U.S.-Soviet arms control talks.

By Keeping Afghanistan out of Indian orbit after 1972 - US has created a competition between nations over the influence over Afghanistan.

Kissinger talks about a long term policy for US foreign policy

http://www.amazon.com/Does-America-Need ... 620&sr=1-1
Former Secretary of State Kissinger ambitiously undertakes herein the total revamping of U.S. foreign policy. This is necessary, he contends, because even though the U.S. is enjoying an unprecedented preeminence, it lacks "a long-range approach to a world in transition." Recent U.S. foreign policy, he says, has become dangerously ad hoc, a case-by-case response to challenges as they occur. Needed instead is "ideological subtlety and long-range strategy," which Kissinger provides.
Last edited by svinayak on 27 Sep 2010 03:12, edited 2 times in total.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DavidD, komal, milindc, saip, Sathish_A, SRoy, vijayk and 69 guests