Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 2011

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.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21166
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby Prem » 08 Jan 2012 11:09

chetak wrote:{quote="Sudip"}
Musharraf advocates Pak-Israel ties
[:


Ultimate Surrender Bunder =USB of Pakistan. May he get transformed into Monkey or Ape Babe the moment he shake hand with one Jew of israel. Mushy is turning out to be real Gande Khoon Ki Aulad.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24110
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby SSridhar » 08 Jan 2012 11:11

pankajs wrote:I am thinking of it as a move by Mush to get the chair that dus-percenti may have to vacate.

pankajas, I don't know how offering friendship with Israel would get him the chair now. It might have been possible in those days when Pakistan was 400% an ally of the US. Though the masses never supported the American-Pakistani alliance (especially after Ayub Khan & Bhutto turned the masses against the US after 1962 and completely so after 1965), at least the Generals had a good relationship with the US Army and the Pentagon. It is all gone now. No Pakistani (politician or General) can be seen to be on the US side and yet hope to win support from the Pakistani population. They should thank their stars if they don't get lynched. Had the relationship with the US been good, an offer of friendship with Israel might have pleased the Americans and helped Musharraf ride on that to power. Now, even his party, APML, would be hard-pressed to defend his stance. Wait for a day or two for reaction from his party leaders in Pakistan.

The only way this friendship offer can be turned around in favour of Musharraf is if Israel demonstrates in a very large measure its generosity in terms of funds and weapons and its opposition to India simultaneously and all of that very quickly before he lands in Pakistan and into the jail. Even then, it will be a matter of touch and go. This is not going to happen at all.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3524
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby Rudradev » 08 Jan 2012 11:40

SSridhar, hasn't Musharraf had this Pak-Israel reconciliation bee in his bonnet for a while now? IIRC in 2005, Musharraf met Ariel Sharon at the UN, and after that the Paki and Israeli FMs held official consultations in Turkey. The media was abuzz with rumours that Musharraf and Sharon would hold a "historic summit" to establish diplomatic relations... even inveterate Zionists like Daniel Pipes were making cautious pro-Pakistan noises at that time. Then something happened and the summit got cancelled (maybe Musharraf found a case of mangoes from Aabpaara under his musharraf.)

If Mush had managed to pull it off, he might have been able to cling on to power with the assistance of strong friends in DC, and may still have been ruling the roost today. In fact, Israeli support may even today contribute to the curious levels of hospitality he still enjoys in Western, and even in GCC capitals.

Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby Pranav » 08 Jan 2012 11:45

Anujan wrote:Pakis are a lost cause. It doesn't matter what we do or say anymore. A bloodbath inside pakiland followed by the emergence of one power center which has consolidated its power is needed before India can influence Pakiland through carrot, stick, surrender, treachery or whatever. So everyone chill out.

At this stage, even if we are ready to surrender JK we don't know who to call in Pakiland to share the good news. 10%? Groper? (They are hanging to their chairs) Ashphuck? Pasha? (They are an inch from being qadrified by the TFTAs) Various Yahoos fleeing the predators? (They are freezing in the cold without gas and electricity). Who exactly would we call to surrender ?

Unkil and taller than deep sea friend also have this problem. So they are setting up a telephone number first.


No, there should be multiple power centers and we should separately call each of them. That's what Amreekis do.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14546
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby pankajs » 08 Jan 2012 11:49

SSridhar wrote:Now, even his party, APML, would be hard-pressed to defend his stance. Wait for a day or two for reaction from his party leaders in Pakistan.

The only way this friendship offer can be turned around in favour of Musharraf is if Israel demonstrates in a very large measure its generosity in terms of funds and weapons and its opposition to India simultaneously. Even then, it will be a matter of touch and go. This is not going to happen at all.

SS saar I agree.

It is not about my view but Mush's desire for the US support. He was in DC recently. The statement was targeted at a specific audience in the US. If and when Mush lands in the land of pure, he will either deny or spin it. I was just trying to re-interpret his latest fart.

The fact remains that US still is a player in the internal politics of pakistan. They specifically hold the purse strings and can't be matched on this count by either KSA or China. The pakis still prefer US weapons over the Chinese and for that matter US train engines over the Chinese. The US can quietly support Mush if it wanted to and that it my guess what Mush is after.

Fresh supply of US money and US weapons can anytime be spun into a great victory for the "just" paki cause and how the H&D has been restored. All else will temporarily be forgotten.
Last edited by pankajs on 08 Jan 2012 11:54, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby shiv » 08 Jan 2012 11:50

CRamS wrote:

And his speech that goes on to toe the GoI line is filled with digs at Pakistan.



Big deal. And TSP takes lotsa digs at India too in return. What is required is thappad, and many of them, on TSP's backside.

You fail to see the joke here because his speech is designed to irritate everyone. Only Tharoor will have the last laugh. There is little that anyone can like because he is not even taking the mollify Pak rope with seriousness. He has craftily beaten about the bush praising and screwing subtly.

His speech is not important. But it is funny to me and a few others even if many get upset by it. Not my problem. It is hardly policy and it hardly represents GoI policy - insulting as it is to anyone who can understand what he is saying. What is funny to me and a few others is most people can't read the innuendo and see the funny bit and instead get themselves all worked up trying to see whom Tharoor is batting for. He is batting for himself. At worst he can be accused of toeing the GoI line. But those who accuse him of toeing the GoI line appear to be as clueless as most others about the fact that he has taken subtle digs at everyone in language that is nowhere near clear. It's like an insider schoolboy joke.

I am going to drop the subject but I think that is a top notch speech. Too bad for those who can't see what's funny. Of course 26/11 wasn't funny, but I would be dishonest if I say that I have never smiled after 26/11. If his speech is translated into its many meanings in simple language that anyone can understand - no one will be happy other than those who see the joke. Especially the totally deniable dig at MMS. Tharoor, like Rushdie, has a subtle mastery over the language.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24110
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby SSridhar » 08 Jan 2012 11:56

Rudradev, yes. He tried that twice when he was in power. It was the ever expanding defence collaboration between India & Israel that is at the heart of Musharraf's new found merit in friendship with Israel. Even as late as c. 2007, he tried to do so with the mediation of Turkey. The foreign ministers of Israel & Pakistan met in Istanbul secretly for two days. Today, the Turkish-Israeli relationship has nosedived and I do not know whom Gen. Musharraf has in mind to kickstart the talks all over again if he comes to power.

No wonder the likes of Hizb-ut-Tahrir dislike Pakistan in its present form when the most implacable enemy of Islam is being sought for friendship by the only county to be created for Islam. What a shame !

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby shiv » 08 Jan 2012 12:56

My personal take on Musharraf is that he is a useful idiot for the USA. He can never go back to Pakistan IMO (### - I am putting that string of hashes here so I can find this message in future and say I was wrong if I am)

Overtures to Israel maybe to help soften up the Sunni allies of Pakistan like KSA for a possible future attack on Iran.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24110
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby SSridhar » 08 Jan 2012 13:06

From Tharoor's website, here are some statements he made at the Jinnah Institute which is the closest an Indian politician can get to PA.
The civil-military imbalance in Islamabad is a key factor impeding India-Pakistan relations . . . The dominant role played by the security establishment in shaping Pakistan’s foreign policy and the powerful military’s long-standing links with jihadi groups are issues that will have to be addressed to put the bilateral relationship on an even keel. . . elements in Pakistan had for long sponsored terrorists and jihadis as part of a policy meant to “bleed India” . . . The Pakistan Army was one of the most “lavishly funded” armies of the world and has a “stranglehold over policy” while no elected civilian government had ever completed its term . . . The Pakistan Army was one of the most “lavishly funded” armies of the world and has a “stranglehold over policy” while no elected civilian government had ever completed its term . . .The army lays down the red lines that political leaders dare not cross . . . a civilian administration in Pakistan that neither controls nor launches militants for terrorist attacks {the implication here is that it is the PA that launches the terrorists}. . . People in India also questioned whether the Pakistan Army would agree if a civilian dispensation decided that India is not a threat . . . peace overtures made by President Asif Ali Zardari shortly after he came to power and the army’s negative reaction to them showed that the President “went farther than the army was willing to allow him to”.

I have not known of any politician or leader or General from any other country speak so damningly and so extensively on Pakistani soil about the PA, and that too at a PA-run think tank. Full marks to Shashi Tharoor here. Short of catching hold of Lt. gen. Asad Durrani (who was sitting there) by his collar and slapping him, Tharoor has done everything else, IMHO only.

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby harbans » 08 Jan 2012 13:26

Short of catching hold of Lt. gen. Asad Durrani (who was sitting there) by his collar and slapping him, Tharoor has done everything else, IMHO only.


Absolutely Sir. It's a very welcome change from run of the mill types who go there and do PJ (Pappi Jhappi) sessions. He is questioning policy on that side of the fence. Not saying that both sides need to build trust and blah blah..like others usually do out there. He's specifically pointing out in their den that the problem is in their policies and power dispensations, These sort of speeches deserve support and are significant as they point to the root policy and power structure problems in the neighborhood.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24110
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby SSridhar » 08 Jan 2012 14:03

Recently, the National Security Adviser of China, Dai Bingguo (he is also the special representative to the Boundary Commission between India & China), was awarded the Hilal-e-Pakistan by Zardari. Gen. Kayani excused himself from the event. He decided to send a replacement who also could not attend for some other reason. These are not to be taken lightly because Dai is an important cog in the defence relationship between the two nations, he is young and rising in the CPC and will serve in more important positions in the future. Why did Kayani choose to ignore the ceremony and more so why did he snub his Supreme Commander (not that he has any great respect for Zardari anyway) in front of a very high ranking diplomat from the only country that is willing to keep the Pakistani H&D from sinking further ? How did he explain that away to Dai Bingguo ? Kayani seems to have had at least a 45 or 50 minute meeting with Wen Jiabao (considering some loss of time in translation and exchange of pleasantries) in Beijing two days back and that is a fairly long duration for a meeting between two unequals. After his earlier flurry of visits to PRC, Zardari has stopped paying obeisance personally at the Chinese altar. Do we assume that a sort of tug-of-war is going on between the ruling political class and the PA on who woos the Chinese better ? Will that have a bearing on the outcome of the on-going tussle between the PA & PPP ?

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby shiv » 08 Jan 2012 14:16

SSridhar wrote:From Tharoor's website, here are some statements he made at the Jinnah Institute which is the closest an Indian politician can get to PA.
I have not known of any politician or leader or General from any other country speak so damningly and so extensively on Pakistani soil about the PA, and that too at a PA-run think tank. Full marks to Shashi Tharoor here. Short of catching hold of Lt. gen. Asad Durrani (who was sitting there) by his collar and slapping him, Tharoor has done everything else, IMHO only.


There is an added dimension here. There seems to be a quiet "understanding" that the Pakistan army is losing its stranglehold on power - or at least it is more "loose" than before. This understanding can only come from multiple intelligence inputs - including troop levels on the Pakistan side, morale, desertions and the state of repair and maintenance in the absence of American infusion of generous aid. In addition it has been clear for some time that some civilian entities have been in quiet rebellion against the Pakhani army (even if they were great army supporters when they thought the army was powerful). the tie to say things openly is now and cast the first stone as it were in preventing/forestalling the Pakistan army from doing another coup on some trumped up excuse.

The usual excuse has always been "national security" and the enemy always India - so an India that is oozing peace takes the wind out of Paki army sails pre emptively.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14546
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby pankajs » 08 Jan 2012 14:33

Musharraf denies he knew Bin Laden was living in Pakistan
In his first ever interview to an Israeli daily, Ha'aretz, Musharraf insisted on his innocence and said he was 100 per cent sure about himself that he did not know he (Osama bin Laden) was there.
"I say the question is, was there complicity or negligence? And I strongly believe it was negligence. Of course, that's not great either, it's terrible negligence and shameful. But, while both are bad - complicity would be worse," said the former president, who became a key ally of the West in the fight against terror post 9/11.

ashish raval
BRFite
Posts: 1390
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 00:49
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby ashish raval » 08 Jan 2012 14:40

^^ guess time to take lie detector test. Lol

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14546
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby pankajs » 08 Jan 2012 15:16

US fighting on wrong side of border: Karzai
WASHINGTON – Afghan President Hamid Karzai has maintained that the United States is fighting war on terror ‘on wrong side of the border’.
In an interview with American newspaper The Daily Beast published on Saturday, Hamid Karzai said “They [the Americans] were not happy with the way I stood up for certain issues in Afghanistan such as [NATO-caused] civilian casualties, night raids, and relations with Pakistan.” On Pakistan, Karzai said he believes the Americans are fighting on the wrong side of the border. “The war on terror in my view [should not have been fought] in Afghanistan, in Afghan villages and homes,” he added. “But in the [Pakistani] sanctuaries, and the training, motivational and financial grounds that [the Taliban] have there. And the US did not go there for 10 years. We know where the troubles were coming from but they [the Americans] did nothing about it.”
He is also miffed that the US has been talking to the Taliban behind his back over the setting up of a Taliban representative office in the Gulf state of Qatar, even after Washington insists that the peace process must be Afghan led and Afghan owned. “[It’s] definitely not [Afghan led,”] he said.
“That’s the problem. We have told the Americans that.” Even so, he said he will support the Qatar option for talks. “We will go along with it for the return of peace to Afghanistan as soon as possible.”
He also said that he ‘welcomed’ the statement by US Vice President Joe Biden that the Taliban ‘are not the enemy per se’. “We hope that [statement] will end all the reasons and excuses for the causing of casualties and harm to the Afghan people.” Karzai said he and his government will maintain their own negotiating track with the Taliban. “We have contacts with our fellow countrymen, the Taliban,” he said. “It will continue.” He added that he believes that the Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar is alive and is most probably living in Pakistan, though he admits he does not have any direct contact with Omar. “If I did [have contact] I’d call him right now and say: ‘Let’s talk, Afghan to Afghan’.” He also said he believed that most Taliban are interested in peace despite their propaganda statements insisting that no negotiations are possible until all foreign forces have withdrawn from Afghanistan.
“I think a great many of them are interested in peace,” he said. “At least those who are Afghans and have families in Afghanistan.” He added that there’s another category of insurgent “who is in the pay of this or that intelligence agency,” perhaps a reference to the Haqqani Network, which is close to Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence.
“Of course, they do not want peace. But the majority [of the Taliban] do.”
He believes Pakistan could squeeze the Taliban into negotiating seriously if it wanted. “[Pakistan] can and should [squeeze the Taliban] including Mullah Omar,” he said. “Pakistan does have a major role to play with regard to those Taliban whom it accommodates in its own territory. The Pakistani connection to the Taliban is old and real. It is not a fantasy.”
Karzai believes that Pakistan unfortunately does not have what he calls “an independent policy toward Afghanistan.” “It’s as if Pakistan’s policy toward Afghanistan is driven by [the quality of its] relations, either good or bad, with India or the US,” he said. With Pakistan-US relations at an all-time nadir right now, Pakistan is not about to be helpful in the peace process, at least according to Karzai’s calculation.

Dilbu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6440
Joined: 07 Nov 2007 22:53
Location: Deep in the badlands of BRFATA

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby Dilbu » 08 Jan 2012 15:38

Musharraf plans trip to Saudi Arabia to rally support: Sources
“Musharraf will be travelling to Saudi soon in order to get support before he goes back to Pakistan,” said a Gulf-based Saudi source familiar with the matter. A Pakistani source confirmed that Musharraf, who is in Dubai, was to travel to Saudi Arabia soon.

The source declined to say what form of support the former president is seeking. But some reports have said that Musharraf, who faces possible arrest on charges that he had failed to provide adequate security to former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto before her assassination in 2007, will seek Saudi guarantees that he would not be detained.

Saudi Arabia, which has considerable influence in Pakistan because of its economic support, has expressed concern over the friction between the army and the government in recent months
.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24110
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby SSridhar » 08 Jan 2012 15:54

Dilbu wrote:Musharraf plans trip to Saudi Arabia to rally support: Sources
. . . will seek Saudi guarantees that he would not be detained.

After returning to Pakistan, Musharraf will lament loss of sovereignty over US drone strikes

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14546
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby pankajs » 08 Jan 2012 16:04

New Pak doctrine: Deploy at border if terror strike in India
After a thorough year-long re-evaluation of its “war concepts”, Pakistan is learnt to have adopted a revised doctrine that calls for immediate mobilisation of one-fourth of its battalion reserves to defensive positions along the Indian border in case there is a major terrorist attack in India.

Sources said this change was made after rehearsing new war-fighting concepts at various levels throughout 2009-10, announced as the “year of training” by Pakistan Army Chief Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani.
The assessment in Islamabad was that post 26/11 attack, India would certainly carry out a military offensive in case another major terror attack were to happen on its territory.
Defensive positions were identified along the border which would have to be occupied immediately in case of a major terror attack in India.
Pakistan, sources said, still continues to assume that India has a cold start doctrine, which caters for rapid offensive strike into Pakistan territory which has been used as another justification to alter its military posture.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14546
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby pankajs » 08 Jan 2012 16:18

OT but..

Photoshopping the prime minister

Image
A photograph circulated by the Press Information Department across newsrooms recently had Yousaf Raza Gilani standing in the middle, chatting with General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and General Khalid Shameem Wynne, with his fingers stationed uncomfortably near his chest — a pose we normally won’t stand in. But then again he is the prime minister.

A sub-editor’s journalistic curiosity and an acute eye for detail led to a legitimate inquiry. Experts were called in. Professional advice was sought. No one could figure out this enigmatic conundrum: What happened to the prime minister’s fingers? “They are hiding something,” screamed one over-worked editor. “It is the memo, people,” hushed another pale-faced girl. “No! Gilani is showing Kayani the conversation between Husain Haqqani and Mansoor Ijaz on his BlackBerry,” came another sweeping declaration. But true hope often emerges from the unlikeliest of places. A ‘chai wala’ figured it all out. He closely inspected the image for a while. And then came the revelation: “They removed a teacup from his hand!”
Was the premier’s nonchalant demeanour in front of the army chief a plausible threat to the supremacy of the military? If anything, the original picture negated all notions of the apparent standoff between the military and the government. It seemed all had been forgotten over a cup of tea. But then the teacup vanished.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24110
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby SSridhar » 08 Jan 2012 16:26

In fact, they could even deploy ahead of time because only they know the precise time of attack. But, that might reveal the impending terror strike and so they would roll in along with the beginning of the terror strike.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14546
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby pankajs » 08 Jan 2012 16:34

Right saar. India would be forced to respond even if they did not originally intend to deploy.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14546
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby pankajs » 08 Jan 2012 16:42

Let me take this scenario further. If PA believes that India is poised to attack, what prevents them from launching a peremptive strike. They will have the advantage of surprise.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12275
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby Aditya_V » 08 Jan 2012 16:48

Best is to act as of we are not going deploy, do a mock deployment where some offensive units begin to deploy, public ally state nothing, with draw in 30 days and then do it again 2 months later , withdraw and start the 3rd time with serious interest. This way Pakis cannot choose the time and place with strategic assets and we do not have to act on haste.

But guys with acquisition of F-16's complete and latest moves, a major Terror attack has definitely planned , I hope our forces are ready, our intelligence agencies have abandoned their political duties and are now focused on this very real threat.

TSP wants to fight a defensive war and then declare victory when a stalemate/ ceasefire is done. They don't want to declare war, go on the offensive, incur heavy casualties and lose public face.

When India declares hostile intentions and is forced to back down or agree for a ceasefire- TSP Khakis are heros before the world and their population and sections of Indian Media/ intellectuals.

If TSP declares war, goes on the offensive and is loses, makes no gains, then Paki Public will screw them, Paki Supporters in West Middleeast and India will have no place to hide.

So, Pakis will always initiate attack through their strategic Jihadi attacks and not directly. Then Not State Actor/ Proof question is raised by Paki supporters in India and West while the Paki public cheers the heroric slaughter of innocents.


P.s - When 26/11 was happening Bollywood personalities Javed Jafri and Mahest Bhatt in the interview carried out by NDTV's Barkha Dutt had stated that the attack was in response to demolition of Babri masjid. so don't underestimate the length they will go to
Last edited by Aditya_V on 08 Jan 2012 16:58, edited 1 time in total.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12275
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby Aditya_V » 08 Jan 2012 16:55

pankajs wrote:Right saar. India would be forced to respond even if they did not originally intend to deploy.


i.e Pakis are prepared and choose the time and place of the Indian attack. best we delay our response and keep the shadow boxing on , lull them and then attack at the time of our choosing.

dada
BRFite
Posts: 135
Joined: 12 Jan 2006 16:43

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby dada » 08 Jan 2012 17:36

When someone walks up to you and asks you to stop believing in what you really believe in essentially asking you to lose your identity do you question your own beliefs or do you punch the other guy in the face?

Identity. Its what makes me me!

In this situation , what will pakjabis do ? most will punch the other guy in the face.
But the more important question is "How will we indians respond ?"

Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3021
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby Dipanker » 08 Jan 2012 17:56

I am posting this PTI summary of Tharoor's speech in Hindustan Times for the benefit of those among us who are still not quite sure what he said or made an interpretation contrary to what he said.

This summary of speach should abundantly make it clear that he delivered them a whole series of slaps!

Notice that I have made the entire text bold as each and every paragraph is a slap to Pakis!
Gotta to say, this guy is good!

http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/Pakistan/Civil-military-imbalance-in-Pak-impeding-Indo-Pak-ties-Tharoor/Article1-791691.aspx

Civil-military imbalance in Pak impeding Indo-Pak ties: Tharoor
Press Trust Of India
Islamabad, January 05, 2012

The civil-military imbalance in Islamabad is a key factor impeding India-Pakistan relations despite a large constituency for peace in both countries, former Indian minister Shashi Tharoor said in Islamabad on Thursday. The dominant role played by the security establishment in shaping

Pakistan’s foreign policy and the powerful military's long-standing links with jihadi groups are issues that will have to be addressed to put the bilateral relationship on an even keel, Tharoor said.
Speaking on the theme, "India and Pakistan: Cooperation or conflict", at an event organised by the Jinnah Institute, a leading think tank, Tharoor noted that elements in Pakistan had for long sponsored terrorists and jihadis as part of a policy meant to "bleed India" while compensating for the asymmetry in conventional forces.

The Pakistan Army was one of the most "lavishly funded" armies of the world and has a "stranglehold over policy" while no elected civilian government had ever completed its term, he pointed out.

It was not in Pakistan's interests for the army to get a "grossly disproportionate share" of the GDP and the budget, said Tharoor, who arrived in Lahore on Tuesday on a four-day Pakistan visit.

"The army lays down the red lines that political leaders dare not cross," he said. The army also preserves the "myth of an Indian threat", the former minister of state for external affairs underlined.

This civil-military imbalance made people in India wonder whether the government was doing the right thing by holding talks with a civilian administration in Pakistan that neither controls nor launches militants for terrorist attacks, he said.

Each terror attack, he said, undermines the minority who believe peace is possible.

People in India also questioned whether the Pakistan Army would agree if a civilian dispensation decided that India is not a threat, Tharoor remarked.

In this regard, he said peace overtures made by President Asif Ali Zardari shortly after he came to power and the army's negative reaction to them showed that the President "went farther than the army was willing to allow him to".

Pakistan's policy of "strategic depth" in Afghanistan and any efforts to wrest Kashmir from India too are not in Islamabad’s interests, he said.

At the same time, Pakistan was suffering due to its policy of financing and training jihadis for 20 years as the terrorists were now targeting military establishments like the army's General Headquarters and a naval airbase in Karachi, he said.

Addressing Pakistan’s concerns about India, Tharoor said the people of India were "totally reconciled to Pakistan's existence as an independent state" and no one believes that the events of 1971 – which led to the creation of Bangladesh – can be replicated.

He noted that the 1971 war was a "special case" precipitated by a Pakistani crackdown on the people of erstwhile East Pakistan.

Answering questions from the audience after his speech, Tharoor made it clear that India had neither the intention nor capability to foment unrest in Balochistan.

A strong and stable Pakistan was in India's interest, he said. India was essentially a "status quoist" country and there could be peace between the two sides if they agreed on "mutually acceptable parameters", Tharoor said.

While terrorist groups have a momentum of their own and cannot be turned off like a tap, Pakistan and India can focus on softer issues like a free trade pact and educational exchanges to improve relations, Tharoor noted.

He also called for greater interaction between India and Pakistan on Afghanistan, where an "unhealthy sense of competition" had developed. Though both countries were often on opposite sides, a stable, moderate and functional Afghanistan was in the interest of both sides, he said.

In response to a question on the failure by both sides to reach an agreement to end the military standoff on the Siachen glacier, Tharoor acknowledged that there had been a "hardening" of the Indian stance after Pakistan-backed infiltrators occupied strategic heights in Kargil in 1999.

There were fears that a unilateral withdrawal by Indian troops would be taken advantage of, he said.
Last edited by Dipanker on 08 Jan 2012 18:10, edited 1 time in total.

Dilbu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6440
Joined: 07 Nov 2007 22:53
Location: Deep in the badlands of BRFATA

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby Dilbu » 08 Jan 2012 18:10

That is some straight talk to TSPA. Good job by Tharoor.

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby shiv » 08 Jan 2012 18:58

Dipanker wrote:I am posting this PTI summary of Tharoor's speech in Hindustan Times for the benefit of those among us who are still not quite sure what he said or made an interpretation contrary to what he said.

This summary of speach should abundantly make it clear that he delivered them a whole series of slaps!

Notice that I have made the entire text bold as each and every paragraph is a slap to Pakis!
Gotta to say, this guy is good!

http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/Pakistan/Civil-military-imbalance-in-Pak-impeding-Indo-Pak-ties-Tharoor/Article1-791691.aspx



This should be read in conjunction with his geography of peace article
http://www.asianage.com/columnists/geography-hope-787
He says in that article, among other things:
The joker in the pack remains the Pakistani Army. Until the military men are convinced that peace with India is in their self-interest, they will remain the biggest obstacles to it. One hope may lie in the extensive reach of the Pakistani military apparatus and its multiple business and commercial interests.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12275
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby Aditya_V » 08 Jan 2012 19:21

We must really appreciate Tharoor for travelling to the Jackal's den and making that speech! Bravo.

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby shiv » 08 Jan 2012 19:31

dada wrote:When someone walks up to you and asks you to stop believing in what you really believe in essentially asking you to lose your identity do you question your own beliefs or do you punch the other guy in the face?

Identity. Its what makes me me!

In this situation , what will pakjabis do ? most will punch the other guy in the face.
But the more important question is "How will we indians respond ?"


Not if you read what Surinder has to say. He has a feel for the pakjabi psyche. The Pakjabi will downhill ski.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24110
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby SSridhar » 08 Jan 2012 19:33

Why did Ejaz Haider, who picked up a fight with Shashi Tharoor over a column written by the latter, invite him to Islamabad ?

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20897
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby Philip » 08 Jan 2012 19:37

Desperate, Cornered And Willing To Kill

http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/india/a ... 20106.aspx

Xcpts:
January 6, 2012: The Pakistani military is still feuding with NATO and its own government. This has been going on since the American raid into Pakistan last May, which killed Osama bin Laden. Both the U.S. and Pakistani politicians were appalled at the duplicity of the Pakistani military, which had always insisted it had no idea where bin Laden was. Pakistani politicians have always feared and despised their own military. During Pakistan's brief history (since 1947) the military has forcibly taken control of the government half the time. Usually, the reason given was massive corruption and incompetence in an elected government (accurate accusations). But this was often an excuse to settle a dispute between politicians and generals over who could steal what. The latest such incidence was in 1999, when the military increased their unauthorized (by the civilian government) attacks on Indian troops along the Kashmir border. This led to a brief war (which Pakistan, as usual, lost). In response, the elected government tried to remove the head of the military (Pervez Musharraf) from his job, but instead Musharraf took control of the government. But, as always happens, the military eventually becomes very unpopular, because they are no more effective at running the country than elected politicians. Musharraf and the military lost control of the government in 2008, and elected officials took over. The politicians then sought to curb the independence of the military. It was during this struggle (which involved a lot of posturing and threats by both sides), the bin Laden raid occurred. The generals saw this raid as a major defeat. Now the military was seen as liars and incompetent. The military had always presented themselves as the least corrupt and most efficient institution in Pakistan. The military had also convinced most Pakistanis that the many (most of them invented by the generals) threats to Pakistan could only be handled by the military. The chief threat was India, which the generals insisted was always just on the brink of invading. Only the Pakistani military prevented this.

The Pakistani generals had adopted Islamic radicalism in the 1970s, so the generals could claim to be guardians of Islam as well. Thus it came to be that the Pakistani military created the Taliban in the early 1990s, and used this force to suppress the messy civil war in Afghanistan. But the Taliban idea (tribal religious zealots taking over the government) got out of hand, and after September 11, 2001 there arose a Pakistani branch, which went to war with the Pakistani government. When ordered, by the newly elected 2008 government, to go after the Taliban, the military refused to finish the job, leaving the Taliban with safe havens in North Waziristan and Quetta. The generals still believed they could regain control of their terrorist creations. While many Pakistanis still believe in Islamic conservatism and the need to protect the country from external threats, it's increasingly common for Pakistanis to see their military leadership as a bunch of lying, self-serving warlords. The Pakistani military has never won a war, but they have grown rich.

After a November incident on the Afghan border (where American aircraft attacked Pakistani troops mistaken for those who had just fired on Afghan troops in Afghanistan), the Pakistani military declared this a deliberate American attack and sought to use this incident to get the Americans, and Pakistani politicians, to stop pressuring the Pakistani military to go after Islamic terrorists and halt support for groups like the Taliban. As a result, NATO supplies moved via Pakistan have been halted at the Afghan border. Some of the supplies have been seized by Pakistani troops, and NATO has ordered the 3,600 trucks stuck at the border for weeks to turn around and go back to the port of Karachi. NATO has been reducing the use of the Pakistani land route for years, because of the thefts and attacks, and now it looks like that shift will be completed sooner rather than later.

The Pakistani military also ordered most NATO military advisors and such out of Pakistan. NATO was still allowed to fly through Pakistani air space, the generals apparently concluding that trying to halt air traffic might get the Pakistani Air Force destroyed. The U.S. has halted over a billion dollars in military aid to Pakistan. Since the generals steal a lot of that, this confrontation is hitting the Pakistani generals in their foreign bank accounts.

Negotiations between the U.S. and the Pakistani military have been carried out quietly, and the U.S. will only say that these talks will be concluded successfully shortly. When these negotiations are over, there will be a winner, and a loser. The Pakistani government is also negotiating with its own military, publicly and secretly. Because these negotiations are partly public, and the military is increasingly being accused of killing and threatening journalists who do not toe the army line, one can surmise that the military is not doing well here either. There are more rumors of another military coup. The Pakistani generals appear cornered and out-of-control. What is to be done? The generals are using cash, economic clout and terror to prevent the elected government from removing senior commanders and replace them with more democracy minded officers. The military knows how to play this game and has allies among civilian leaders and judges. Most Pakistanis expect the military to survive this crisis.


Indian officials, trying to negotiate a peace deal with Pakistan, complained that interference from the Pakistani military prevented a peace deal from being agreed upon. The Indians believe the Pakistani Army is addicted to the large chunk of Pakistan's GDP they receive each year, and fear (correctly) the military budget would be cut if there were an official peace deal with India. Elected Pakistani officials openly admit that they cannot control their own military and that interference from their generals makes peace negotiations difficult. The generals have allies in the Islamic parties, which see India as an enemy of Islam and a permanent threat.

India is also upset about Pakistan's increasingly close relationships with China. Most of this has to do with Chinese economic investment in Pakistan. But even here, the Chinese insist on security and anti-corruption guarantees, which the Pakistanis are not able to provide for some projects (where the security is bad and corrupt officials too numerous). There are rumors that China is going to station troops in northern Pakistan, but Pakistan and China deny this.

January 4, 2012: Indian intelligence officials warn that Pakistan-based Islamic terror groups are training 21 women to carry out operations in Kashmir and the rest of India. Islamic terrorism in Kashmir have been declining for the past seven years and the terrorists are desperate to come up with some new tactic that will prevent them from being entirely wiped out there. The use of female operatives seems to be their latest gambit. While Islamic terrorists have frequently used women as suicide bombers, they have not trained a lot of women to be full time terrorists. But some women have taken over when sons, brothers or cousins, who were Islamic terrorists, were killed. This came about despite the fact Islamic radicals espouse a form of Islam that severely limits the activities of women outside the home.


PS:Shashi T has eloquently described Pak's chicanery,but we on BR have been talking about this for over a decade! It is abundantly clear that the Paki military,esp. under gen.Kill-any,that they simply "will not let go" of the reins of actual power.Faced with their declining image within the nation,they have outsourced the job of preserving power to the anti-democratic,dictatorial regime of Communist China. Let no one be in doubt of the fascist nature of the Chinese leadership,who cloak themselves in the ideological garb of Communism.With their crony-communist style capitalism,they are still nowhere as benign as our crypto-commies at home of the Left ,who wear all the shades of pink! The meshing of the Paki military and Chinese hegemons is a very,very dangerous development,as it will further cement the merger of the Sino-Pak military machine.This juggernaut together possesses armies of approx 2.5+ million thta can steamroll over any part of Asia should they decide to engage themselves in a joint military adventure.The weakspot in this machine is their prowess at sea,which the PLAN is relentlessly trying to
expand beyond legitimate size.This calls for a calibrated Indian respone involving both innovative military strategy and dilpomatic skills-not of the servile type that we have just seen over the visa for an air force officer! Tharoor must give us options,diplomatique,his speciality so that we can deal with these Chinese insults and slurs effectively,without any loss of face or status as a global great power


For the forseeable future,Gen.Kill-any.the "Vulture",will be calling the shoots.The Paki army chief has cleverly swung the country's attention to the political war between the "Great Conqueror and Great Khan" vs The Zardar and "Sherrif".Like the corrupt Sherrif of Nottingham,Nawaz aghast at the sped with which the Imran bandwagon has gained momentum,even in his own heartland , in desperation has found his equally crooked "Prince John" ,rival and pres of Pak,"Mr.10%",the Zardar.The shame and dishonour of the Paki army after the Bin laden fiasco and US killings of Paki soldiers in drone strikes,is now fading fast in the memory of the Paki populace.Memogate also has helped it,leading to speculations that the ISI was behind the infamous memo.Gen.Kill-any will allow the situ to deteriorate into a free-for-all between the two factions before pulling the plug.While Gen.the bandicoot is rushing off to the Saudis for "life insurance", so that he can return in triumph,there are some who feel that his return might be dejas vu,like the return of Sen. Aquino and Bibi Bhutto! If any of these dire predictions happens,Kill-any will step into the breach to yet again "save the nation",in typical fashion and track record of Pak's myriad armymen.

Our policy should be to let Pak stew in its own juice and watch for signs of a fissiparious nature develop in the other states.Should they need "help",I'm sure that we can provide such timely assistance and help widen the gaps emerging.Should Pak continue to resort to terrorism as an instrument of the state,then we must be prepared for a swift fitting reply.

member_22286
BRFite
Posts: 812
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby member_22286 » 08 Jan 2012 19:56

I have a line of thought please point out the flaws if wrong.From Tharoors speeches and other sources we do know that GoI is aware of Puke duplicity and Chicanery at the highest level.So what is compeling the GoI to take a tough line.My reasons

1)The AF-Pak war which prevents us from taking any action

2)I was thinking of Nukes as a deterrence but the more i look at it and the more I read about Nuclear detterence ,warfare and Stuart Slades works I feel that Pakistan Nukes are not much of a problem as their most effective delivery veichicles are only F-16's not ballistic missiles yet

3)I think the major impediment which prevents the GoI from taking action is the refugee problem .Hoordes of inbred idiots will once start streaming across the border bring pestilence and chaos with them.This is the biggest problem for GoI and the biggest detterrence the PA has against India

I think the best way to tame Pakistan is to wide the chasm btw the various based on any ideology which can enable mass culling in the likes of the Taipeng rebellion in China(it claimed nearly 50 million lifes)and in the mean time upgrade our infrastructure in the west wing to make it refugee proof is my idea .

Members please think of this

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby RajeshA » 08 Jan 2012 20:18

Anujan wrote:At this stage, even if we are ready to surrender JK we don't know who to call in Pakiland to share the good news. 10%? Groper? (They are hanging to their chairs) Ashphuck? Pasha? (They are an inch from being qadrified by the TFTAs) Various Yahoos fleeing the predators? (They are freezing in the cold without gas and electricity). Who exactly would we call to surrender ?

I find this to be a useful idea.

We don't have a partner in Pakistan (read the true Ghazi) to whom we can surrender! We can consider surrendering Kashmir to Pakistan only if we know that Pakistan is really truly Pak! Right now the civvies are murtads and Army is full of munafiqs! Even the Islamists in Pakistan are not pure enough! Only once true Islam has taken root in Pakistan can one surrender Kashmir to Pakistan. Till then no deal! We will wait!

We cannot give Kashmir to Murtads and Munafiqs!

Anytime they say Kashmir, we respond with needling Pakis that they are not pure enough! Even if an Islamist regime should take over we can find fault with them! Let them do the internal 'Jihad' first till its logical end! Thus India gets to have a say in their piety. We get to judge them!

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby shiv » 08 Jan 2012 20:46

Ashok Gottipati wrote:I have a line of thought please point out the flaws if wrong.From Tharoors speeches and other sources we do know that GoI is aware of Puke duplicity and Chicanery at the highest level.So what is compeling the GoI to take a tough line.My reasons

1)The AF-Pak war which prevents us from taking any action

2)I was thinking of Nukes as a deterrence but the more i look at it and the more I read about Nuclear detterence ,warfare and Stuart Slades works I feel that Pakistan Nukes are not much of a problem as their most effective delivery veichicles are only F-16's not ballistic missiles yet

3)I think the major impediment which prevents the GoI from taking action is the refugee problem .Hoordes of inhttp://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/view ... rt=320bred idiots will once start streaming across the border bring pestilence and chaos with them.This is the biggest problem for GoI and the biggest detterrence the PA has against India

I think the best way to tame Pakistan is to wide the chasm btw the various based on any ideology which can enable mass culling in the likes of the Taipeng rebellion in China(it claimed nearly 50 million lifes)and in the mean time upgrade our infrastructure in the west wing to make it refugee proof is my idea .

Members please think of this


Ashok good thinking. I have always felt that the real reason why a series of GoIs do not deal a permanent blow to Pakistan is that it is actually too costly for India. This statement of mine "too costly" will be hotly cntested and a lot of people WILL disagree, but I am convinced that the GoI is intent on addressing poverty, literacy etc (apart from some pocket lining :oops:)

India is not a weak nation, but neither is Pakistan. The cost of seeking a permanent solution by war is too much. Pakistan knows this and has exploited it to the hilt. We can hit Pakistan. We can damage Pakistan seriously, but I suspect that no one in the GoI or military can promise a permanent solution by war. Irritating. Frustrating but true.

This must not be construed as meaning that India cannot defend itself against Pakistan. Defence requires fewer resources than offence.

member_22286
BRFite
Posts: 812
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby member_22286 » 08 Jan 2012 21:08

shiv wrote:
Ashok Gottipati wrote:I have a line of thought please point out the flaws if wrong.From Tharoors speeches and other sources we do know that GoI is aware of Puke duplicity and Chicanery at the highest level.So what is compeling the GoI to take a tough line.My reasons

1)The AF-Pak war which prevents us from taking any action

2)I was thinking of Nukes as a deterrence but the more i look at it and the more I read about Nuclear detterence ,warfare and Stuart Slades works I feel that Pakistan Nukes are not much of a problem as their most effective delivery veichicles are only F-16's not ballistic missiles yet

3)I think the major impediment which prevents the GoI from taking action is the refugee problem .Hoordes of inhttp://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/view ... rt=320bred idiots will once start streaming across the border bring pestilence and chaos with them.This is the biggest problem for GoI and the biggest detterrence the PA has against India

I think the best way to tame Pakistan is to wide the chasm btw the various based on any ideology which can enable mass culling in the likes of the Taipeng rebellion in China(it claimed nearly 50 million lifes)and in the mean time upgrade our infrastructure in the west wing to make it refugee proof is my idea .

Members please think of this


Ashok good thinking. I have always felt that the real reason why a series of GoIs do not deal a permanent blow to Pakistan is that it is actually too costly for India. This statement of mine "too costly" will be hotly cntested and a lot of people WILL disagree, but I am convinced that the GoI is intent on addressing poverty, literacy etc (apart from some pocket lining :oops:)

India is not a weak nation, but neither is Pakistan. The cost of seeking a permanent solution by war is too much. Pakistan knows this and has exploited it to the hilt. We can hit Pakistan. We can damage Pakistan seriously, but I suspect that no one in the GoI or military can promise a permanent solution by war. Irritating. Frustrating but true.

This must not be construed as meaning that India cannot defend itself against Pakistan. Defence requires fewer resources than offence.


Thank you very much sir for replying

This refugee problem is more or less the same problem due to which South Korea is tolerating North Korea and kim's idiocu. It is not NoKo's nukes or dongs but the refugees idiots that is deterring South Korea.Sir the best way to inflict damage is to exploit the class and sect divisions in Pakjab specifically pakjab in such a way you have warlordism taking place this with the lack of inadequate facilities like medicine will cause drastic reduction in population.All this must be done keeping in mind the idiot abdul does not get the idea of crossing the Indian border.

More investment made on our Indo-pak fences and defences to make it refugee proof.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14546
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby pankajs » 08 Jan 2012 21:25

I have been thinking about Kayani's visit to China. We have the details of his engagements for the first 2 days and after that there has been no news. All the high level meetings seem to be over. That got me thinking about the agenda for the remaining 3 days.

Could he be on a secret visit to Xinjiang and was he called to China to explain the inability of the PA to control anti-china rebels operating from within Pakistan? The visit come after the recent report of terrorists being killed in China. The Chinese may have kept all of this a secret, unlike the very public denunciation last time, to save the paki H&D. JMT

While searching for news to prove or disprove my theory, I came across this interesting analysis. There was a lot of stress on the "core interest" in the official press release. Apologies for posting this long article in full.

How Pakistan’s Unstable Tribal Areas Threaten China’s Core Interests
http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=38856&tx_ttnews[backPid]=13&cHash=16529785932c98e3e5923fa6df24879b

With all eyes focused on the consequences for the United States and NATO of the accidental air strikes, which killed 24 Pakistani soldiers, little attention has been paid to another big player who will be greatly impacted by Pakistan’s refusal to go after militants that are using the country as a refuge: China. Pakistan-based militants in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) are increasingly a threat to China’s core interests: national stability and territorial integrity. In July, Turkestani Islamic Party (TIP) militants trained in FATA launched yet another attack against China with bomb explosions in Kashgar, Xinjiang, ahead of China’s launch of “China-Eurasia Expo” in Urumqi under the auspices of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). TIP wants Xinjiang to be an independent Islamic state and the China-Eurasia Expo is a centerpiece of China’s Eurasia strategy of developing its western provinces and rebuilding the Silk Road of trade and commerce across the Eurasia heartland (Beijing Review, September 15, 2011; China Daily, September 6, 2011; Xinhua, September 1, 2011). Outraged at Pakistan’s inability to clean up its own backyard, Chinese Communist Party-controlled press was immediate and harsh in decrying this incident (China Daily, August 12, 2011; Xinhua, August 1, 2011). This quickly prompted a scurrying of Pakistani leaders—military intelligence chief Lt. Gen. Ahmed Shuja Pasha, Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar and President Asif Ali Zardari—to Beijing to mend relations with its patron (Dawn, August 25, 2011; New York Times, August 1, 2011).

In these meetings, China allegedly demanded to set up military bases in FATA or in the Federally Administered Northern Areas (FANA) that borders Xinjiang province (Asia Times, October 26, August 10, 2011). After the bombing, the Chinese government reportedly deployed at least 200,000 security personnel to pursue Uyghur terrorists in the region, more than the 140,000 coalition troops currently in Afghanistan (Asia Times, August 31, 2011). China also is revising its anti-terror law to possibly allow military intervention abroad (Xinhua, October 27, October 24, 2011). One official commentary warned that “If the violent forces in Xinjiang gain ground, China may be forced to directly intervene militarily in Pakistan and Afghanistan, but this is clearly not the situation China would like to see” (Xinhua, September 27, 2011; “China and Pakistan: Evolving Focus on Stability within Continuity,” China Brief, November 30, 2011). While these reports may be speculative, taken together, they suggest Beijing’s concerns—especially with a less active U.S. presence in Pakistan—may be rethinking fundamental tenets of its security policy.

FATA-Based Militants’ Threat to China’s Core Interests

That Beijing might demand a military base in this hotbed would underscore its view on the gravity of the FATA threat against China’s core interests: realizing its western development strategy across Eurasia; continued economic growth for Chinese Communist Party (CCP)’s legitimacy and survival; and sovereign control over Xinjiang to deter ”splittism” in other parts of the country, such as Tibet and Inner Mongolia as well as to preserve its claims on Taiwan. Chinese Defense Minister Liang Guanglie spelled out China’s core interests at the IISS 10th Asia Security Summit last June:

“The core interests include anything related to sovereignty, stability and form of government. China is now pursuing socialism. If there is any attempt to reject this path, it will touch upon China’s core interests. Or, if there is any attempt to encourage any part of China to secede, that also touches upon China’s core interests related to our land, sea or air. Then, anything that is related to China’s national economic and social development also touches upon China core interests” (Straits Times, June 6, 2011).

China also fears TIP’s close ties with al-Qaeda in FATA and increasing Chinese “Turkistan-ization” of al Qaeda. Trained by al-Qaeda in FATA, TIP already has claimed a number of attacks in Xinjiang as well as against Chinese economic interests in Pakistan. The extent of TIP militants’ network of terrorist activities in Pakistan was revealed in 2009 when they threatened the Chinese Embassy in Islamabad through a letter to kidnap Chinese diplomats and consular officers. In a video on August 1, 2009, TIP leader Abdul Haq al Turkistani urged Muslims to attack Chinese interests to punish Beijing for what he described as massacres against Uyghur Muslims during their uprising in Xinjiang (Asia Times, August 10, 2011). Abdul Haq had been appointed a member of al-Qaeda’s majlis-e-shura or executive council in 2005, but was subsequently killed in a 2010 U.S. drone strike and succeeded by Abdul Shakoor Turkistani, a Chinese Uyghur well known for his friendly terms with major Taliban groups in Waziristan (Asia Times, October 26, 2011). A few weeks before the death of Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda appointed him as new commander of its Pakistan forces and training camps (Times of India, May 11, 2011). Beijing thus has legitimate fears that Pakistan’s inability to crack down on TIP and al-Qaeda in FATA will undermine China’s hold over Xinjiang and sabotage China’s access to strategic minerals and markets across the Eurasian heartland.

Political Dimensions of the Threat

It was not surprising therefore when Beijing dispatched its elite commando forces, the Snow Leopard, near Pakistan’s borders in the aftermath of the Kashgar bombing and stepped up its “Strike Hard” campaign (China Daily, August 13, 2011). Xinjiang is a strategic region for China. Three times the size of France and one sixth of China’s land area, it share borders with eight countries: Mongolia, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India. It is rich in energy resources and a key transport corridor for China to access energy and strategic minerals from Central Asia, Caspian region and the Middle East [1].

Instability in Xinjiang is a threat to CCP credibility and legitimacy. Senior CCP officials seem to think that if the government is seen as weak and unable to control Xinjiang, this may encourage separatism in other regions, such as Tibet, Inner Mongolia, Taiwan and potentially elsewhere. Moreover, the CCP needs continued access to energy and strategic minerals in Central Asia to help feed its voracious economic growth. The SCO is China’s vehicle to project its influence across this pivot of the Eurasia heartland.

In 1996, then-President Jiang Zemin presided over a Politburo Standing Committee meeting that addressed Xinjiang’s stability. In a document called “Document #7,” CCP issued directives to resolve regional issues. Document #7 outlined three main security concerns: (1) outside influence in destabilizing Xinjiang; (2) erosion of state’s authority as religiously-motivated groups challenge authority at the local level; and (3) economic impoverishment in the region as a catalyst for discontent. CCP’s courses of action to address these issues are threefold: (1) resolve problems of foreign influence through multilateral diplomacy with Central Asian republics; (2) crack down on challenges to state authority; and (3) promote economic development to resolve impoverishment [2]. This Document #7 served as the blueprint for China’s ”Develop the West” Silk Road Strategy to stabilize Xinjiang and spur local economic growth.

Economic Dimensions of the Threat

Terrorist attacks from al-Qaeda-trained TIP potentially threaten a core tenet of China’s strategy of stabilizing Xinjiang—as an ‘inseparable part of China”, for resource extraction and as a springboard into Central Eurasia. More than 43 percent of investment allocated by the central government to expand domestic demand was used for projects in western regions (Xinhua, October 16, 2009). Xinjiang is also a vital section of the continental rail route, the Eurasia Land Bridge, which connects China with Europe (Beijing Review, August 11, 2011).

On April 23, 2010, in a meeting held by the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, President Hu Jintao stated, “it is a major and urgent task of strategic significance for us to boost the economic and social development of Xinjiang to achieve lasting stability in the region.” According to Wang Ning, an economist with the Academy of Social Sciences in Xinjiang, the development of the region would speed up the political, economic and cultural exchanges between China and Central Asian states and contribute to regional prosperity and stability. To that end, China’s Civil Aviation Administration plans to have six new airports in the region by 2015, bringing the total number to 22. There are also plans for new flight routes to link Xinjiang’s capital Urumqi to Istanbul, Dubai, Samarkand in Uzbekistan, Yekaterinburg in Russia and Tbilisi in Georgia (Xinhua, July 2, 2010).

Kashgar, a key hub near China’s far western border, is emblematic of both Beijing’s outreach and vulnerability. Kashgar is being developed into a Special Economic Zone (SEZ) and together with Pakistan’s northern provinces of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Gilgit-Baltistan, this will form the central plank in the emerging architecture for new silk routes. There are ideas to establish a trans-border economic zone on both sides of Pakistan and China by establishing manufacturing hubs, trade houses and clearing houses as well as the use of yuan for cross-border trade settlement (Global Times, September 18, 2011). Since FATA borders Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Gilgit-Baltistan and the latest terrorist attack was in Kashgar, collectively the foundational stone of China’s Silk Road development strategy, China would not be able to launch this central plank if FATA militants became a more significant destabilizing force.

Military Dimensions of the Threat

One key aspect of Xinjiang that is sorely neglected in press coverage regarding terrorism is China’s nuclear arsenal. Xinjiang hosts China’s nuclear test site Lop Nur and elements of the Second Artillery Corps, China’s strategic missile force. Some of the Second Artillery’s vaunted tunnels—the so-called “Underground Great Wall” for hiding missiles and nuclear warheads—also surround Urumqi, the capital of Xinjiang and site of the July 2009 riots that killed 200 people and injured almost 2,000 others. Persistent unrest on a national scale has left at least China’s Xinjiang-based nuclear warheads vulnerable, like during the Cultural Revolution (Washington Post, November 29, 2011; People’s Daily, July 6, 2009) [3]. Should such unrest occur again—probably on a scale even more substantial than 1989—these weapons might become vulnerable to seizure by Uighur militant groups.

Implications of Pakistan’s Inability to Neutralize FATA Militants

If Pakistan continues its lax attitude towards FATA militants and attacks on Chinese soil increase in severity and frequency, Beijing would likely see this as a continued threat to national sovereignty and territorial integrity. China already appears to be taking several courses of action to redress this problem.

Increased PLA Presence in Pakistan

One course of action, as mentioned earlier, is the reported demand for PLA bases in the FATA in addition to its current troop presence in northern Pakistan. When it comes to China’s territorial integrity, China has a history of responding forcefully when its borders are violated or threatened: in 1950 it invaded North Korea; in 1962 it invaded India; in 1979 it invaded Vietnam; and, since the 1990s, it has confronted other claimants in the South China Sea several times. PLA engineers have been assisting in earthquake recovery since last January; however, its not clear how long they will stay or whether the PLA contingent lacks security elements for its protection (India Today, January 4; Financial Times, November 3, 2011; Asia Times, October 26, 2011; Asia Times, August 1, 2011; ). Beijing has not tolerated any direct violation of its territorial integrity (outside of compromises in territorial dispute negotiations). suggesting it might attempt to deal with FATA militants more effectively within Pakistan if Islamabad cannot. The recent fallout between the United States and Pakistan also suggests Pakistani weakness that could spur Beijing to act or pressure Islamabad to boost the Chinese presence in the country. Islamabad’s demands of Washington correspond almost point by point with the Taliban’s list of demands in November as conditions for entering into peace negotiations: Pakistan’s review of its U.S. ties, suspension of NATO supply lines and closure of Shamsi Air Base (Asia Times, December 3, 2011; Long War Journal, November 28, 2011; Associated Press, November 21). This further underscores Pakistan’s weakness in face of militants and could prompt China to pressure Islamabad to support Chinese bases in the FATA or FANA. On January 4, Chief of Army Staff General Afhfaq Parvez Kayani left for Beijing on a five-day official visit at the invitation of Chinese authorities to discuss the complete range of Sino-Pakistani security and defense relations (Pakistan Today, January 4,). This visit deserves some scrutiny to assess how Beijing sees Pakistan’s security situation and what, if anything, China can do to protect its interests.

Slowing Future Chinese Investments in Pakistan

Another course of action is further withdrawal and deterrence of future Chinese investments in Pakistan. On November 22, militants targeted a convoy carrying Chinese engineers in a bomb attack in Balochistan. In September, China’s Kingho Group withdrew from a $19 billion coal deal in Balochistan after bombings in Pakistan’s major cities. In November, Pakistan sent a large delegation from Sindh to Beijing to try to garner Chinese investments. Downplaying security concerns, the delegation reiterated how Pakistan has taken special measures to protect China’s 120 projects and over 13,000 staffers throughout Pakistan (Xinhua, November 22, 2011; Global Times, November 18, October 25, 2011; Wall Street Journal, September 30, 2011). China’s massive investment losses in Libya and evacuating its 36,000 workers however are still fresh in Chinese minds—reminding them of the high cost of investing in highly unstable countries, especially in one that is the central base of several dozen terrorist organizations. With TIP’s close links with al-Qaeda that explicitly targets Xinjiang and Chinese citizens and al-Qaeda’s cooperation with other terrorist organizations, Beijing has legitimate fears that the status quo in the FATA is increasingly unsustainable.

Conclusion: Pakistan Between a Rock and a Hard Place

In light of recent U.S/NATO-Pakistani fallout, Islamabad is trying to play the China card and their “all weather friend” as an alternative to the United States. However, upon closer scrutiny, Chinese aid pales in comparison to U.S. aid and is not a feasible replacement in the near or medium term. Nor does Beijing want to take on the U.S. burden. For example, Center for Global Development published a report in May revealing that average recorded grant assistance to Pakistan for FY2004-2009 from China was $9 million compared with the United States at $268 million. Oxford University also published a report in February that revealed U.S. FDI flow in Pakistan averaged 28 percent of total share from 2001-2009, while China stood at a meager 2 percent of total share in the same period. As for military aid, a few defense deals between China and Pakistan is no comparison for U.S. military assistance at $2.5 billion in addition to economic assistance at $1.8 billion in 2010 [4].

There also is growing perception in Beijing that it must take proactive measures to protect its interests abroad (Asia Times, December 17, 2011; “Mekong Murders Spur Beijing to Push New Security Cooperation,” China Brief, November 11, 2011). Its willingness to deploy paramilitary forces to patrol the Mekong in December in response to the October killing of 13 Chinese sailors underscores how changing security pressures may lead Beijing to diverge from its previous policies of “nonintervention” and deploying troops abroad. China has long contributed to UN peacekeeping missions overseas, but this is the first time it will carry out sustained operations in another country without a UN mandate. By deploying more than 300 armed police to the lawless triple-border area of the Golden Triangle (Laos, Thailand and Burma) in a joint patrol, coupled with its new domestic anti-terror laws to pave way for military intervention abroad, this may be an indicator of how China will address TIP militants in the lawless AfPak border area of FATA to safeguard its growing economic interests if Pakistan fails to control its militants.

If this was to happen, Chinese will be sucked into the $hithole and all the "brotherhood" will vanish. The American lost the day they put boots on the ground.

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby Rangudu » 08 Jan 2012 21:57

Has anyone posted this article on Pakjabi caste make up and how that links to the "thinking from the loin" attitudes?

My hypothesis is that the division of the Punjabi nation in 1947 produced a Pakistani Punjab that was heavily weighted in favour of the martial castes. The trading castes, which tend to be more pragmatic and balance society’s extremism mostly left to come to India. This has produced the imbalance which explains Pakistan’s fondness for a state dominated by soldiers

member_22286
BRFite
Posts: 812
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby member_22286 » 08 Jan 2012 22:05

Rangudu wrote:Has anyone posted this article on Pakjabi caste make up and how that links to the "thinking from the loin" attitudes?

My hypothesis is that the division of the Punjabi nation in 1947 produced a Pakistani Punjab that was heavily weighted in favour of the martial castes. The trading castes, which tend to be more pragmatic and balance society’s extremism mostly left to come to India. This has produced the imbalance which explains Pakistan’s fondness for a state dominated by soldiers


But India got the proub of Punjabi Martiality the Sikhs.Sardars are anything but thinking from the loins type they are a very pragmatiic bunch.May be the pakjabis want to emulate the Sikhs in martiality but it became a case of a fox trying to emulate a Tiger


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 34 guests