Sunni Terrorist Fragments of Unstable Pakistan-Nov 21, 2015

Peregrine · Post by **Peregrine** » 14 Dec 2015 21:06

Fully Posted on the Islamism & Islamophobia Abroad Thread

View from abroad : An email from Bill - Irfan Hussain
Cheers

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 14 Dec 2015 22:03

Good job by Raghavan and GoI. PoK is Indian land and must be taken back even if its over the corpse of pakistan.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 14 Dec 2015 22:15

rsingh wrote:SShridar Saar thank for very informative article.Sir Syed Ahmed is portrayed as being progressive and moderate muslim in our history books. remember writing about him for History exams. What buffoons were these people. I am always puzzled by one thing : how come first Muslims ruled India that long. Was there no fight back by Hindus all this time? Really ?

Maulana Azad was another moderate, progressive copy of Syed Ahmad. He succeeded in keeping the seeds of discontent in India which Nehru and sickculars kept watering, keeping the sickle away to make way for India's modernity, progress and peaceful rise.

Regarding TAPI, IMHO it will be ok as long as we do not invest penny in it and pay for gas delivered on Indian border.UWIIP /Under Water Iran India Pipeline will be exclusive project for both nations and primary source of NG import. India will build back up storage facilities for NG and in case of Paki bite Paki to get Paki disease to interrupt gas supply from TAPI, it will have less than 24 hour irritation to Indian people and big financial penalty to Poaqlatoonlandinsectdefecationbornominsofpuresyeddescendandbendandgandh.

Peregrine · Post by **Peregrine** » 14 Dec 2015 23:08

Jhujar wrote:Regarding TAPI, IMHO it will be ok as long as we do not invest penny in it and pay for gas delivered on Indian border.UWIIP /Under Water Iran India Pipeline will be exclusive project for both nations and primary source of NG import. India will build back up storage facilities for NG and in case of Paki bite Paki to get Paki disease to interrupt gas supply from TAPI, it will have less than 24 hour irritation to Indian people and big financial penalty to Poaqlatoonlandinsectdefecationbornominsofpuresyeddescedent.

Jhujar Ji :
I had posted the following link - may be "2 Pages ago" :

The Pipelines Perplexity – Bhaskar Dasgupta : 16-01-2004

Here is as a relevant portion of this Article :

In 2010 we have this nice shiny pipeline running across the country, delivering humungous quantities of gas to energy hungry industries and consumers sick of carting those silly gas canisters around every month or so. Energy is a funny resource, it has a massive force multiplier effect. It causes all kinds of nice chain reactions. Once there is cheap energy available, then the energy hog industries such as iron and steel, pharmaceuticals, manufacturing, etc start rapidly developing. Once we have these, then ancillary industries blossom and soon you have the rise of a huge industrial cluster in North India delivering almost 5% of India’s GDP directly or indirectly. It is no surprise that Gujarat and Maharashtra state have so much of industrial capacity, simply because of the relative abundance of cheap energy compared to other states. Besides this, you will have consumers having gas on tap with pipelines piped into their houses (so I am projecting this, stop chuckling!)

Then we come to the “oops” moment. The grand poo bah of some obscure tribe in Baluchistan, Pakistan gets upset because a traffic policeman gave his third cousin’s wife’s son a ticket or some other grand poo bah of another tribe flew a kite over his territory or something important like that. You know how it is with these grand poo bah’s, when they get upset, its not for them to just cluck their tongues, say “aww shucks”, have a cup of tea and forget about it. These guys have got artillery pieces and rocket propelled grenades and they do use them as frequently like you and I have hot dinners. They look around for some nice obvious target like a Barn or something. Oh! so what’s that long shiny thing? Man, I cannot miss that, so they pop off couple of grenades or attach some explosive devices to the pipeline. Now, as you well know, gas pipelines are rather sensitive, and don’t really like explosives going off on or near them. So, the gas pipeline goes up, and it takes a month to repair it and all. We have huge protestations of security, shows of rangers patrolling the pipeline, insurance claims flying through here there and everywhere, and the normal cacophony breaks out. In one month, the Pakistani’s say, hey, its repaired so take your gas already. The Iranians say, hey, you don’t have to pay so why are you moaning?

I will tell you why we will moan. 5% of our GDP will be affected, confidence rocked, long term contracts cancelled, small scale industries going bankrupt by the hundreds, working capital requirements shooting up with liquidity crunches, households in a total uproar because they don’t have gas to cook and the infrastructure to provide gas cylinders has been wound up, markets diving south, financing costs shooting up drastically, risk premiums dramatically increasing, increased unemployment, etc. etc. There is no amount of insurance which can ever satisfy the total potential damage that this interruption can cause. If we assume that the GDP will be US$ 1 Trillion in 2010, then the direct cost and indirect costs will be in the tens of billions of dollars if not more. Yes, the economy will be big, but the damage will be huge as well, can we take that kind of shock and pain?

If the "accident" to the Natural Gas Pipe Line passing through Pakistan would cause a loss of at least 5% of India's GDP in 2010 then what will be cost in 2020 or beyond? What if the Cwapistanis take longer to repair the Pipeline or take on action at all. The mind Boggles!

Thus Jhujar Ji, IMHO any Indian "Enterprise" dependent on Cwapistan is bound to be a NATIONAL DISASTER FOR INDIA!
Cheers

member_29218 · Post by **member_29218** » 14 Dec 2015 23:22

LokeshC wrote:................. Once the ancient tribal identities were "Borg"ed up by Islam the "Islamic Othering" instinct kicked in and the equillibriums that existed between the tribes began to be enforced by the sword instead of talks and "posturing". Islam turned an otherwise largely dharmic culture into murdering hordes. ..............

Seeing the 'Borg' analogy here is interesting. I've always said that Jihadists are like the Borg in so many ways that it is mind-boggling (pun intended).

Thank you SSridhar, A_Gupta and Ramana Ji for the very interesting discussion.

Albert Camus wrote, in his Myth of Sisyphus:

"For anyone who feels bound up with this world's fate, the clash of civilizations has something agonizing about it. I have made that anguish mine at the same time I wanted to join in."

What he said in 1946 does resonate so loudly today, is even more relevant. That there is a clash is not in question, the issue as I see it is, who are the key players and what is the end game? It is simplistic to assume that the show is being run at the behest of the ones who lived in a cave in Afghanistan or the ones who are waving a flag atop a HumVee. Hanging around here at BRF makes your head spin, with all the possible alternatives at hand.

I would beg to differ a little in the division of the ideology of the Islamists (not Islam per se). I feel there are two movements that have always been involved and at different times in the history of Islam one or the other has been in ascendance. There is no doubt, IMHO, that the majority of Islamists would like to see the rest of the world converted to their belief system, even those that are 'peaceful' subscribe to the theory that Islam is good for you and that a religion in opposition to the basic tenets of Islam is not compatible with the growth of humanity and civilization.

There is a ridiculously small fraction of muslims who truly believe in the equality of faiths of the kind that Rajiv Malhotra demands. Most 'tolerant' ones are simply that, tolerant of another pov without accepting it as equally legitimate.

The 'peaceful' and 'tolerant' muslims still support, overtly or not, the conversion of the rest of humanity to Islam by silently allowing the gradual erosion of civil liberties, egalitarianism, freedom of speech and action and by promoting those factions within their own ranks that facilitate the slow but definite imposition of Sharia and other instruments of Islamic doctrine.

The true Jihadis, those following the principles laid down 1400 yrs ago by PBUH and imitating the leader in the ultimate form of respect they can, seek to do so in a more aggressive, violent manner that leaves no doubt as to their intention. This is the group that everyone loves to hate and they are a convenient foil to the 'Islam is Peace' group.

The 'Peaceniks' view their conquests in the long term, they are content to wait and propagate, are like a slow virus and thus the really deadly ones. The Jihadi fundoos are the favorite whipping boys and billions of dollars are spent on fighting them while the real work is being done quietly by the 'moderates'.

The true reformists are a really rare breed and are truly irrelevant, they come on television shows and write a few books but sadly nobody is listening to them, other than a few of us on the 'other side'.

IMHO, both the 'security-motivated' and the 'civilization-motivated' Islamists exist in the two groups I described.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 14 Dec 2015 23:55

Attention: One hour and 4 minutes from now there will be a live event. It will be streamed online and tweeted about live.

It is a panel discussion hosted by the Washington-based "Atlantic Council" on the topic of "The Wisdom of a Grand Nuclear Bargain with Pakistan".

Read more about it in my earlier BRF post here.

The designated twitter hashtag is #ACPakistan which can hopefully be used to raise questions to be picked-up and responded-to in the actual event, by the panelists. Link to the stream is in my earlier post.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 15 Dec 2015 00:14

Guys, for those who think kirket is not a leverage India has over TSP, please watch this latest interview JaitlyJi gave to Burka Bibi starting at 46:40 about kirket with TSP (you can watch the whole interview where he speaks candidly). JaitlyJi skilfully navigates Burka's dumb or shall we say mischievous question on why if diplomats can meet, why not kirket, and oh so poor Shariyar Khan said its a closed chapter etc. He clearly says the onus for restoring normalcy rests with TSP but couches it as busy calendar etc

. I am glad Indian govt is using the leverage it has

http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/the-bu ... dtv/394836

RajeshG · Post by **RajeshG** » 15 Dec 2015 00:19

Sridharji can this post be put on some blog so the link can be shared ?

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 15 Dec 2015 01:10

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 15 Dec 2015 01:11

http://92newshd.tv/hurriyat-leaders-cal ... new-delhi/
HURRIYAT LEADERS CALL ON PAKISTAN HC ABDUL BASIT IN NEW DELHI

NEW DELHI (92 News) – Hurriyat Conference leaders met Pakistan High Commissioner Abdul Basit in New Delhi on Monday.They conveyed the message of Hurriyat Conference chairman Syed Ali Geelani to Pakistan HC Abdul Basit during the 90-minute meeting.Pakistan HC Abdul Basit told the Hurriyat leaders that the Pakistan Foreign secretary would definitely meet them when he would come to India.

Nandu · Post by **Nandu** » 15 Dec 2015 03:16

Ravi Karumanchiri wrote:Attention: One hour and 4 minutes from now there will be a live event. It will be streamed online and tweeted about live.

It is a panel discussion hosted by the Washington-based "Atlantic Council" on the topic of "The Wisdom of a Grand Nuclear Bargain with Pakistan".

Read more about it in my earlier BRF post here.

The designated twitter hashtag is #ACPakistan which can hopefully be used to raise questions to be picked-up and responded-to in the actual event, by the panelists. Link to the stream is in my earlier post.

At least on twitter, it seems to have been a dud.

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 15 Dec 2015 03:21

Jhujar wrote:

What is going on here? Obviously looks like the gernails grandiose delusions are being satiated, but I am curious as to the occassion.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 15 Dec 2015 04:00

Nandu wrote:
Ravi Karumanchiri wrote:Attention: One hour and 4 minutes from now there will be a live event. It will be streamed online and tweeted about live.

It is a panel discussion hosted by the Washington-based "Atlantic Council" on the topic of "The Wisdom of a Grand Nuclear Bargain with Pakistan".

Read more about it in my earlier BRF post here.

The designated twitter hashtag is #ACPakistan which can hopefully be used to raise questions to be picked-up and responded-to in the actual event, by the panelists. Link to the stream is in my earlier post.
At least on twitter, it seems to have been a dud.

The recording is worth watching.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 15 Dec 2015 04:13

A_Gupta wrote:It is hoped that the Indo -Pak dialog will be uninterruptible, but saboteurs can affect the dialogue process.
Parliament live blog:
http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... di-chandy/

3.30 pm: The way forward is only dialogue; hopes that ‘saboteurs’ will not provoke and affect the dialogue process, says Swaraj on Indo-Pak ties.

3.15 pm: There is a need to bridge the gulf in relations with Pakistan, hope that the dialogue will be uninterruptable, says Swaraj.

3.00 pm: Talks with Pakistan being re-started on the basis of trust, says External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj in Lok Sabha.
- See more at: http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... fNNOF.dpuf

All the above indicate that the Composite Bilateral Dialogue is *NOT* 'uninterrupted & uninterruptible'. AoA.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 15 Dec 2015 04:19

Yes, more specifically:
http://www.thenewstribe.com/2015/12/15/ ... ma-swaraj/

Indian Minister of Foreign Affairs Susham Swaraj clarified on Monday in the Lok Sabha that it had not given any assurance to continue talks with Islamabad even if there is a terror attack.

It also rejected charges that there was any flip-flop on policy towards the neighbour.

To the demands by some members for assurance that the dialogue process will be “uninterruptible”, External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj said,

“It never works like that. We would like not to get provoked by the saboteurs, who want to stall the dialogue somehow, and will try to find a way forward through the dialogue. This will be our intent. But no assurance can be given.”

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 15 Dec 2015 04:20

RajeshG wrote:Sridharji can this post be put on some blog so the link can be shared ?

RajeshG, what better way can be there to publicize BR than to share the BRf link if you think a post here is worthwhile? Just right click on the little 'Post' icon at the top right corner of any post and 'Share the Link'.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 15 Dec 2015 04:29

Putting the link here for convenience. Thank, Ravi Karumanchiri, for drawing attention to it.
http://www.c-span.org/video/?401987-1/d ... ar-program

Very briefly, the US is concerned about Pakistan's growing nuclear program - tactical nuclear weapons, full spectrum deterrence, etc., and no articulation of what is sufficient. The US has been wondering if there is any way of putting a constraint on Pakistan's nuclear program. It feels it has few sticks, and only the NSG membership carrot.

Gaurav Kampani argues,very effectively IMO, is that Pakistan is a revisionist power, seeking to upset the status quo not through internationally accepted mechanisms but by jihad-under-the-nuclear-umbrella, and essentially it won't accept anything reasonable until that revisionist strategy is abandoned.

There is a lot more than that, overall lays out the current strategic landscape, including China-Pakistan.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 15 Dec 2015 05:21

Wow Gaurav Kampani has changed a lot. Good for him.

Falijee · Post by **Falijee** » 15 Dec 2015 05:25

COAS installed Colonel of battalion of Regiment

More chamcha-giri of the Bad Sherrif

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 15 Dec 2015 05:29

A_Gupta wrote:Yes, more specifically:
http://www.thenewstribe.com/2015/12/15/ ... ma-swaraj/

Indian Minister of Foreign Affairs Susham Swaraj clarified on Monday in the Lok Sabha that it had not given any assurance to continue talks with Islamabad even if there is a terror attack.

It also rejected charges that there was any flip-flop on policy towards the neighbour.

To the demands by some members for assurance that the dialogue process will be “uninterruptible”, External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj said,

“It never works like that. We would like not to get provoked by the saboteurs, who want to stall the dialogue somehow, and will try to find a way forward through the dialogue. This will be our intent. But no assurance can be given.”

Who are the some members?

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 15 Dec 2015 05:57

Well, the Lok Sabha proceedings are on the web, e.g.
http://164.100.47.132/newdebate/16/6/14 ... 2To3pm.pdf (PDF file)
A quick scan (not a careful read) shows: e.g.,

SHRI ASADUDDIN OWAISI (HYDERABAD): Sir, this is a clumsy climb-down but I welcome it. This is a procedural breakthrough but not a substantive breakthrough. I would like to know from the hon. Minister on certain questions. Will this comprehensive bilateral dialogue be uninterruptible? Has the Government given an assurance that the Prime Minister will visit Islamabad during the SAARC Conference? Will India get the most favoured nation status? What steps have been taken to release the fishermen and exchange of prisoners? Will the
Government relax the issues of visas? Whether the LoC trade or the old barter
system would be finished? Will you agree with Sir Creek as maps are being drawn? For Siachen, will the Government be able to overrule its own Army? Is this Government really serious about Afghanistan? Afghanistan is going to be a grave challenge to us. After spending trillions of dollars, we still see that the Government is not in control. Are India and Pakist
an going to sit down and talk about how stable Afghanistan can be made because it is in our interest that Afghanistan remains stable? Taliban is going to come back for sure over there.
All experts are saying this. These are not my words. So, what steps are taken in that regard? These are my specific pointed questions to the hon. Minister.

Sushma Swaraj in her answer also said that the mention of J&K in the NSA talks was with regard to the cross-LoC firing and the terrorism in J&K, not the status of J&K.

Sushma Swaraj also said that the starting and suspending of talks, composite dialog, etc., are a normal part of diplomacy (kootniti), and are not flip-flops.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 15 Dec 2015 06:00

Looks like he was given those questions to ask.
For instance India spent in billions of dollars and not trillions in Afghanistan.
The questions are all over the place and can be quietly ignored.
Yet were answered by Sushma Swaraj.

Falijee · Post by **Falijee** » 15 Dec 2015 06:03

Pakistan’s external debt set to grow to whopping $90b

ISLAMABAD:
Pakistan’s external debt is projected to grow to a whopping $90 billion in the next four years and the country will need $20 billion a year just to meet its external financing requirements amid concerns that all constitutional arrangements put in place to manage debt have become ineffective .

...are about $14 billion higher than the projections made by the International Monetary Fund.(rosy picture painted for IMF? )[/quote]
He said the debt-to-GDP ratio has become irrelevant in case of Pakistan as the country lacks the capacity to repay the debt even at its current 65% level of debt-to-GDP ratio.

So, basically this Islami Takat is drowning in debt, but will be kept afloat by the 3.5 friends on the pretext of "too important to fail"

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 15 Dec 2015 06:13

A_Gupta wrote:
Sushma Swaraj also said that the starting and suspending of talks, composite dialog, etc., are a normal part of diplomacy (kootniti), and are not flip-flops.

Even Jaitly said that certain positions govt takes are transient in nature given a certain environment that exists. This govt is savvy and mature, just pity we have an opposition that just does not oppose them as part of normal democracy, they just loath this govt as much as the Pakis.

arun · Post by **arun** » 15 Dec 2015 06:22

arun wrote: ……..{Snipped}………… Islamic Republic of Pakistan High Commissioner Abdul Basit (AB) claims in interview with India Today’s Rahul Kanwal (RK) that India has agreed that talks with the Islamic Republic will go on even with the noise of gunfire and explosions of Islamic Republics Mohammadden Terrorist proxies that takes Indian lives. ………………{Snipped}……………..

I cannot find any on the record official denial by a named Indian official denying this claim. Meanwhile Mani Shanker Iyer will be undoubtedly pleased that Modi Sarkar has committed India to interruptable dialogue with the Islamic Republic:

Abdul Basit says India has committed to Pakistan terror will not derail talks

Following Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj's historic trip to Islamabad, Pakistan High Commissioner Abdul Basit has said that the India-Pakistan dialogue won't get derailed in case of another terror attack.

New Delhi, December 14, 2015 | Posted by Sangeeta Ojha | UPDATED 16:22 IST ………………….

RK: Is there a commitment that the dialogue will continue despite a possible terror attack?

AB: I would not like to get into specific but I think both sides are committed this time around to not allow those forces to sabotage or thwart this dialogue process between the two countries.
From Here:

Clicky

Comforting to hear our External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj squelching comment of Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s High Commissioner Abdul Basit’s comment suggesting that India has committed to "uninterruptable dialogue" with the Islamic Republic even if hit by Islamic Republic of Pakistan fomented Mohammadden Terrorism :

A_Gupta wrote:Yes, more specifically:
http://www.thenewstribe.com/2015/12/15/ ... ma-swaraj/

Indian Minister of Foreign Affairs Susham Swaraj clarified on Monday in the Lok Sabha that it had not given any assurance to continue talks with Islamabad even if there is a terror attack.

It also rejected charges that there was any flip-flop on policy towards the neighbour.

To the demands by some members for assurance that the dialogue process will be “uninterruptible”, External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj said,

“It never works like that. We would like not to get provoked by the saboteurs, who want to stall the dialogue somehow, and will try to find a way forward through the dialogue. This will be our intent. But no assurance can be given.”

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Dec 2015 06:25

Jhujar wrote:

First jhumkas. Then choodiyan.

partha · Post by **partha** » 15 Dec 2015 06:36

That BC Owaisi is a closet Paki for sure. No doubt after reading those questions. They are straight from Pak HC or ISPR as ramanaji said.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 15 Dec 2015 06:39

Pakistan diplomat's links with terror groups revealed
http://bdnews24.com/bangladesh/2015/12/ ... s-revealed
( check out her picture with rat face)

Pakistan High Commission's Second Secretary (political) Farina Arshad is said to be involved with the Islamist radicals.Earlier in January this year, Mazhar Khan, a Pakistani official working in the Dhaka mission, had been expelled after Bangladesh intelligence accused him of funding Islamist radicals and peddling fake currency.Both these radicals had been travelling frequently between Bangladesh and Pakistan, he said.Monirul Islam said Idris was in possession of a 'spy mobile', which he was using to communicate regularly with a foreign intelligence agent outside the country."He was regularly sharing information with that agent and was also in touch with a female diplomat based in Dhaka." The police officer did not disclose the diplomat's identity at that time.
In his judicial confession before Dhaka Metropolitan Magistrate Abdullah Al Masud under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), Idris named Second Secretary Farina Arshad as the diplomat he was in contact with.Senior intelligence sources say another junior diplomat of same origin working in a European mission in Dhaka is alleged to have been involved in anti-Bangladesh propaganda.DB's Monirul Islam told journalists in November that Idris had visited Pakistan via India in 1985.In 2002, Idris contested national elections from Pakistan Muslim Alliance but lost. In 2007, he returned to Bangladesh and joined the JMB.Monirul Islam said Idris, 49, had been to Pakistan 48 times in the past two years.
About his links with Pakistani diplomat Farina Arshad, Idris said on return to Bangladesh in 2007, he had first tried his hand in garment business, but five years later, he switched over to air ticketing and visa processing.Idris said in his confession that Babul later told him that a man arrested for peddling counterfeit Indian currency in Dhaka airport was closely linked to Farina.Idris said in his judicial confession that he got a ride from Farina in her car from Baitul Mukarram to Fakirapool and received Tk 30,000 from her.An intelligence official told bdnews24.com that Idris had saved a foreign number in his mobile phone as his own.That number actually belongs to a Pakistani intelligence official called Captain Asim, who is performing a crucial under-cover assignment based in an airport in Pakistan.The phone Idris carried had the capability to record conversations of other people using malware.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 15 Dec 2015 06:57

LokeshC wrote:
Jhujar wrote:[i
What is going on here? Obviously looks like the gernails grandiose delusions are being satiated, but I am curious as to the occassion.

COAS installed Colonel of battalion of Regiment
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MAhNDmbEHc

Bad Sharif Abb Dekhe Sapne ,
Ganje Sharif Kii Laggi Hai Phatne
Ram Ram Lagga Hai Jaapne
Kaffir Indians Lagge Hai Hassne
O Deear Bakistan,
Din Aaa Gye Phir Coup Maar Ke !!

Mushy will be in his cab(re)inet in 2016 .

sum · Post by **sum** » 15 Dec 2015 07:03

From Shri.Owaisi's questions:

For Siachen, will the Government be able to overrule its own Army?

Which Indian MP talks like this?

Truely, we seem to have some real $%#^-up people at highest places

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 15 Dec 2015 08:08

A_Gupta wrote:Putting the link here for convenience. Thank, Ravi Karumanchiri, for drawing attention to it.
http://www.c-span.org/video/?401987-1/d ... ar-program

Very briefly, the US is concerned about Pakistan's growing nuclear program - tactical nuclear weapons, full spectrum deterrence, etc., and no articulation of what is sufficient. The US has been wondering if there is any way of putting a constraint on Pakistan's nuclear program. It feels it has few sticks, and only the NSG membership carrot.

Gaurav Kampani argues,very effectively IMO, is that Pakistan is a revisionist power, seeking to upset the status quo not through internationally accepted mechanisms but by jihad-under-the-nuclear-umbrella, and essentially it won't accept anything reasonable until that revisionist strategy is abandoned.

There is a lot more than that, overall lays out the current strategic landscape, including China-Pakistan.

You have captured the essence accurately even as the above discussion brings out exactly what we have been discussing here lately, namely 'security-seeking' vs. 'civilizational enmity'.

The American analyst Toby Dalton (in association with Michael Krepon) propagates the usual American 'security' model along with that Pakistani Sameer Lalwani while Gaurav Kampani explains the 'civilizational' aspect.

The weak defense put out by the Pakistani Sameer Lalwani and his demeanour of presentation were interesting by contrast. He was pathetic and his furious pace of delivery hides his insecurity, I thought.

I made a rough transcript below.

Toby Dalton

Why should there be a consideration of a nuclear deal with Pakistan? That is because there is a growing nuclear danger, nuclear terrorism or nuclear war because of Pakistan. Perception of this threat has changed recently even though its nuclear security has improved. It is a threat to peace & security and Pakistan is being scrutinized.

Many things contribute to this increased awareness of nuclear threat such as Pakistan’s TNW programme, testing of longer range systems and sea-based nuclear weapons etc.

The scrutiny has led to some sense of a need to think through options vis-à-vis Pakistan. The options are not good if one looks at incentives vs. leverage. On the leverage side there is very little. The US record of ‘punitive sanctions’ especially against n-weapon holding countries is not particularly good.

If one talks to Pakistani officials, they are satisfied with their nuclear posture, with where they are today in terms of n-weapons.

The ‘reputation’ of Pakistan comes into play when it comes to joining international nuclear regime. Pakistan’s first priority is to keep India out of NSG , second is if India joins NSG the Pakistan also does so. This, then, gives a leverage to ‘negotiate’ with Pakistan on that basis. For this, there has to be a change in internal logic in Pakistan.

So long as there is a military-driven logic for n-weapons, it is not possible for Pakistan to take measures needed to join international nuclear regimes. We had a discussion with Pakistan a year ago about it joining NSG. When asked abou how they intended to go about that, they said that they would do exactly what the Indians did. This is a cognitive dissonance by Pakistan because Pakistan is not exactly India.

We postulated two futures for Pakistan. One, the ‘status quo’ in which Pakistan will continue to produce weapons, (a prediction based upon the fissile material capacity suggests 350 weapons) {though Toby Dalton did not mention the timeframe for these many weapons}. This is because the Pakistani military would want a nuclear arsenal whenever there is a qualitative or quantitative gap in conventional military capabilities between the two countries.

The question also arises then at what point the additional n-weapons become meaningless. Therefore, there is an alternative second future which says that if the additional weapons are not going to provide n-deterrence, and if Pakistan feels secure, then it opens up certain possibilities for leverage. The leverage is to prescribe a nuclear force structure for Pakistan.

We have suggested five things for Pakistan to do. These are exemplars, not prescriptions or demands. Changes in its declaratory policy, formalizing its recessed nuclear posture, thinking about numerical and geographical constraints on its TNWs, limiting fissile material production and signing CTBT without waiting for India to do so with the caveat that if India tests again, Pakistan could exercise its ‘supreme national interest’ clause to wriggle out.

Is it wise to seek this path with Pakistan? We have also received criticism that we only looked at Pakistan and not India.

If there is an open-door for India and a closed-door for Pakistan, then it limits our policy options. There is therefore wisdom in thinking about a bargain with Pakistan.

Sameer Lalwani

I see a a lot of potential good for both the US and India in the report of Toby Dalton & Micheal Krepon if Pakistan were to implement their suggestions

There will be a reduction in nuclear risk in South Asia. For example, the gravest danger comes from TNWs and if Pakistan can be persuaded to limit the number of such weapons and their deployment, it could help in crisis management that could come from a terrorist attack or a ‘misattribution’ of an attack or a simple escalation on the LoC firing which happens on a routine basis. A recessed posture would strengthen crisis stability.

Greatest crisis scenarios in Pakistan come from a compromised command& control, unauthorized launch,theft or capture of n-weapon. These are exacerbated by TNWs.If incentives are offered to Pakistan to ‘restrict’ TNWs that would be useful for all parties involved or anybody who cares for nuclear proliferation.

Measures suggested by Toby Dalton & Michael Krepon would be beneficial to India because they are aspiring to be a ‘great power’ and they can pursue that policy rather than being engaged in a competition with Pakistan.

For Pakistan, this shows a path out of isolation. This would also stop Pakistan from taking ‘provocative actions’ to pull people to the table

There are two criticisms I have heard. One that it rewards Pakistan’s wuest for parity with India and the other that it could setback India-US relation. But reward is incorrect because there would be no ‘material balance’ with India (What is this material balance?} because signing CTBT or FMCT or restrictions on TNWs would be costly and negate the parity. As for impact on India-US relationship, the US is deft enough to manage any fallouts. For example Greece-Turkey or Japana-South Korea or Japan-China.
Gaurav Kampani

The idea of accepting Pakistan has been in the air since 2010. This gained prominent effort from the US after the successful Iran deal.

Pakistan wants a deal similar to India-US deal and it does not want any compromise on its FMCT & CTBT postures.

Within the Beltway, outside of the US administration, the three concerns on Pakistan are its rapidly expanding arsenal, the scope and ambition of its weapons programme and the possibility of an implosion of the state.

The Carnegie Endowment & Stimson Centre approach misses a fundamental point that there is an underlying link between Pakistan’s grand strategy and its nuclear trajectory. One of the reasons for the India-US deal is that India is a status-quoist and a ‘normal’ power. By contrast, Pakistan is a revisionist state and it is a power that believes in radical ideology to up-end the international status-quo and its instruments are non-state actors with radical Islamist ideology. So, there is a link between Pakistan revisionism, its arsenal size, posture and the threat to Pakistan’s internal stability. Faced with Pakistan’s nuclear blackmail using non-state actors, India has threatened to use conventional forces and this in turn lead to Pakistan deploying TNWs as well as adopting a ‘full spectrum’ deterrence. Hence the idea that we can persuade Pakistan to move from ‘full spectrum deterrence’ to a more moderate ‘strategic deterrence’ will not work. We are wasting our time in asking Pakistan to change its nuclear deterrence strategy

If Pakistan were to become a ‘normal’ state, India would not have to threaten it with conventional forces and Pakistan would not have to deploy TNWs

There is an argument to use Obama administration’s strategy in Iran of asking it to set aside its radical groups in lieu for a nuclear deal is seductive but flawed with respect to Pakistan. One, Iran was still ambivalent about its n-weapons and this opened the door for negotiations. Within Pakistan’s strategic community, there is no ambivalence on TNWs or full spectrum deterrence. Second, in the case of Iran, there was no linkage between the state’s support of terrorism and its pursuit of n-weapons. In Pakistan’s case, n-weapons are a keystone in its revisionist and radical grand strategy (28:00Min). Hence, while it made sense to negotiate with Iran independent of the radical nature of the Iranian state, the same approach is invalid in the case of Pakistan. We have to address the nettlesome task of addressing the Pakistani revisionism as part of a grand nuclear deal.

In perspective, the US goals since WW II have been to promote democracy, market capitalism and stop revisionist powers. Any approach in which we divorce the revisionism of Pakistan from its nuclear-weapons programme would end up treating the symptom rather than the disease.

vivek.rao · Post by **vivek.rao** » 15 Dec 2015 08:12

sum wrote:From Shri.Owaisi's questions:
For Siachen, will the Government be able to overrule its own Army?
Which Indian MP talks like this?

Truely, we seem to have some real $%#^-up people at highest places

^^ We need to borrow Putin's secret sauce and serve these ba$tards ...

That includes NDTV,TOIlet,ItalianExpress too

Mihaylo · Post by **Mihaylo** » 15 Dec 2015 08:19

LokeshC wrote:
Jhujar wrote:
What is going on here? Obviously looks like the gernails grandiose delusions are being satiated, but I am curious as to the occassion.

Tail the donkey. They both tailed it very close to his musharaff

-M

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 15 Dec 2015 09:08

So a secret birdie of a cousin twice removed tells me that efforts are underway to secure Bad Sharif a second term.

What is funny about that is that nobody knows if Bad Sharif himself wants a second term. Seems that Jernails in Al Bakistan are surrounded by sycophants who try to secure things for the Jernail and the civvies dont know if the Jernail himself wants it or if there is a chamcha of the Jernail who is trying to curry favor with the Jernail by securing the Jernail an extension. Bad Sharif has issued a statement he is not interested in an extension. Now people dont know if he is really not interested or if he wants the civvies to do a song and dance about "forcing him" to accept an extension, without openly asking for one as Ashphuck did.

Meanwhile, apparently Badmash is tempted to offer an extension to Jernail because of a few reasons: Jernail has brought back peace & stability and dramatically reduced terror attacks, Jernail is also decimating the PPP and MQM, Kaptaan is unable to take up the space vacated by them, so whats left is Badmash. Lastly, Jernail seems to be content and is not threatening frequent Coups like Ashphuck* Why spoil a good thing?

*There is this insane story about Ashphuck. Apparently Ashphuck mused openly to a visiting massa dignitary whether he should conduct a coup or not. The alarmed massa dignitary ran to his ambassador, who then called up Ten Percenti to warn him. Paki jernails have strange ways of communicating their threats.

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 15 Dec 2015 10:01

Anujan wrote: *There is this insane story about Ashphuck. Apparently Ashphuck mused openly to a visiting massa dignitary whether he should conduct a coup or not. The alarmed massa dignitary ran to his ambassador, who then called up Ten Percenti to warn him. Paki jernails have strange ways of communicating their threats.

It could have been asking bermission from massa on whether coup is halaal or not.

I know this because my "bery close fraand" once sold me bhaang this way

.

When you are selling contraband to someone you know very well and are afraid of the reaction, you kind of introduce it as a "joke". Like so: "If, hypothetically, I had some bhaang left over right now, would you 'hypothetically' buy it?" followed by as wide of a

as one can manage.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 15 Dec 2015 10:33

X-post

++++++++++++++++++

IMO Shia Sunni divide while significant is over rated in BRF thinking. We need to bring it down. When Pakistan and Afghanistan split they will go with ethnic lines not sectarian divide. Even Iranian support for shia Hazara is restrained as they do not share common ethnicity. Shias of Afghanistan are being used as cannon fodder in Syria per reports. Shia sunni divide is a brand war fought between Persians and Arabs. It is a significant contributor to the enmity between them but not the primary cause...which is ethnic divide.

Secondly the Shia support for Pakistan as strong as ever, Qadianis are not showing signs of remorse for being the flag bearers of Pakistan. While there was a blast in Shia Parchinar, they will not come out openly against Taliban forget siding with Kaffirs or Americans.

Please remove Sunni and replace it with Pakjabi as title of Pakistan thread..................

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 15 Dec 2015 10:52

Pashtun Civil war thread....

I think the partition of Punjab and Bengal on religious lines has clouded our perception. This is an exception not the norm as Punjab partition was encouraged by external powers...One should not think this will be case in other parts of the world. Both sides have same ethnic lineage, religious differences but age old Pashtun threat to Punjab will force Pakjabis to realign with Indian Punjab (Note: Indian Punjab not India). The Af-Pak region is breaking up along ethnic lines. Pakjab does not have strategic depth to take on the Pashtun threat. This is the essence of Pakistan search for security from NW threat (ISIS/Taliban/Pashtun nationalism) etc. Pashtun yearning to come together is unanimous whether it is Shia or Sunni Pashtuns.

Similarly Indian Ashrafis consensus for Pakistan has not broken down as evidenced by Salman Khurshid's recent statement or Shahryar Khan's position in Pakistan..both are Shia, as was Ashphuck. Amir Khan is Shia as well. I follow Shia news from Pak in twitter and they are more pro Pak than the sunnis.

Similarly Indian Ashrafi consensus for Pakistan has not broken down on sectarian lines as evidenced by Salman Khurshid's recent statement asking India to go easy on Pak or Shahryar Khan's status in Pakistan..both are Shia, as was Ashphuck. Amir Khan is Shia as well. I follow Shia news from Pak in twitter and they are more pro Pak than the sunnis. Persian influence over Af-Pak is more substantive while Saudi influence is transient.

we are confusing Saudi and American meddling as events which can influence this change but are overestimating their power and influence. The Durranis and Ghilzais will keep fighting for spoils of power but ISI cannot exploit them to keep Pakistan united as ethnic difference is triumphing over sectarian differences. Persian influence over Af-Pak is more substantive while Saudi influence is transient.

Just a ramble

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 15 Dec 2015 12:03

Omar Abdullah & Mehbooba Mufti call for 'sustained' & 'uninterrupted' dialogue - The Hindu

Both the ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP) president Mehbooba Mufti and Opposition National Conference (NC) working president Omar Abdullah on Monday called for “sustained” and “uninterrupted” talks between India and Pakistan.

“There is a need to insulate the dialogue process from the elements who will try to derail it. I am sure there will be attempts at it,” said Mr.Abdullah in Srinagar.

He asked Prime Minister Narendra Modi to reach out to the stakeholders in Srinagar too. “The way Modi Sahib reached out to Pakistan, there is also a need to talk to Srinagar. Both external and internal dimensions of the Kashmir problem need to be addressed,” he said.

Ms.Mehbooba, in a statement issued in Srinagar from New Delhi, expressed hope that the renewed thaw in Indo-Pak ties “would mark a new beginning for peace, stability and prosperity in the region”.

Calling for “uninterrupted and productive engagement” between New Delhi and Islamabad, she said, “We cannot visualise any alternative to reconciliation and dialogue to end the dark era of hostility and confrontation plaguing the sub-continent’s six-decade-long tumultuous history.”

Falijee · Post by **Falijee** » 15 Dec 2015 12:14

Nawaz, Modi likely to meet in Switzerland next month

ISLAMABAD - Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi will meet yet another time in Switzerland next month where they will be together to attend the 46th annual meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos-Klosters.

It is likely that the adviser-level talks between Pakistan and India would take place after the Davos meeting of the two prime ministers. India was insisting that the adviser-level talks that would determine the course of future dialogue of Pakistan and India should be held in New Delhi, but Pakistan asked it take place in Islamabad. The rendezvous of the dialogue could become a bone of contention between the two countries and the prime ministers would resolve it.

News is from a Paki source, therefore reader discretion advised !

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 15 Dec 2015 12:21

Dhaka University cuts ties with Pak. - Haroon Habib, The Hindu

Dhaka University, the premier university of Bangladesh, has decided to cut all relations with Pakistan.

Announcing this on Monday, vice-chancellor the university, Prof. AAMS Arefin Siddique, said “the decision on cutting ties with Pakistan was taken in a syndicate meeting as Pakistan denied the atrocities committed during Bangladesh’s Liberation War.” He also demanded the government to sever ties with Pakistan unless Islamabad provides an unconditional apology for the crimes it committed in 1971. {AoA}

The university took the decision on a day when Bangladesh observed Intellectual Martyrs Day in memory of the intellectuals who had fallen victims to the Pakistani military regime and its local collaborators. On December 14, 1971, the Pakistani occupation forces and their cohorts had killed university teachers, doctor and writers after picking them up from their homes in Dhaka.