Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 2011

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 2011

Postby shiv » 08 May 2011 05:37

The following links are background articles on Pakistan.

UNDERSTANDING PAKISTAN:


Jinnah's Pakistan: An Interview with MA Jinnah, and how the Pakistan of Yesterday is the Pakistan of Today
http://iref.homestead.com/Messiah.html

http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/_files/012809Tellis.pdf

The above is the testimony of Ashley Tellis on Jan 28th 2009, to the US Senate Homeland Security Committee on LeT's global role. It is a good articulation of LeT's past and future trends.

Know Your Pakistan
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITOR/I ... /Shiv.html

The Monkey Trap: A synopsis of Indo-Pak relations
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITOR/I ... ayyam.html

PAKISTAN-FAILED STATE: an ebook that owes its origin and existence to BRF.
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/EBOOKS/pfs.pdf

Whither Pakistan ? Growing Instability and Implications for India: an IDSA e-Book, July 2010
http://idsa.in/book/WhitherPakistan

A landmark article that demolishes myths built up about Pakistan
http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers8/paper710.html

Pakistani Role in Terrorism Against the U.S.A
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITOR/I ... yanan.html

Pakistani Education, or how Pakistan became what it is: Curricula and textbooks in Pakistan
http://www.sdpi.org/archive/nayyar_report.htm

Making Enemies, Creating Conflict: Pakistan's Crises of State and Society. A book written by Pakistanis on Pakistan.
http://members.tripod.com/~no_nukes_sa/Contents.html

Should Pakistan Be Broken Up? by Gul Agha
http://pakistan70.tripod.com/gul.html

Alden Pyle in Pakistan, Part I
http://pundita.blogspot.com/2009/12/ald ... art-1.html

Prof. Walter Russell Mead, "Pakistan's Failed National Strategy"
http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/ ... -strategy/

"Pakistan Is", by Barry Bearak in New York Times Magazine, December 7, 2003.
Brings out succinctly various facets of Pakistani perfidy, obsession, fundamentalism etc.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.h ... nted=print

PAKISTAN & TERRORISM:

The Ideologies of South Asian Jihadi Groups (Laskar-e-Taiba)
By Hussein Haqqani (journalist and Pak ambassador to US)
http://www.futureofmuslimworld.com/rese ... detail.asp

Lashkar-e-Taiba: Past Operations and Future Prospects, Stephen Tankel, April 2011
New America Foundation
http://newamerica.net/sites/newamerica. ... _LeT_0.pdf

Pakistani sponsoring of Terrorism
http://www.geocities.com/charcha_2000/
http://pak-terror.freeservers.com/Terro ... y_Tool.htm

Terror Map: The Pakistani Hand
http://sify.com/news/specials/terrormap/?vsv=TopHP1

Ethnic cleansing in Pakistan - a statistical analysis
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITOR/I ... idhar.html

A chronicle of genocide by the Pakistan army
http://www.gendercide.org/case_bangladesh.html

Documentary video evidence of Pakistani genocide in Bangladesh
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x-94U1bVUQ
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=EBKlIUbpc ... re=related
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=sMg9Ly9nK0g
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=xwwPbkyZV ... re=related

Inside Jihad - How Pakistan sponsors terrorists in India
http://www.time.com/time/asia/magazine/ ... r_sb1.html

Pakistan's Role in the Kashmir Insurgency - Op-ed by Rand's Peter Chalk
http://www.rand.org/hot/op-eds/090101JIR.html

Alden Pyle in Pakistan, Part II
http://pundita.blogspot.com/2009/12/ald ... -upon.html

BEYOND MADRASAS: ASSESSING THE LINKS BETWEEN EDUCATION AND MILITANCY IN PAKISTAN
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/ ... nthrop.pdf

PAKISTAN TODAY:

On the Frontier of Apocalypse: Christopher Hitchens seminal article on Pakistan today
http://newsstuff.0catch.com/article5.htm

http://meaindia.nic.in/bestoftheweb/2002/10/14bow2.htm

A Slender Reed in Pakistan - Editorial in the Christian Science Monitor
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1229/p08s03-comv.html

Seymour Hersh Interview
http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcript_hersh.html

Pakistan's Nuclear Crimes (Wash. Post editorial)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dy ... 2-2004Feb4

http://www.indiadefence.com/LOA07Aug04.htm

The Battle for Pakistan: Militancy and Conflict in Pakistan's Tribal Regions
http://counterterrorism.newamerica.net/ ... r_pakistan

BOOK REVIEW Fulcrum of Evil: ISI-CIA-Al Qaeda Nexus
http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpap ... r1844.html

Article from Vinni Capelli - Foreign Policy Research Institute:
Containing Pakistan: Engaging the Raja-Mandala in South-Central Asia
http://www.fpri.org/orbis/5101/cappelli ... kistan.pdf

The videos are from this documentary: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/taliban/

A bomb at all cost By Ahmad Faruqui - a candid admission of the wars that Pakistan started against India.

Popular support for suicide bombings in pakistan.
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.as ... 008_pg12_1
Survey by university students in karachi say 50% of respondents support suicide bombings in kashmir.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=OWsmJIwe9Q4
"Descent into Chaos"
UC Berkeley Conversations with History, host Harry Kreisler talking with Pakistani Journalist Ahmed Rashid. 59 minutes 120 MB. It sums up Pakistan and lays bare all Pakistan's terrorist support and proliferation activities. **Note - he wants the US to solve Pakistan's Kashmir problem.

Pakistan on the brink: Video Link (must download)


MISCELLANEOUS

Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto telling Bangladeshis to "Go to Hell": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Dsxfyxa ... re=related

IDSA's weekly summary of Pak Urdu Press:

http://www.idsa.in/pup
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Five installment series by Kapil Komireddi published in Frum Forum

Part I. Nov 16, 2009. “Pakistan In Crisis”.

Part II. Nov 18. 2009. “Pakistan: Origins of A Failed State”.

Part III. Nov 18, 2009. “Pakistan: It Could Not Succeed Unless India Failed”.

Part IV. Dec 06, 2009. “Pakistan: A Mecca for Radical Islam”.

Part V. Dec. 07, 2009. “Pakistan’s Army: Building a Nation for Jihad

A perceptive blog on Pakistan: http://pak-watch.blogspot.com/

Declassified documents from US National Archives on Pakistan:

http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/pakistan/pakistan.htm
_______________________________________________

Admission of state sponsored terrorism by Pakistani authorities


see this Der Spigel Interview where Musharraf admits to that.

On 7th Nov in TimesNow Channel, Tasneem Noorani, a former Secretary of the Pakistani Interior Ministry, openly said that.

Kiyani called the Haqqanis as strategic assets.

In Dec. 2008, President Zardari himself admitted to ISI helping LeT. He said,"The links between the Inter-Services Intelligence Agency and the LeT were developed in the old days when dictators used to run the country. After the 9/11 terror attacks in the US, things have changed to a great extent"

In an address to bureaucrats in July 2009, President Zardari said: "Militants and extremists were deliberately created and nurtured as a policy to achieve some short-term tactical objectives. Let us be truthful to ourselves and make a candid admission of the realities. The terrorists of today were the heroes of yesteryears until 9/11 occurred and they began to haunt us as well"

In Nov. 2009, Prime Minister Gilani admitted to the support for terrorism by Musharraf as "running with the hares and hunting with the hounds".

When Bush warned the Pakistanis in August 2008 of their support to Al Qaeda, Afrasiab Khattak, President of Awami National Party (ANP) said this: "The question is why it has taken the Americans so long to see what the ISI is doing. We’ve been telling them for years but they wouldn’t buy it.". See here.

In an interview to the BBC as far back as on Feb. 13, 1994, Benazir Bhutto admitted how she handed over to Rajiv Gandhi the complete list of Sikh activists colluding with the ISI in terrorism in the Punjab. Later, Nawaz Sharif described this interview as a faux pas.

Apart from these, of course, numerous Pakistani commentators, analysts, and editors have openly admitted to terror as a state policy.
Last edited by shiv on 08 May 2011 05:39, 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): May 8, 201

Postby shiv » 08 May 2011 05:38

Link to last page of old thread
May that thread burn in hell
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=5871&start=2840

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby shiv » 08 May 2011 06:26

suryag wrote:
First of all sir, you say we need to create a group that will push for aggressive actions against the Pakis. This in my opinion, is not doable for atleast a decade or two. The reason behind this is the perennial struggle that the middle class in India is involved in; day-in and day-out they need to wrestle with so many issues in their life that a westerner or a well to do Indian doesnt have to. This group basically wants some amount of peace in life, may it be the fight between wife and mother or may it be between India-Pak. I am pretty sure this same group is also at ease if GOI takes unilateral action against Dawood Ibrahim via a covert/overt operation. They dont care, what they want at the end of the day is the problem doesnt exist. I have talked to a lot of people and they all are of the opinion that get done with this problem and move on and of course, they dont mean surrender when the say "get done" they mean smash them i.e., no half-baked measures. Why do you think entire India galvanises when there is an overt war, why do you think people(one person i know did) in far away TN sent in their jewelry to "somefund" on Nehru's appeal during the 1962 war, that is because the conflict is of immediate concern and we need to solve it. Here what i am trying to say is if you add one Low Intensity conflict issue on the psyche of an already burdened middle class man/woman it is going to invite indifference. You respond back and even if the outcomes are bad all these silent masses will rally towards the nationalistic side.


Suryag - that is a thought provoking post.

I would tend to agree with most people on here that a large number of people we meet want something done about the terrorist state when they are asked directly. But that is not the whole story. I have to agree with you that low intensity conflict does get less attention compared with the burden of daily life. Add to this the genuine WKKs, peaceniks and Gandhians in the population. Add people who would see conflict as a threat to their wealth and business interest and then you have a huge number of people who are not interested in conflict. In addition I believe Indians have a deep sense of right and wrong where they feel that is they might be wrong they need to correct themselves first. That is how Pakistan gets an opening to talk about "Hindi terror". Our sense of right and wrong allows that to happen.

Pakistan, having lost wars has learned to calibrate its actions in India to stay below the line where action would be take, The Pakistanis conduct 100 terror attacks of which only 2 are serious enough to cause threaten war. For example the parliament attack and 26/11 were the only two of dozens of attacks and dozens more of foiled attacks and infiltration bids. As long as Pakistan stays below a particular baseline - they will not get war from India. That is the theory behind the "war of a thousand cuts". Of course the rhetoric of a "thousand cuts" is worse than reality. Few people die from a whole lot of cuts that come one after another. I bit my tongue last week. That healed and this week I cut my finger. Next week I scrape my knee. etc. But Pakistan has learned to calibrate its provocations to keep the response level low.

Let me post the graph of terrorist attacks on India below
Image

Maybe my interpretation is wrong, but it seems to me that every time Pakistan feels threatened by India it goes quiet for a few months or years and after that it gradually starts ratcheting up terrorism. As it ratchets up terrorism - the provocations initially remain below the "baseline" for India to react. As India fails to react, it is possibly seen in Pakistan as weakness and a green signal to keep attacking. Sooner or later something big happens and there is threat of war. After that Pakistan goes quiet for a year or two. Then the cycle starts again.

This leads to several different questions and streams of thought as far as I am concerned. The first is what on earth does Pakistan gain by hitting India so feebly that India the nation does not want to react? It is pure rhetoric to claim that cuts like these really bleed India the nation. India does hit back if it is hurt and Paki cowards are deliberately calibrating to hit below the level that provokes a response. Let alone what is happening to India, what does Pakistan gain from it? This would IMO be the subject of a separate discussion - I will only say that it probably keeps the jihadis of Pakistan united and focused on India and keeps the army in power.

The real question to me is whether India can tilt the balance in this game by a disproportionate response.

I am irritated by the expression disproportionate response. We (Indians) should not talk about disproportionate response which can be declared "unfair". We should talk of retribution for all past acts of terrorism in response to any more terrorism. That means that Pakistan should be threatened with war even if 2 people die in a terrorist attack - not as "disproportionate response" but a perfectly proportionate response to a war of a thousand cuts being countered by massive blows.

But to do this we have to build up the anger by recalling every act of terrorism and perfidy and building up the political constituency to act among Indians. Short of that India will do nothing.

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby shiv » 08 May 2011 06:31

Cross posting from the old therad
Kamboja wrote:It strikes me that this slavishness of the Paki elites towards the taller/deeper overlords seems very idiosyncratic. Consider that the Pakis are past masters at cynical manipulation of imperial overlords: willing to sell themselves to the US/UQ cause, but only in exchange for vast amounts of cash, weapons systems, etc; willing to sell themselves to the Saudis and Gulf Arabs, but again only because they are the 'spiritual overlords', keepers of the two mosques, and incidentally are able to provide subsidized oil at critical moments.

The Americans have done an incredible lot for the Paki elite -- yet the latter only begrudgingly, if at all, acknowledge all this. The Saudis have also helped and receive the respect and due obeisance from the Paki elite... but again, none of this matches the awe, respect and love shown to the taller/deeper/sweeter allies. And really, what have the Chinese done for the Pakis?

As far as I can see, there are only a few things:
1) Providing the clown jewels; which, granted, is a big deal
2) Providing Nodongs and green paint helping Paki 'jinn teknology scientists' to 'build' Shaheens and other 400% halal delivery systems for the jewels
3) A few military trinkets, but nothing compared to the US largesse
4) Indirect benefit: bruising India in a war in '62, which no doubt sent the Pakis into a tizzy of schadenfreude

Looking at these I think the real reason for the otherwise inexplicable reverence and love that the Pakis show for the Cheenis -- who, let us not forget, are even more kaffir than us SDREs -- is benefit (4). Why? Simply by process of elimination. We all know (and the Paki elite surely know) that China will not provide what the US or even the Saudis have in the past; i.e. steady streams of cash money for the elites to milk; neither is China (yet) the kind of place that the RAPEs want to send their RAPElets to 'study' and party; neither does China (yet) have sufficient advanced military hardware to share en mass with their TFTA friends. So it must come down to the fact that China is the only major Paki ally (and country in modern history) to injure India in a fight -- that, and the possibility that India and China could come to blows in the future, are the single most important reason that the Pakis worship the Chinese.

In other words it boils down to the one thing that Paki elites love more than cash (surprising!) and even more than their beloved ummah (jeehard!!) -- and that is anyone who hurts India. Do that and you earn the everlasting love of the Paki elite, rich or not, kaffir or not, and they seem willing to even do things to please China that are self-destructive or even suicidal (like Lal Masjid).

Am I missing anything here?


Great post! :D

Ultimately it boils down to the fact that Pakistan is an irrational and dysfunctional state.

Anindya
BRFite
Posts: 1539
Joined: 02 Feb 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Anindya » 08 May 2011 06:38

Shiv, admins

would it be possible to post your (shiv's that is) "10 points about Pakistan" in the first post on all the Pakistan threads?

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23779
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby SSridhar » 08 May 2011 07:51

From the previous thread,
A_Gupta wrote:The Pakistani Taliban are creating havoc in Pakistan. The Pakistani Army is hardly able to control its homegrown extremists (unless one believes that the apparent loss of control is part of some strategically brilliant plan).

About three weeks back, I had posted in the 'US-China-TSP' threadabout how the Afghan Taliban and the Pakistani Taliban share the workload. The thrust of my argument was that while the Afghan Taliban was concentrating on attacking the Americans & Karzai, the Pakistani Taliban have been assigned the task of establishing an Islamist rule in Pakistan so that in course of time, the two will coalesce. Thus, for me at least, the loss of PA's control is not imaginary or as per some brilliant PA/ISI plan. It is for real.
Perhaps the only reason it has some control over the Afghan Taliban is that the Taliban leaders are in its protective custody.

While in c. 1996, the Taliban were completely dependent on the PA/ISI, it is now outgrowing its masters. They understood the power of refined heroin and there are various ways in which they can export the product, even without the help of the National Logistics Cell of the PA. Besides, the constituency within Pakistan where the Taliban (both Afghan & Pakistani) are being looked at favourably has grown larger. The drone attacks, and now the OBL fiasco, have generated exceptionally high antagonism towards the Americans in Pakistan (where such an antagonism was systematically developed the GoP itself as a pressure tactic since c. 1962) and this has translated into support for the Taliban. The PA fears the Pakistani Taliban garnering all this support and hence it is trying to prop up Imran Khan who is sufficiently anti-American for the masses, is a hero among cricket-crazy Pakistanis, has no blemish of corruption as he never was in power and could be sufficiently malleable to PA/ISI as he has no huge electoral base. PA hopes to deflect the mass support to Pakistani Taliban this way.
Once the Afghan Taliban leaders are safely ensconced in Kabul, after an American departure, and with Pakistani help, all bets are off; I don't see why they will be any more biddable than their Pakistani brethren.

The Taliban indeed have a bright prospect of repossessing power in Kabul, unless internecine war breaks out as it did after c. 1989. With the assassination of Ahmed Shah Masoud, the Afghan Taliban have eliminated the only stumbling block in their path. Others like Hekmatyar, Dostm or Ismael Khan cannot pose as much danger as Masoud. The PA realizes this and are also supporting Hekmatyar so that the Taliban would not simply runaway without a tempering presence.
So what is the Pakistan Army after, if not strategic depth? IMO, it is control over the lucrative opium trade.

I believe that the PA will attempt to make money in every which way, opium, kickbacks in arms purchases, running bakeries & marriage halls, secret transactions with the CIA, logistics, road construction etc. etc. But, beyond all that, they want to control Pakistan either as a front-seat or a back-seat driver because that is the only way they can perpetually enjoy disproportionate benefits. For the Pakistani politicians too, such an oversight by the PA is beneficial because they can be subservient to them and loot the economy with impunity and enjoy power in those areas where it does not conflict with PA's interests. The trouble comes only when the paths cross. The PA can sell any idea to the Pakistani people so long as it is described as as a measure to give kafir India a bloody nose. So, 'Strategic Depth' or the necessity of the various terrorist organizations is readily accepted by the common folks. That situation is not going to change. However, I do believe that over and above 'making money and enjoying good life', the PA has not given up on destroying India. That thought won't go away especially in an Army that surrendered to its arch enemy once before, even if the common citizens of Pakistan, by some miracle, change their opinion about India. The likely loss of 'deep friendship' with the US and the attendant benefits, will need to be compensated by the Chinese. Hence, the increasing presence of the Chinese everywhere. While the Chinese will not readily part with hard cash, they may provide some sense of security as the PA goes ahead with its Afghan scenario. The PA is worried about a not-so-friendly government coming to power in Afghanistan or a prolonged period of power struggle erupting once again in Afghanistan. PA knows that powerful countries such as Russia, India, Iran, Turkey and others such as Uzbekistan & Tajikistan are completely against the Taliban. They need the Chinese on their side. Hence China is being inducted into this theatre under one pretext or the other. Overall, I would say therefore that while personal greed, as usual, may play a minor part in its decisions, the most compelling reason for PA's behaviour is India.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21111
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Prem » 08 May 2011 08:04

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... story.html
Trial in Mumbai attacks could strain U.S.-Pakistan relations
It could be years, if ever, before the world learns whether Pakistan’s powerful Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate (ISI) helped hide Osama bin Laden.But detailed allegations of ISI involvement in terrorism will soon be made public in a federal courtroom in Chicago, where prosecutors late last month charged a suspected ISI major with helping to plot the deaths of six Americans in the 2008 Mumbai attacks.The indictment has explosive implications because Washington and Islamabad are struggling to preserve their fragile relationship. The ISI has long been suspected of secretly aiding terrorist groups while serving as a U.S. ally in the terrorism fight.The discovery that bin Laden spent years in a fortresslike compound surrounded by military facilities in Abbottabad has heightened those suspicions and reinforced the accusations that the ISI was involved in the attacks that killed 166 people in Mumbai

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21111
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Prem » 08 May 2011 08:08

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB2000142 ... 80310.html
Signs Point to Pakistan Link
U.S. Probe of Aid to bin Laden Likely to Focus on Islamabad's Military and Spy Services

.S. and European intelligence officials increasingly believe active or retired Pakistani military or intelligence officials provided some measure of aid to al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, allowing him to stay hidden in a large compound just a mile from an elite military academy. The suspicions cast light on where the U.S. is expected to focus as it investigates who might have helped bin Laden hide in plain sight in Abbottabad, a town about 40 miles from the capital Islamabad. Two senior U.S. officials and a high-level European military-intelligence official who have direct working knowledge of Pakistan's military intelligence agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate, say similar elements linked to the ISI have aided other Pakistan-based terror groups, the Haqqani militant network and Lashkar-e-Taiba. "There's no doubt he was protected by some in the ISI," the European official said of bin Laden.

The officials didn't offer specific evidence, but pointed to the town's proximity to the capital and its high concentration of current and former military and intelligence officers. They said aid likely included intelligence tips to help keep bin Laden ahead of his American pursuers. But others in both the U.S. and Pakistan have cast doubt on whether Abbottabad would have provided a more hospitable refuge than other towns, or whether officials would have reason to believe bin Laden could be hiding there. Details continued to emerge Wednesday that added to questions about what officials may have known. Abbottabad had come to the notice of Pakistani intelligence as a suspected hiding place for al Qaeda leaders as long ago as 2003, and was the focus of searches for top al Qaeda figures in years since. In 2005, the man who was later identified as bin Laden's courier acquired the property in Abbottabad on which the compound was built, U.S. officials said Wednesday. The name he used, Arshad Khan, is the local alias he employed. It was this courier who, nearly six years later, eventually led the U.S. to the compound.Pakistan denies it knew of bin Laden's whereabouts or sheltered him. Pakistani officials point out they passed the information about the 2003 search to their American counterparts.U.S. officials say intelligence cooperation with Pakistan has helped the U.S. carry out many critical operations but that the intelligence used in the raid that killed bin Laden early Monday local time came from American sources and intelligence. In classified congressional briefings this week on the U.S. operation that killed bin Laden, senior national-security officials have told lawmakers they suspected Pakistan wasn't as forthcoming as it could have been about its intelligence on bin Laden, an official briefed on the exchanges said. They also told lawmakers they were looking for evidence that elements within the ISI and the army played a direct or indirect role in protecting the al Qaeda leader, several officials said. Helping the effort will be the cache of computers, storage drives and other materials taken from bin Laden's residence.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21111
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Prem » 08 May 2011 08:16

Face of Zardari, Lips of Kiyani, Eyes of Gillani and Cheeks of Pasha
Pakistan karre tamassha.

Image

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21111
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Prem » 08 May 2011 08:29

Pakistan in the balance
(He verify collective wisdom of BRF that this is how Jinnah found it hanging when he put his hand in Churchil's pocket with big hole)
By Pervez Hoodbhoy

On numerous occasions, Pakistani military and civilian leaders had emphatically stated that Bin Laden was not in the country. Some suggested that he might be in Sudan or Somalia. Others insisted that he might already have died from a kidney ailment, or perhaps that he was in some inaccessible area, protected by nature and terrain, and thus outside the effective control of the Pakistani state.But then it turned out Bin Laden was not hiding from U.S. drones in some dark Waziristan cave but rather living comfortably inside a specially constructed and fortified house in the modern, peaceful and extraordinarily secure city of Abbottabad. Using Google Earth, one sees that the deceased lived within easy walking distance of the famed Pakistan Military Academy at Kakul, the place where army chief Gen. Ashfaq Kayani declared April 23 that "the terrorist backbone has been broken and, inshallah, we will soon prevail."Even the famously ferocious retired Lt. Gen. Hamid Gul —Pakistan's former intelligence chief who is an open Bin Laden sympathizer and advocates war with America — isn't buying the claim that Pakistan's military was unaware of Bin Laden's whereabouts. In an interview, he said he found that idea "a bit amazing." Aside from the military, he noted, "there is the local police, the intelligence bureau, military intelligence, the ISI; they all had a presence there." And Pakistan's intrusive intelligence agencies are very good at sniffing out foreigners
.
So why was Bin Laden sheltered in the army's backyard?
Gen. Pervez Musharraf was army chief when Bin Laden's house in Abbottabad was being constructed. Back then, Pakistan's political pundits used to speculate about which Al Qaeda or Taliban leader would be miraculously "found" on the eve of some important U.S. military or political leader's visit to Pakistan. And one was usually produced. Important arrests included those of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the Kuwaiti-born senior Al Qaeda leader who was arrested in Rawalpindi, and Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, a Taliban leader arrested in Karachi. The American visitors generally left pleased.It is quite possible that Bin Laden was being kept in reserve by the army, the ultimate trophy to be traded in at the right time for the right price, either in dollars or political concessions.Alas for Pakistan's army, American Navy SEALs have now killed the golden goose, and a potential asset has turned into a serious liability. For officials to appear joyful would infuriate the Islamists, who pose a real threat to the state. On the other hand, to criticize the killing would suggest that Pakistan had knowingly hosted the king of terrorists.With Bin Laden gone, the military has two remaining major strategic assets: nuclear weapons and America's weakness in Afghanistan. It will surely try to extract maximum advantage from these factors. But this will not ensure the peace and prosperity that we Pakistanis so desperately crave. It will not solve our electricity or water crises, move us out of dire economic straits or protect us from suicide bombers.

Muppalla
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7084
Joined: 12 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Muppalla » 08 May 2011 08:37

shiv wrote:The real question to me is whether India can tilt the balance in this game by a disproportionate response.

I am irritated by the expression disproportionate response. We (Indians) should not talk about disproportionate response which can be declared "unfair". We should talk of retribution for all past acts of terrorism in response to any more terrorism. That means that Pakistan should be threatened with war even if 2 people die in a terrorist attack - not as "disproportionate response" but a perfectly proportionate response to a war of a thousand cuts being countered by massive blows.

But to do this we have to build up the anger by recalling every act of terrorism and perfidy and building up the political constituency to act among Indians. Short of that India will do nothing.


I guess we have seriously discussed what India can do on BRF. A lot of times we have concluded either gently or crudely the same. War with Paks is not going to change much as long as it has its 3.5 and the cost is enoromous for India.

I think the best disproportionate response is to cut off relations with Pak including closing down embassies etc. Keep a relationship like the one between NKo and SKo or the one that was between West Germany and East Germany. Build a Berlin wall and just keep increasing the defences disproportioniately. No trade and nothing until complete terror machinery is gone.Just keep doing whatever we like on this side of the border. Increase internal securiy posture with all the modernity etc. Let the dogs keep barking but India does not change a bit and stick to guns of no relations.

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Rangudu » 08 May 2011 09:33

Image

:D

KLNMurthy
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3940
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 13:06

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby KLNMurthy » 08 May 2011 09:43

shiv wrote:
[kamboja's post deleted]

Great post! :D

Ultimately it boils down to the fact that Pakistan is an irrational and dysfunctional state.


I know what you mean, and it is a very useful thing to call TSP irrational and dysfunctional. But in reality, as kamboja pointed out, the rationale becomes clear once we accept that the desire to hurt India (I would put it more as "desire to act to suppress any stable state of independence on the part of Hindus of the subcontinent") is the driving motivation. As to being dysfunctional, maybe it is so by normal metrics of a state such as having an interest in the welfare and progress of its citizens etc., but if the purpose of the state is to maintain itself indefinitely while it remains focused on its one overarching motivation, then we have to admit it has functioned quite well and shows no signs of not functioning, thanks to the nukes and US folly (or viciousness, it is not clear which one).

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11637
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby A_Gupta » 08 May 2011 10:13

shiv wrote:Add to this the genuine WKKs, peaceniks and Gandhians in the population.


Dunno what you have against Gandhians.
This was very characteristic of the Mahatma. Conversation with him about political matters did not follow the normal course because he insisted on getting the principle straight and refusing to compromise upon it. He would apparently stand pat on a point of principle until he was sure either of the goodwill of his adversary―which happened when the Cabinet Mission finally persuaded him of its sincerity―or as in this case of Kashmir, until agreement had been reached that the ideal solution must be, for the moment, left out of the question. He would then suddenly, and often to the surprise of a Westerner used to laying down principles only to compromise in their application, switch off completely to a highly realistic discussion in which the principle appeared to be forgotten. Perhaps the right way to put it is that he was more determined than other people are to consider a problem on two levels. He took, as it were, his bearings by laying down the principle. He could always return to it. If that course was blocked he would trim his sails, with the result that while still pretending to seek the ideal he might find that he had lost sight of his objective: he preferred, if he could not sail straight to the goal, to accept the lower level of practical politics and frankly give advice on the basis of expediency. Not having lost his bearings by tacking, he could always start again on the true course.

KLNMurthy
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3940
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 13:06

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby KLNMurthy » 08 May 2011 10:14

shiv wrote:...
This leads to several different questions and streams of thought as far as I am concerned. The first is what on earth does Pakistan gain by hitting India so feebly that India the nation does not want to react? It is pure rhetoric to claim that cuts like these really bleed India the nation. India does hit back if it is hurt and Paki cowards are deliberately calibrating to hit below the level that provokes a response. Let alone what is happening to India, what does Pakistan gain from it? This would IMO be the subject of a separate discussion - I will only say that it probably keeps the jihadis of Pakistan united and focused on India and keeps the army in power.


Let me hazard a conjecture. It has to do with how pain works. As a doctor you are obviously aware of the role of pain, and perhaps I will be off on many points here, being a layman. Still, I think it works like this:

Patients live with low-grade chronic pain all the time; the longer the pain persists, the more the patient will be habituated to take it as a baseline, and is unlikely to notice levels of pain that are lower than the baseline or threshold. If the level of chronic pain is increased steadily over time, that has the result of increasing the threshold above which it becomes necessary to apply an analgesic.

Does this mean that the patient has transcended pain up to a certain level and has, in effect become immune to pain below the threshold? I believe it used to be thought so, but I understand that more recent medical practice holds that any level of chronic pain is itself debilitating to the body (on top of the causative medical condition) and must be treated and alleviated even if the patient is able to tolerate that level of pain.

Even without the general systemic debility due to pain, there are direct physical consequences to becoming inured to pain. In diseases like leprosy where nerve endings are deadened leading to loss of pain sensation, the patient will quickly lose fingers and toes from injuries which normal ability to react to pain would have avoided.

So, the myriad low-level attacks, persistently applied, are tolerable for India, but are not ineffectual from the enemy's point of view. I think Indian collective wisdom goes by the conventional view that pain-terrorist attacks can be tolerated and life can go on. The paki mindset comes from a different historical-experiential background: they celebrate the marauder culture, in which a small band of warlike people with no significant stable economic system lives on by engaging in brigandage against a civilized society, and sucking its life juices out a little at a time, knowing that over a longer term, the civilizational entity, debilitated despite itself from the small attacks, will weaken and fall, then to be completely occupied, pillaged, and then perhaps overlaid with a colonizing empire. As and when the empire reaches its natural state of demise, all that they have to do is to resurrect the marauder meme and start the cycle over again.

There is another aspect to Indian collective mind deciding (wrongly) that it will survive indefinitely by 'tolerating' the chronic pain of terrorist attacks. A patient normally chooses to live with chronic pain only when it is not possible to identify and treat the underlying pathological condition that is causing the pain. In case of the pathological condition being an intelligent entity such as TSP, it will take care to convince the patient / India that the causes of the ongoing infliction of pain are not determinable and / or not curable.

What is interesting is that there is no serious ongoing effort to identify and develop a cure for the pathology. Carrying the pain as debiliatator analogy further, perhaps we can suggest that this very lack of interest in researching the pathology and finding a cure is due to a depressive state that is due to the chronic pain.


The real question to me is whether India can tilt the balance in this game by a disproportionate response.


For what it is worth I believe that, just as the terrorist enemy finds its ideological resources from his history / mythology (in the Joseph Campbellian sense of collective imagination), so too can we. For example, Ramayana is a classic tale of a fierce and aggressive dharmic peole systematically putting an end to the last of the marauding enemy. The intense efforts to turn people away from the Ramayana by labeling it communal, anti-south, anti-woman, etc., etc., and general deracination of elite Indians, could perhaps be understood in the context of the enemy striving to keep us from hitting on the answer, which once noted, would be recognized and adopted instantly by all billion of us. Let us also note that the example of Vibhishana gives us the guidance needed about humanely absorbing members of the enemy who repudiate the marauder-rapist ethic.
Last edited by KLNMurthy on 08 May 2011 10:35, edited 4 times in total.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11637
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby A_Gupta » 08 May 2011 10:16

http://articles.economictimes.indiatime ... od-victims

Apologies if this was posted before.
NEW DELHI: India blocked a $900-million European Union proposal at the World Trade Organization on Tuesday to give duty-free access to the textile exports from Pakistan.


We see India here exercising clout on the behalf of the friendly Vietnam and Bangladesh.

India told the General Council of the WTO, the organisation's topmost decision-making body, that the package would affect the exports of competing countries that would have to continue to pay 6%-12% import duties on textiles in the EU.

India also argued that the relief did not help flood victims in any way. Bangladesh, Peru and Vietnam supported India at the Council, which took up the matter after a lower level 'Goods Council' could not take a decision within the specified period of 90 days.

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby shiv » 08 May 2011 10:54

A_Gupta wrote:Dunno what you have against Gandhians.
Perhaps the right way to put it is that he was more determined than other people are to consider a problem on two levels. He took, as it were, his bearings by laying down the principle. He could always return to it. If that course was blocked he would trim his sails, with the result that while still pretending to seek the ideal he might find that he had lost sight of his objective: he preferred, if he could not sail straight to the goal, to accept the lower level of practical politics and frankly give advice on the basis of expediency. Not having lost his bearings by tacking, he could always start again on the true course.


I have less against Gandhi than Gandhians. The problem as I see it - Gandhi was unique. Gandhians are parodies of certain aspects of Gandhi. Particularly I accuse Gandhians of using Gandhi's name to hide behind the hijab of "ahimsa" to implement a policy of inaction. Perhaps the term Gandhian itself should be recognised as pejorative rather than praiseworthy? I wonder if "Gandhigiri" is far more representative of Gandhi's brilliance than "being Gandhian"

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby shiv » 08 May 2011 11:09

KLNMurthy wrote: But in reality, as kamboja pointed out, the rationale becomes clear once we accept that the desire to hurt India (I would put it more as "desire to act to suppress any stable state of independence on the part of Hindus of the subcontinent") is the driving motivation.


In fact this is what I have questioned because it seems to me that Pakistanis have not been particularly effective in acting to "suppress any stable state of independence on the part of Hindus of the subcontinent" and their ability to hurt India has been small enough to not provoke - which is what prompted my post. They could do a lot more. But they keep the tempo down to levels where it is neither going to "bring India down" nor "hurt Hindus". I would be curious to see where Pakistani actions have suppressed any "stable state of independence on the part of Hindus of the subcontinent". That is a broad statement.


As to being dysfunctional, maybe it is so by normal metrics of a state such as having an interest in the welfare and progress of its citizens etc., but if the purpose of the state is to maintain itself indefinitely while it remains focused on its one overarching motivation, then we have to admit it has functioned quite well and shows no signs of not functioning, thanks to the nukes and US folly (or viciousness, it is not clear which one).


In fact the meaning of dysfunctional in this context would be by the the normal metrics of a nation state. The support for Pakistan as a functioning (and not dysfunctional) nation state comes from outside. Even India fails to point out it's dysfunctionality and i guess that hoping the US and other nations would do that is too much to ask for. Every nation on earth seems bent on ignoring Pakistan's obvious dysfunctionality and applying some incredibly convoluted reasoning to continue supporting Pakistan as a functioning nation state. I am just wondering what metrics are being used for that.

As I see it - the open acknowledgement of Pakistan as failing on a large number of counts would then allow a lot more minds in governments, the media and among the public at large to think about how this failing state needs to be dealt with. For example - if you are a business leader and want to invest - you are more likely to invest in an environment that experts tell you is a safe , good bet. Clearly there is something more than meets the eye in the way Pakistan is supported as "whole" and "intact" and functioning.

Kamboja
BRFite
Posts: 133
Joined: 12 Mar 2010 19:41

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Kamboja » 08 May 2011 11:11

shiv wrote:every time Pakistan feels threatened by India it goes quiet for a few months or years and after that it gradually starts ratcheting up terrorism. As it ratchets up terrorism - the provocations initially remain below the "baseline" for India to react. As India fails to react, it is possibly seen in Pakistan as weakness and a green signal to keep attacking. Sooner or later something big happens and there is threat of war. After that Pakistan goes quiet for a year or two. Then the cycle starts again.


SSridhar wrote: ... [TSPA] want to control Pakistan either as a front-seat or a back-seat driver because that is the only way they can perpetually enjoy disproportionate benefits. For the Pakistani politicians too, such an oversight by the PA is beneficial because they can be subservient to them and loot the economy with impunity and enjoy power in those areas where it does not conflict with PA's interests.

... The PA can sell any idea to the Pakistani people so long as it is described as as a measure to give kafir India a bloody nose. So, 'Strategic Depth' or the necessity of the various terrorist organizations is readily accepted by the common folks. That situation is not going to change. However, I do believe that over and above 'making money and enjoying good life', the PA has not given up on destroying India.


One answer to Shiv-ji's question is suggested by SSji above -- i.e. TSPA keeps up a low-intensity conflict with India not so much as a means to an end (say, the destruction of India or acquisition of J&K) but as an end in and of itself. Provoking India allows the TSPA to turn to the unwashed abdul on the street and say, 'look, the evil yindus are amassing their tanks on the border! They are here to steal your H&D and your Islam! Give me your last penny (and your sons... and come to think of it, your daughter has her uses too), because it is all in the name of Pakistan, which is Islam, and you are a good Muslim aren't you?'

Jokes aside I see a very clear benefit to TSPA to fostering constant tension with India, using that to justify the disproportionate assets and share of national budget of the TSPA, and ultimate control over the country. In fact, I would venture to humbly suggest to SSji that perhaps the TSPA, or elements within it, have come to realize that tension with India is itself the golden goose -- if the conflict were to be resolved and peace to prevail between the two countries, then why the need for the oversized TSPA? They would be sent back to the barracks and would no longer command pre-eminent power.

I would guess that the TSPA has no interest in conflict resolution, nor in even achieving the dismemberment of India -- they just want to keep the fire at a slow burn, neither desiring a flare-up into a true conflagration nor a cooling to the point of dying out. This enables their stranglehold over their hostage, Pakistan.

Describing it in those terms actually makes me realize that the average Abdul in Pakiland is really a hostage suffering from Stockholm syndrome -- even as he is effed in the a** on a daily basis by the TSPA, he identifies with the latter's cause and offers himself and his children up for further effing even as he bays for the blood of the Hindu/assorted infidel. Meanwhile the crore kammandus are laughing all the way to the bank/feudal estate/bedchamber...

Altair
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2620
Joined: 30 Dec 2009 12:51
Location: Hovering over Pak Airspace in AWACS

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Altair » 08 May 2011 11:21

An excellent post Kamboja. The events next door is certainly bringing the best out of BRF closet.

kittoo
BRFite
Posts: 969
Joined: 08 Mar 2009 02:08

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby kittoo » 08 May 2011 11:33

A_Gupta wrote:http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-05-05/news/29512797_1_flood-relief-package-duty-free-access-flood-victims

Apologies if this was posted before.
NEW DELHI: India blocked a $900-million European Union proposal at the World Trade Organization on Tuesday to give duty-free access to the textile exports from Pakistan.


We see India here exercising clout on the behalf of the friendly Vietnam and Bangladesh.

India told the General Council of the WTO, the organisation's topmost decision-making body, that the package would affect the exports of competing countries that would have to continue to pay 6%-12% import duties on textiles in the EU.

India also argued that the relief did not help flood victims in any way. Bangladesh, Peru and Vietnam supported India at the Council, which took up the matter after a lower level 'Goods Council' could not take a decision within the specified period of 90 days.


Nice!
Man we will really be in a very good position if we can make Vietnam our staunch ally.
With Bangladesh, the current govt seem on the correct path of economic integration.

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby shiv » 08 May 2011 11:52

Kamboja wrote:
One answer to Shiv-ji's question is suggested by SSji above -- i.e. TSPA keeps up a low-intensity conflict with India not so much as a means to an end (say, the destruction of India or acquisition of J&K) but as an end in and of itself. Provoking India allows the TSPA to turn to the unwashed abdul on the street and say, 'look, the evil yindus are amassing their tanks on the border! They are here to steal your H&D and your Islam! Give me your last penny (and your sons... and come to think of it, your daughter has her uses too), because it is all in the name of Pakistan, which is Islam, and you are a good Muslim aren't you?'

Jokes aside I see a very clear benefit to TSPA to fostering constant tension with India, using that to justify the disproportionate assets and share of national budget of the TSPA, and ultimate control over the country. In fact, I would venture to humbly suggest to SSji that perhaps the TSPA, or elements within it, have come to realize that tension with India is itself the golden goose -- if the conflict were to be resolved and peace to prevail between the two countries, then why the need for the oversized TSPA? They would be sent back to the barracks and would no longer command pre-eminent power.

I would guess that the TSPA has no interest in conflict resolution, nor in even achieving the dismemberment of India -- they just want to keep the fire at a slow burn, neither desiring a flare-up into a true conflagration nor a cooling to the point of dying out. This enables their stranglehold over their hostage, Pakistan.

Describing it in those terms actually makes me realize that the average Abdul in Pakiland is really a hostage suffering from Stockholm syndrome -- even as he is effed in the a** on a daily basis by the TSPA, he identifies with the latter's cause and offers himself and his children up for further effing even as he bays for the blood of the Hindu/assorted infidel. Meanwhile the crore kammandus are laughing all the way to the bank/feudal estate/bedchamber...


Absolutely. Very well put.

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6948
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Anujan » 08 May 2011 11:54

Big IED Mubarak outside Agriculture minister's house in Peshawar.

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6948
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Anujan » 08 May 2011 11:58

I posted this message (what feels like eons back)


Anujan wrote:The Yahoos just shot down a Paki helicopter near Pak training base in Abottabad. Hopefully they got some star batsmen.


Turned out to be much better than I had hoped for. :mrgreen: 8)

KLNMurthy
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3940
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 13:06

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby KLNMurthy » 08 May 2011 12:07

shiv wrote:
KLNMurthy wrote: But in reality, as kamboja pointed out, the rationale becomes clear once we accept that the desire to hurt India (I would put it more as "desire to act to suppress any stable state of independence on the part of Hindus of the subcontinent") is the driving motivation.


In fact this is what I have questioned because it seems to me that Pakistanis have not been particularly effective in acting to "suppress any stable state of independence on the part of Hindus of the subcontinent" and their ability to hurt India has been small enough to not provoke - which is what prompted my post. They could do a lot more. But they keep the tempo down to levels where it is neither going to "bring India down" nor "hurt Hindus". I would be curious to see where Pakistani actions have suppressed any "stable state of independence on the part of Hindus of the subcontinent". That is a broad statement.


The driving motivation and the actual measure of success achieved are two different things. I am not alone in suggesting that the driving motivation of TSP is to put down "Hindu independence". Clearly they haven't succeeded in an absolute sense, but they have achieved something close to it in J&K; for India as a whole, it is debatable if they are progressing towards that goal, and if so how much. Maybe it can be ascertained, or maybe not, but I was thinking that there would be little controversy about the motivation itself.

As to being dysfunctional, maybe it is so by normal metrics of a state such as having an interest in the welfare and progress of its citizens etc., but if the purpose of the state is to maintain itself indefinitely while it remains focused on its one overarching motivation, then we have to admit it has functioned quite well and shows no signs of not functioning, thanks to the nukes and US folly (or viciousness, it is not clear which one).


In fact the meaning of dysfunctional in this context would be by the the normal metrics of a nation state. The support for Pakistan as a functioning (and not dysfunctional) nation state comes from outside. Even India fails to point out it's dysfunctionality and i guess that hoping the US and other nations would do that is too much to ask for. Every nation on earth seems bent on ignoring Pakistan's obvious dysfunctionality and applying some incredibly convoluted reasoning to continue supporting Pakistan as a functioning nation state. I am just wondering what metrics are being used for that.

As I see it - the open acknowledgement of Pakistan as failing on a large number of counts would then allow a lot more minds in governments, the media and among the public at large to think about how this failing state needs to be dealt with. For example - if you are a business leader and want to invest - you are more likely to invest in an environment that experts tell you is a safe , good bet. Clearly there is something more than meets the eye in the way Pakistan is supported as "whole" and "intact" and functioning.


Certainly, the dysfunctionality of TSP based on normal parameters is a fact and it is something more supportive or neutral states need to be educated on. But it is important (especially for India) to interpret this dysfunctionality correctly--the normal interpretation of deprivation, lack of expertise, poverty etc. gives the wrong answer, namely that providing developmental assistance, supporting education, jobs etc., will 'fix' TSP and they will then become part of something called the comity of nations. The correct interpretation is that, as far as TSP is concerned, this dysfunctionality is, for all intents and purposes, by design, in the sense that the state was never meant to generate the normal sorts of things a state does for its people, its only intent is to retain and develop the capability to pursue its primary motivation.
Last edited by KLNMurthy on 08 May 2011 12:27, edited 1 time in total.

KLNMurthy
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3940
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 13:06

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby KLNMurthy » 08 May 2011 12:21

Kamboja wrote:
shiv wrote:every time Pakistan feels threatened by India it goes quiet for a few months or years and after that it gradually starts ratcheting up terrorism. As it ratchets up terrorism - the provocations initially remain below the "baseline" for India to react. As India fails to react, it is possibly seen in Pakistan as weakness and a green signal to keep attacking. Sooner or later something big happens and there is threat of war. After that Pakistan goes quiet for a year or two. Then the cycle starts again.


SSridhar wrote: ... [TSPA] want to control Pakistan either as a front-seat or a back-seat driver because that is the only way they can perpetually enjoy disproportionate benefits. For the Pakistani politicians too, such an oversight by the PA is beneficial because they can be subservient to them and loot the economy with impunity and enjoy power in those areas where it does not conflict with PA's interests.

... The PA can sell any idea to the Pakistani people so long as it is described as as a measure to give kafir India a bloody nose. So, 'Strategic Depth' or the necessity of the various terrorist organizations is readily accepted by the common folks. That situation is not going to change. However, I do believe that over and above 'making money and enjoying good life', the PA has not given up on destroying India.


One answer to Shiv-ji's question is suggested by SSji above -- i.e. TSPA keeps up a low-intensity conflict with India not so much as a means to an end (say, the destruction of India or acquisition of J&K) but as an end in and of itself. Provoking India allows the TSPA to turn to the unwashed abdul on the street and say, 'look, the evil yindus are amassing their tanks on the border! They are here to steal your H&D and your Islam! Give me your last penny (and your sons... and come to think of it, your daughter has her uses too), because it is all in the name of Pakistan, which is Islam, and you are a good Muslim aren't you?'

Jokes aside I see a very clear benefit to TSPA to fostering constant tension with India, using that to justify the disproportionate assets and share of national budget of the TSPA, and ultimate control over the country. In fact, I would venture to humbly suggest to SSji that perhaps the TSPA, or elements within it, have come to realize that tension with India is itself the golden goose -- if the conflict were to be resolved and peace to prevail between the two countries, then why the need for the oversized TSPA? They would be sent back to the barracks and would no longer command pre-eminent power.

I would guess that the TSPA has no interest in conflict resolution, nor in even achieving the dismemberment of India -- they just want to keep the fire at a slow burn, neither desiring a flare-up into a true conflagration nor a cooling to the point of dying out. This enables their stranglehold over their hostage, Pakistan.

Describing it in those terms actually makes me realize that the average Abdul in Pakiland is really a hostage suffering from Stockholm syndrome -- even as he is effed in the a** on a daily basis by the TSPA, he identifies with the latter's cause and offers himself and his children up for further effing even as he bays for the blood of the Hindu/assorted infidel. Meanwhile the crore kammandus are laughing all the way to the bank/feudal estate/bedchamber...


All of the above is no doubt accurate but I don't think the matter stops with TSPA and venality. There is a larger strategic intent which is encoded in the TSP constitution that, in effect states that Hindu freedom and assertion is interpreted as a desire to dominate Muslims, and is not acceptable. Practically all segments of TSP society are stakeholders in this proposition; there might be disputes about different segments' shares from time to time, there might even be high-level philosophical debate about whether TSPA's disproportionate share of assets is good or bad for the country, but all are committed to the enterprise. I don't see any forced subjugation of the TSP aam abdul by TSPA into pursuing the supremacist agenda.

Short of a few isolated RAPE voices like Hoodbhoy, I don't see any serious movement demanding that TSP should leave India alone, or stop teaching hatred of Hindus in schools.

Maybe I am confused and dysfunctional (!), misreading everything, but it feels like we are revisiting some basic premises here.

Hari Seldon
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9229
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 12:47
Location: University of Trantor

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Hari Seldon » 08 May 2011 12:56

Re. Kamboja's post, how then does India break this cycle of a 1000 cuts short of overt conflict?

IMHO, since TSPA uses low-intensity-conflict to keep the focus on India and the stockholm syndrome of aam awam in TSP going, India might try directly dealing *massive* H&D blows (costlessly, since talk is cheap) to TSPA instead of trying to appease the TSP elite.

One way to do this is to call TSP for what it is - a criminal enterprise - and reveal that TSPA deals in drugs worldwide apart from radioactive materials. Another is to point out that despite losing half its country in 1971, TSPA has never won any war against India, period. Third, call TSPA's disdain for the baloch, the shia and the pushtu for what it is. And so on.

This naming-shaming-H&D haran has to be done by loudly and unapologetically by cabinet level ministers in GOI, not some SDRE boorocrat low in the pecking order.

Point is to try and unsettle TSPA into trying and taking risks that break the status quo. I know I know, we SDREs may have little stomach for what will follow, perhaps. Pak will raise J&K if we raise Balochistan, will raise LoC if we raise Durand, will raise Gujarat 2002 if we raise shia/ahmediya/balwari etc and so on. But is a GOI that brusqely brushes off paki noises on this front while focusing on TSPA H&D target-practice too much to ask for??

abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby abhishek_sharma » 08 May 2011 13:23

Why the hardliners wept for Osama: MUZAMIL JALEEL

There is serious likelihood that the al Qaeda may finally see an ideological shift with Ayman al-Zawahiri taking over the leadership of al Qaeda, with the members of his Egyptian Islamic Jihad forming the core of the top executive council or Shoura. While bin Laden came from the Salafi school of thought, Zawahiri’s ideological moorings are grounded in his time with Ikhwan-ul-Muslimoon (Muslim Brotherhood). With bin Laden’s disappearance from the leadership scene, there is every likelihood that al Qaeda’s dominant ideology may shift away from the Salafi school of thought. Whether this possible shift will drastically change al Qaeda’s alliances within Af-Pak is too early to predict, especially as the Osama-led group had strategically forged a closer alliance with both Mullah Omar’s Taliban and later Pakistani Taliban—and not Lashkar-e-Toiba, which is the only jihadi group in Pakistan with strong Salafi credentials.

...

Tankel concludes that the relationship between Lashkar and the al Qaeda has been complicated because of their respective alliances. “Lashkar is hostile to al Qaeda’s close Deobandi allies, and al Qaeda is wary of working too closely with Lashkar because it is considered to have remained close to the ISI,’’ Tankel writes.

...

There is another important aspect to this dichotomy. The Taliban movement in Afghanistan and Pakistan is primarily based on the Deobandi school of thought while Lashkar is Salafi. While Deobandis in Pakistan seek the establishment of an Islamic State in its letter and spirit and even favour a jihad against the establishment itself, the Salafis do not support rebellion against the government in a Muslim country and rather advocate reform to turn the ruling elite into “Muslims at heart”. This means that the Lashkar or its parent organisation, the Markaz-al-Dawa wal-Irshad, was never a security risk for the Pakistani state within the country.

In fact, this Salafi group was in absolute conformity with Pakistan’s policy till 9/11 blurred the line dividing armed movements and terrorism internationally. This is precisely why Musharraf’s decision to ban Lashkar was seen as a major step.

...

In fact, the latest statement from United States making a clear distinction between 9/11 and 26/11 too shows that the groups fighting India are still not very high on American priority. Though Hafiz Saeed and his Jamaat-ud-Dawa have now publicly called bin Laden a martyr, the US’s focus towards Lashkar will depend on how the al Qaeda after Osama regroups in Af-Pak and also on the nature of the relationship between Lashkar and al Qaeda.


So Americans were mentioning LeT because both OBL and LeT are Salafi?


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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby shiv » 08 May 2011 13:50

KLNMurthy wrote: The correct interpretation is that, as far as TSP is concerned, this dysfunctionality is, for all intents and purposes, by design, in the sense that the state was never meant to generate the normal sorts of things a state does for its people, its only intent is to retain and develop the capability to pursue its primary motivation.



In fact the very same observations about Pakistan's state can have a different interpretation. Never in the history of the world has the area called "Pakistan" been cut off from the rest of India in terms of trade, family ties and culture. Pakistan may survive the cutting of family ties and culture because that was done voluntarily. But recall that the economy of the area called Pakistan (esp Pakjab) was always agrarian. Even the "trade" economy of Karachi was linked to the needs of Norther India.

What I am trying to say is that Pakistan is a non viable state.

If you want an agrarian economy to thrive - it needs to export to and import from its traditional markets - unless the produce can be shipped via sea and earn loadsa cash (like Heroin). Heroin cash is rarely spread around - it stays among the drug peddlers. So when we talk mango Abdul the agrarian economy is insufficient for a "modern economy" and development. Pakistan does not have the industry or expertise to develop a manufacturing economy or service economy, and tourism has not taken Pakistan far, given its penchant for holding its own heritage as useless and looking to Arabia for tourist destinations.

Pakistan's "viability" as a nation state has been ensured by recognizing the India and Hindu hating Army and RAPE as the true rulers of Pakistan an supporting them, giving them a seat in the UN and looking after their needs. Pakistan per se wil not survive without aid any more than Afghanistan because their economy is nothing. The biggest boost to the Pakistani economy will come in restoring trade ties with India which will allow Pakistan's fertile land to grow food and agricultural products for export to India.

The Pakistani leadership (Army and establishment) do not want any links with India and are unwilling to be cowed down because hey have the support of an international system - starting with the US that allows them to confidently oppose India and not worry about where their next meal will come from. That army and elite have to be defeated or disempowered or other wise recognised as not being the true representatives of Pakistani interests before Pakistan can become a viable state. But the army and establishment are now blackmailing the international system saying that if they don't get aid to survive their nukes will fall into the hands of terrorists. Kamboja's view about them is quite right.

But a state like Pakistan cannot be anything but dysfunctional. It cannot survive as a nation. It does not have what it takes. Its survival is being ensured merely by feeding an extremely belligerent army. I disagree with your contention that the army has the power to hold Hinduism back or that the entire Paki nation is united by islam in such enviable anti-Hindu unity of a degree of robustness that Hinduism can never hope to achieve. That gives both Islam and the Paki army more credit than they deserve. Take that army down and Pakistan will spin towards normality - perhaps in 2-3 fragments.

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby shiv » 08 May 2011 13:54



- a must read link. Wise words from the Army.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby arun » 08 May 2011 14:00

X Posted from the ISI News and Discussion thread.

The Islamic Republic of Pakistan, specifically the ISI / ISID, is spinning the story that Osama Bin Laden had been sidelined in a presumed ploy to peddle the message that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan ‘s failure to take OBL down was not significant as he had played a small role in overseeing Al-Qaida over the past six years and thereby deflect the US wrath currently focussed on the Islamic Republic:

MAY 6, 2011

Split Seen Between bin Laden, Deputy

By ZAHID HUSSAIN in Islamabad and KEITH JOHNSON in Washington

Osama bin Laden and the deputy leader of al Qaeda "parted ways" six years ago, a senior Pakistani intelligence official said Thursday

The official said bin Laden had been "marginalized" by his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, who helped bin Laden found al Qaeda in 1988 and led its operation in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He added that bin Laden had been sidelined because he no longer had the funds to support al Qaeda operations and that his popularity in the network was slipping. "They had parted ways some six years ago," he said.

Portraying bin Laden as sidelined within al Qaeda could help Pakistan's reputation in the aftermath of his death by implying that he had little to do with al Qaeda or its recent attacks—suggesting that Pakistan's failure to find him wasn't such a significant lapse. Pakistani officials have expressed embarrassment that the U.S. found bin Laden in Pakistan and are probing the intelligence failure. …………………….

Wall Street Journal


The US is however not buying the snake oil being peddled by Islamic Republic of Pakistan and instead have disclosed that Osama Bin Laden “remained an active leader in al Qaeda, providing strategic, operational and tactical instructions to the group“:

The following is a key point: the materials reviewed over the past several days clearly show that bin Laden remained an active leader in al Qaeda, providing strategic, operational and tactical instructions to the group. Though separated from many al Qaeda members who are located in more remote areas of the region, he was far from a figurehead. He was an active player making the recent operation even more essential for our nation’s security.

The materials reviewed thus far reveal that bin Laden continued to direct even tactical details of the group’s management and to encourage plotting. The materials show that bin Laden remained focused on inspiring and engineering international terrorism and specifically on attacking the United States. In fact, one previously unreleased video, which we will show momentarily, is a self-styled message to the United States.

Background Briefing with Senior Intelligence Official at the Pentagon on Intelligence Aspects of the U.S. Operation Involving Osama Bin Laden

RSoami
BRFite
Posts: 771
Joined: 23 Apr 2010 14:39

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby RSoami » 08 May 2011 14:33

Muppalla wrote:
shiv wrote:The real question to me is whether India can tilt the balance in this game by a disproportionate response.

quote]

I think the best disproportionate response is to cut off relations with Pak including closing down embassies etc. Keep a relationship like the one between NKo and SKo or the one that was between West Germany and East Germany. Build a Berlin wall and just keep increasing the defences disproportioniately. No trade and nothing until complete terror machinery is gone.Just keep doing whatever we like on this side of the border. Increase internal securiy posture with all the modernity etc. Let the dogs keep barking but India does not change a bit and stick to guns of no relations.


Agree with Mupallaji
Add to that the creation of a very efficient and powerful anti-pockroachi system..It should consist of a powerful counter-terrorism apparatus, powerful and efficient intelligence agencies and strategically inclined bureaucracy.(ve given up on the politicos)
And the time to develop these is now... All of these will come handy when Pakistan turns into the mess its trying hard to become.
Regards

jrjrao
BRFite
Posts: 869
Joined: 01 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby jrjrao » 08 May 2011 14:40

Worth a read.

The Double Game
The unintended consequences of American funding in Pakistan.

by Lawrence Wright
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011 ... act_wright
It’s the end of the Second World War, and the United States is deciding what to do about two immense, poor, densely populated countries in Asia. America chooses one of the countries, becoming its benefactor. Over the decades, it pours billions of dollars into that country’s economy, training and equipping its military and its intelligence services. The stated goal is to create a reliable ally with strong institutions and a modern, vigorous democracy. The other country, meanwhile, is spurned because it forges alliances with America’s enemies.

The country not chosen was India, which “tilted” toward the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Pakistan became America’s protégé, firmly supporting its fight to contain Communism. The benefits that Pakistan accrued from this relationship were quickly apparent: in the nineteen-sixties, its economy was an exemplar. India, by contrast, was a byword for basket case. Fifty years then went by. What was the result of this social experiment?

India has become the state that we tried to create in Pakistan. It is a rising economic star, militarily powerful and democratic, and it shares American interests. Pakistan, however, is one of the most anti-American countries in the world, and a covert sponsor of terrorism. Politically and economically, it verges on being a failed state. And, despite Pakistani avowals to the contrary, America’s worst enemy, Osama bin Laden, had been hiding there for years—in strikingly comfortable circumstances—before U.S. commandos finally tracked him down and killed him, on May 2nd.

American aid is hardly the only factor that led these two countries to such disparate outcomes. But, at this pivotal moment, it would be a mistake not to examine the degree to which U.S. dollars have undermined our strategic relationship with Pakistan—and created monstrous contradictions within Pakistan itself.

abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby abhishek_sharma » 08 May 2011 14:53

From the link posted above ^

Eliminating, or sharply reducing, military aid to Pakistan would have consequences, but they may not be the ones we fear. Diminishing the power of the military class would open up more room for civilian rule. Many Pakistanis are in favor of less U.S. aid; their slogan is “trade not aid.” In particular, Pakistani businessmen have long sought U.S. tax breaks for their textiles, which American manufacturers have resisted. Such a move would empower the civilian middle class. India would no doubt welcome a reduction in military aid to Pakistan, and the U.S. could use this as leverage to pressure India to allow the Kashmiris to vote on their future, which would very likely be a vote for independence. These two actions might do far more to enhance Pakistan’s stability, and to insure its friendship, than the billions of dollars that America now pays like a ransom.

jrjrao
BRFite
Posts: 869
Joined: 01 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby jrjrao » 08 May 2011 15:01

Mr. Hum hain Gobar now writes for another Paki paper. This Osama thingie has badly mauled this Gobar's h&d. So this Paki RAPE tries the rape metaphor to makes his point.

I do give a damn
Pakistan had to choose between complicity and incompetence and chose incompetence. They rejected the rock and chose the hard place. There was a third option, truth, but that’s not the only thing missing from our radars.

One night the lioness got raped. “What kind of a king are you?” she berated the lion. “Someone raped me last night and you didn’t even know?” The lion tried to roar but meowed instead, for he knew that the rapist was too strong for him. Not only that, he’d ‘sold’ him his used dentures as ‘aid’ by giving him an impossible loan. What would he do without his dentures? He couldn’t touch him.

One day the rapist returned and raped the lioness again. “He did it again,” cried the lioness. “You are quite useless, my King of the Jungle.”

Meowed the king: “He didn’t inform me. I slept through it.”

“How could you allow this beast in our jungle? Didn’t you know he was there?”

“No, I swear I didn’t,” said the lion, looking like a lamb.

“You’re worse than useless. From now on I won’t bring food to your table.”

Loss of face caused loss of words. The lion crawled into his labyrinth, letting the lesser animals do the whining for him. Having thought things through he prepared an ingenious announcement to regain his lost pride. Emerging four days later, he threatened: “If anyone rapes my lioness again, he’d better watch it. There will be horrible repercussions. I mean it.” The rapist said that if he had to rape her again, he would. People laughed. The jungle drowned in embarrassment. Nothing would happen. The lioness would be raped again. The lion would keep getting more impossible loans to buy more used dentures.

symontk
BRFite
Posts: 904
Joined: 01 Nov 2001 12:31
Location: Bangalore

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby symontk » 08 May 2011 15:26

1. Osama Bin Laden had died in 2001 in Tora Bora’s cave complex shortly after 9/11 from ‘Marfan Syndrome’, which was on the intelligence roster, a degenerative genetic disease that severely shortens lifespan. CIA physicians had visited him in July 2001 at the American Hospital in Dubai. “He was…already dying, so nobody had to kill him…Bush Jr. knew about it, the intelligence community knew about it.” The US government knew that Osama was dead before they invaded Afghanistan. The government would “roll out the corpse” when it was politically opportune.

2. If true, then the ‘raid’ in Abbotabad was an elaborate hoax. This could only have happened if they had attacked a mortuary.



Although it may be true that Osama met US agents before 9/11, its not true that he may have died earlier than 9/11. If that was the case, Mushraff & Taliban would have mentioned during the course of WOT of 2001 itself and not from 2005

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby arun » 08 May 2011 15:30

jrjrao wrote:Worth a read.

The Double Game
The unintended consequences of American funding in Pakistan.

by Lawrence Wright
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011 ... act_wright
It’s the end of the Second World War, and the United States is deciding what to do about two immense, poor, densely populated countries in Asia. America chooses one of the countries, becoming its benefactor. Over the decades, it pours billions of dollars into that country’s economy, training and equipping its military and its intelligence services. The stated goal is to create a reliable ally with strong institutions and a modern, vigorous democracy. The other country, meanwhile, is spurned because it forges alliances with America’s enemies.

The country not chosen was India, which “tilted” toward the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Pakistan became America’s protégé, firmly supporting its fight to contain Communism. The benefits that Pakistan accrued from this relationship were quickly apparent: in the nineteen-sixties, its economy was an exemplar. India, by contrast, was a byword for basket case. Fifty years then went by. What was the result of this social experiment?

India has become the state that we tried to create in Pakistan. It is a rising economic star, militarily powerful and democratic, and it shares American interests. Pakistan, however, is one of the most anti-American countries in the world, and a covert sponsor of terrorism. Politically and economically, it verges on being a failed state. And, despite Pakistani avowals to the contrary, America’s worst enemy, Osama bin Laden, had been hiding there for years—in strikingly comfortable circumstances—before U.S. commandos finally tracked him down and killed him, on May 2nd.

American aid is hardly the only factor that led these two countries to such disparate outcomes. But, at this pivotal moment, it would be a mistake not to examine the degree to which U.S. dollars have undermined our strategic relationship with Pakistan—and created monstrous contradictions within Pakistan itself.


In the end the same old same same that the US has been following with regards to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan over the past six decades which is aiding that country except this time around the US is not going to foot any part of the bill. India it seems is now expected to foot the bill entirely by handing over Jammu and Kashmir :rotfl: :

India would no doubt welcome a reduction in military aid to Pakistan, and the U.S. could use this as leverage to pressure India to allow the Kashmiris to vote on their future, which would very likely be a vote for independence. These two actions might do far more to enhance Pakistan’s stability, and to insure its friendship, than the billions of dollars that America now pays like a ransom.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23779
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby SSridhar » 08 May 2011 15:36

Kamboja wrote: In fact, I would venture to humbly suggest to SSji that perhaps the TSPA, or elements within it, have come to realize that tension with India is itself the golden goose -- if the conflict were to be resolved and peace to prevail between the two countries, then why the need for the oversized TSPA? They would be sent back to the barracks and would no longer command pre-eminent power.

I would guess that the TSPA has no interest in conflict resolution, nor in even achieving the dismemberment of India -- they just want to keep the fire at a slow burn, neither desiring a flare-up into a true conflagration nor a cooling to the point of dying out. This enables their stranglehold over their hostage, Pakistan.

Describing it in those terms actually makes me realize that the average Abdul in Pakiland is really a hostage suffering from Stockholm syndrome -- even as he is effed in the a** on a daily basis by the TSPA, he identifies with the latter's cause and offers himself and his children up for further effing even as he bays for the blood of the Hindu/assorted infidel. Meanwhile the crore kammandus are laughing all the way to the bank/feudal estate/bedchamber...

Kamboja, you have made two excellent points. One, PA makes money out of 'tension with India' and therefore there is no motivation to 'resolve the conflict'. Two, the poor, unwashed Abduls simply believe what the PA dishes out to them and send their children to fight evil Hindus.

Both are certainly true. But, the whole 'Idea of Pakistan' (Nazariya-e-Pakistan as the unwashed Abduls know it) goes far beyond that. Things evolve over a period of time and Pakistan is certainly no exception. It is no longer just the PA alone that determines the course of foreign policy or even domestic policy for that matter (witness the killing of Taseer and Shahbaz Bhatti). There is now a new kid on the block, the Islamists. while the Islamist phenomenon is certainly not new in Pakistan, there are two aspects of it that have made it the potent force that it is today. Their reach and the support for jihadi Islamism among the masses.

As I have said before, there is a jihad going on between these jihadi Islamists (who see the whole world as the stage for jihad, starting probably with India after Afghanistan and Pakistan) and the PA and the former are winning. The PA are trying to wrest the situation by various means. One of them was to strike peace deals with these jihadi Islamists during Gen. Musharraf's days. After all the eight peace deals unravelled rather quickly and humiliatingly for the PA and after the jihadis moved perilously close to Islamabad, a new strategy had to be adopted in c. 2009. The international pressure to act decisively on a nuclear-weapon state was just too much. Then, PA tried to provoke India into a war hoping that would blunt the jihadi aggression as attention got diverted and also hoping that many of them would get killed by the IA. Hence the immediate embrace of the jihadi Islamists as 'strategic assets' by Gen. Kayani after the self-inflicted war hype after 26/11 and the justification of 'freedom of expression' by Shuja Pasha of the fiery jihadi speeches within Pakistan by Pakistani Taliban and others. PA/ISI also hoped that an audacious attack in Mumbai would fire the imagination of the LeT cadres and stop the attrition rate from the LeT ranks to the Punjabi Taliban.

But, Kabul-I, Kabul-II and 26/11 failed to provoke a docile India to retaliate, a docility (aka 'chanakian approach') which surprised even the PA/ISI planners. Various developments since then have temporarily reduced the intensity of the jihad against the PA. But, the evil guys are not exactly sitting on their haunches. They are consolidating their position all over Pakistan, surreptitiously in other places and openly in the Punjab where they have a friendly government. But, make no mistake that when the Afghan situation reaches a denouement in the months ahead, there shall be renewed spring in the heels of the jihadi Islamists. Thus, while PA/ISI have been trying to impose their agenda on the Pakistani Taliban, the latter have steered clear of that and are trying, in turn, to impose their agenda on the PA/ISI. Hence, we often hear these days of 'reverse strategic depth'. The latter will win as the PA is today far too Islamist in nature to fight the high church Taliban on behalf of the low church Corps Commanders and corrupt politicians. The PA will simply and dramatically keel over when time comes.

The point I am making is that while PA is making hay while the sun shines (the sun will always shine in this part of the world and by implication the PA will always make its money), they are losing their ground under their feet. They are no longer in complete control of the situation. We know that they have lost control of the Punjabi Taliban (including JeM), but more importantly, they have lost it with the Afghan Taliban too. Within Pakistan itself, the command & control has slipped away from PA/ISI into the hands of the Islamists.

But, who is the central figure then ? There are four sets of players, one the arms-bearing Punjabi Taliban (aka Pakistani Taliban) who are waging a jihad against the not-so-Islamic Republic of Pakistan; the second are the ulema; the third are the right-wing politico religious leaders and the fourth are the closet Taliban like Nawaz Sharif, Chaudhry Shujaat, Imran Khan etc. They all reinforce each other even if there are differences among them and even if the highest church (the Punjabi taliban) sometimes considers some of these leaders (like Fazl-ur-Rehman) as not high enough anymore. The latter three sets of players are all apologists of the Punjabi Taliban because all of them justify their atrocities within the state by referring to various excuses, like drone attacks, American presence, Muslim persecution, Koran burning, Jyllands Posten cartoons or anything else that comes handy. They do not utter a single word about the Punjabi Taliban's brutalities or their fossilized worldview etc. This way, the agenda is set and executed by the Pakistani Taliban and supported by the Islamist leaders of all hues and colours (Deobandi, Berelvi, Ahl-e-Hadith etc).

Kamboja
BRFite
Posts: 133
Joined: 12 Mar 2010 19:41

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Kamboja » 08 May 2011 15:50

SSji, excellent point and my thanks for refocusing my attention to the future owners of Pakistan (the out-and-out jihadis) as opposed to the current owners (closet jihadis in uniform).

The slender ray of hope for Pakistan I see is that the aam abdul is beginning to see through the TSPA hypocrisy. Sadly for us it does not seem as though they are also taking the next logical step of questioning anti-India/anti-Hindu hatred hammered into their heads by the very same TSPA.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests