Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 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.
Sudip
BRFite
Posts: 378
Joined: 28 Oct 2008 05:42
Location: Paikhana

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby Sudip » 07 Jun 2011 09:02

Documentary on david headley by PBS

it contains 2 videos. worth watching.

He was trying to deal his way out of jail again with FBI agents by offering to go back to paikhastan and tag al qaeda kingpins for drone attacks

pgbhat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4127
Joined: 16 Dec 2008 21:47
Location: Hayden's Ferry

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby pgbhat » 07 Jun 2011 09:03

Now this is a fundamental question that is unlikely to be addressed in the near future. Truth be told, it is way too much of a hot potato to be even touched at the moment. Why, even speaking about it publicly has become a life-threatening issue, so much so that the Jinnah Institute — an Islamabad-based think tank — kept the Pakistani media out of a function organised this week to launch its report on the status of religious minorities in Pakistan.

What the phuck was the point of the "report" then. :rotfl:

vdutta
BRFite
Posts: 682
Joined: 08 Nov 2002 12:31
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby vdutta » 07 Jun 2011 09:15

arun wrote:
vdutta wrote:^^ yes it is. i never forget faces of pigs
http://www.rfi.fr/actuen/articles/108/article_2293.asp


Hi V Dutta,

First things first………………..

Nice job in proving the fact that the picture purportedly released by HUJI claiming to be a post death picture of Pakistani origin Islamic Terrorist Ilyas Kashmiri was bunkum 8) .

Meanwhile Amir Mir in The News on the same topic without disclosing the fact that that the intended deception was not discovered by him:

HuJI posts fake pix of Kashmiri’s body

As an aside it would not surprise me in the least that the so called HUJI press release and photo was a fabrication by a member of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan's Press Corps to gouge money out of credulous non-Pakistani research/news outfits :wink: .



Thanks Arun :)
Appreciate your nice words.

Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby Arjun » 07 Jun 2011 09:26

VikramS wrote:Lot of gurus have alluded to this deep-seated loathing of Indic civilization as the prime motivation of anti-India policies. I am trying to understand those better.

And sir, if you want to use analogies please use something more appropriate to the situation. America, her strategic thinking, her public opinion are constantly evolving and are amenable to influence. How can you compare them to Nazis?

Hi Vikram

I was reacting to the assumption in your earlier post that all negative perceptions are 'fixable' through short / medium term measures.

There is no comparison of the US with the Nazis at all. But the commonality is that when there is a bias (which by definition is a negative perception or stereotype) - there may be a 'fixable' part but there will most likely also be a part which can only be fixed over a generation or so. For example the Christian repugnance to polytheism is not something that can be addressed in the short/medium term nor is there any necessity for India to expend effort on it - but over a generation or so, when Americans see the polytheists gaining in power, wealth and academic muscle - attitudes will automatically change.

Btw, I am a US citizen myself and consider the US and India as the two countries whose values I identify with the most...but discounting the Christian lobby in the US is not realistic. Fyi, Vikram I have seen your posts on other topics and on most occasions my views tend to be in line with yours.

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby svinayak » 07 Jun 2011 09:32

Arjun wrote:

There is no comparison of the US with the Nazis at all.

Books by Noam Chomsky are good to understand the nature of the American behavior.
Hegemony or Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance (American Empire Project)
Failed States: The Abuse of Power and the Assault on Democracy
Profit Over People: Neoliberalism & Global Order
Power and Terror: Conflict, Hegemony, and the Rule of Force

UBanerjee
BRFite
Posts: 504
Joined: 20 Mar 2011 01:41
Location: Washington DC

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby UBanerjee » 07 Jun 2011 09:33

Arjun wrote: For example the Christian repugnance to polytheism is not something that can be addressed in the short/medium term nor is there any necessity for India to expend effort on it - but over a generation or so, when Americans see the polytheists gaining in power, wealth and academic muscle - attitudes will automatically change.


I agree with this. Also while Christianity is one of the bedrock influences underlying US culture there are plenty of pagan influences underlying it as well. Only a certain segment of the population is rabidly Christian to the exclusion of most everything else. We can see that attitudes towards "pagan" Japanese and South-East Asians and even SDREs have evolved much over time.

Sw. Vivekananda also saw the potential for change in US.

a_kumar
BRFite
Posts: 481
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 23:53
Location: what about it?

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby a_kumar » 07 Jun 2011 09:46

Let me take the attention to something that was beautifully put but got overwhelmed by other topics.

KLNMurthy wrote:The case being made is not entirely a crazy one, at least on the surface, if you persuade yourself that there are bigger things than India's survival at stake, or to be fair, if you don't see India's survival being at stake: faced with nuclear blackmail, and potential disastrous nuclear war, why not hand over J&K or more precisely the Valley to buy a respite and at least some chance that there will be a genuine change in Pak? And isn't it incredibly selfish and chauvinistic of India to stubbornly hang on to the Valley, merrily shooting youthful protestors, when so much is at stake? India should be "statesmanlike" and do the right thing, for the world and for itself and maybe it will get the status symbol called permanent membership of UNSC.

"Reasonable" and personable Pakis like Irfan Hussain, Hoodbhoy, Kamran Shafi, Najam Sethi, Marvi Sirmed's sari-bindi, et al as well as the bullying TFTA types like Hilaly et al beloved of Indian media are all making arguments that are in line with this thrust of this theme. True, there is an occasional article from Pakis moaning that nukes haven't bought us anything and we (pakis) should give up on the obsession with India, but they are, in effect, cover for the overall pressure on India, to give indignant Indians a straw to clutch; there is no serious movement at all to change the direction of Pak, nor are there any secondary signs that there will be such a movement. However, there is no reason why, in exchange for India giving up the Valley, TSPA can't be persuaded to observe a temporary truce in India, along with a longer one in the West, which will be presented as "peace" to the WKKs and to the relatively more hardheaded crowd as a window of strategic opportunity for achieving genuine reform in TSP through trade, building more crypto-madrasas, etc.


KLNMurthy wrote:I have seen no credible counterargument to this case being made, not in American circles that are indignant at Paki perfidy, like longwarjournal, and least of all in Indian circles. None of the angry articles in American media in this group have presented any strategic options (however flimsy or morally wrong in that they will reward blackmail) for managing the nuclear threat. (neither have we on brf or the Indian strategic community, other than, just saying we will call the bluff, which doesn't really make the threat go away). That means, when thinking of coherent next steps with Pak, the Vali Nasr school of thought is the only game in town right now, and it is being pushed hard as "statesmanship." The US will try to push India on standard pressure points of trade and growth, along with the carrot of US-India doing big sacrifices (i.e., Indian sacrifices) for greater good (i.e. Western good) in eternal strategic partnership.


Now, one part of the problem has been addressed : The CIA/Pentagon/WhiteHouse are in various stages of acknowledging the basket case situation. It is finally dawning on them. Great.. they are getting it, but now what???

We have to quickly move from gloating of "We told you so" to thinking of counterarguments and alternate solutions for the 100's of know-alls who are getting paid to churn out various options as we speak.

This is one chance for India to have some seeds planted for the next few decades of geopolitics. But we have dangerously lagged in providing any direction (heck, we don't have one internally). As we think about it, is is absolutely essential to pay heed to what Johann is saying.

Until the time comes when we can have the Dronacharya-version of our own and get away with it, we are dependant on US being receptive to our POV. But that is impossible, until we know what ticks the US policy and looking at things from the eyes of US.

We can't do that until we see that there are still areas we can work on. For example... agreed that the theories of Evangelical mindset and anti-Indic POV have all their respective merit. Guess what, India can't do squat about these perspectives. India has no anti-dote. But, there are other factors where India will have a play (economy or regional security or soft-). But we will be blind to it until we get bogged with the above two theories.

Consequence.. Vali Nasr may seem like the only option.

KLNMurthy wrote:The risk here is that this Indian game can be canceled at a stroke of the pen, Gujral-style by an Indian leader suffering r from a failure of nerve and / or intellect, or what is more likely, just operating from an institutional memory pattern of ad hoc and unprincipled negotiating approach combined with an inflated sense of personal vanity and generosity. That is where will see the price of having a counter-strategy without a counter-theory of what Pakistan is, and how it might be handled, including a realistic vision of how to manage the nuclear threat.


Needless to say the WKKs are the biggest hurdle in this. That isn't an issue if WKKs don't occupy a position of influence. Some food for thought.

KLNMurthy wrote:Having a strategy without a theory and principle can work, just due to India being sufficiently strong that it cannot be moved; but Qasim-Ghazni-Ghori worshipping Pakis--who are, collectively not dumb, they have all along been reinventing themselves to take over the mantle of QGG as Britain took over the mantle of Rome--know that this is not a sustainable way for Indians to defend India (and they are absolutely right, an unprincipled and passive defender will always lose to a principled, aggressive and persistent attacker).


One of the best commentary on this thread! Kudos!
Last edited by a_kumar on 07 Jun 2011 09:49, edited 1 time in total.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21161
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby Prem » 07 Jun 2011 09:47

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2011/06/ ... .html?_r=1
U.S., Pakistan Authorities Dispute Militant's Death
LONDON (Reuters) - U.S. and Pakistani authorities disagree sharply over claims that senior al Qaeda leader Ilyas Kashmiri was killed in a recent missile strike, officials from both countries said on Monday, suggesting sharp strains persist between authorities in Washington and Islamabad. Two days ago, intelligence officials in Pakistan claimed that Kashmiri, a figure in both al Qaeda and a Pakistan-based affiliate, was killed by a U.S. drone-borne missile in northwestern Pakistan. akistani officials subsequently issued a series of statements about Kashmiri's death. The nation's interior minister told reporters on Monday: "I can confirm 100 percent that he is dead. I got this information this morning." But U.S. officials familiar with counterterrorism activities in the region said they still were unable to confirm Kashmiri's death. It was more likely than not, they said Monday evening, that the militant leader was still alive. "It wouldn't be the first time that reports of his death have been wrong," one U.S. official told Reuters. "We're simply unable at this time to confirm reports of Kashmiri's demise. Our working assumption is that he's still walking around."
US DOUBTS
(vdutta, take bow)

Kashmiri was wrongly reported to have been killed in a September 2009 drone strike. It is difficult to confirm the identities of people killed in drone strikes because they occur in remote areas not accessible to foreign journalists. A Pakistani television station quoted the group that Kashmiri headed, an al Qaeda affiliate called Harkat-ul Jihad Islami, confirming his death. Britain's Channel 4 News said the death had been confirmed by a senior HUJI commander and close aide of Kashmiri. However, the SITE Institute, a U.S.-based private group that monitors and translates messages posted on militant websites, on Monday cast doubt on an Internet photo said to be of Kashmiri's dead body and an accompanying fax from HUJI confirming his death. The U.S. group said it actually appeared to be the body of another militant, Abu Dera Ismail Khan, who was killed in the militant attacks on Mumbai, India, in November 2008.

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby shiv » 07 Jun 2011 09:48

VikramS wrote:
Thanks for the links. They do give an overview of the relationship quite well. I have a few questions.
.


My views on some of them here. OT for this thread
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=5580&p=1105487#p1105487

GuruPrabhu
BRFite
Posts: 1169
Joined: 01 Apr 2008 03:32
Location: Thrissur, Kerala 59.93.8.169

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby GuruPrabhu » 07 Jun 2011 09:49

Last edited by archan on 06 Jun 2011 06:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

while you're entitled to your opinion on his posts, kindly don't go about telling others what to post and what not. This and the other post of yours = 1 warning.


This has to be a joke. Telling others what to post is a crime? That rule is broken at approximately 1 per hour on this forum.

You have an issue with what I posted to Johann, come out and say it. Couching it in this puerility is silly.

Anyway, a second bogus warning. Three strikes and I am out, but I don't want to see that day.

I'll look for a UQ-Rakshak forum and sing paeans of Uncle's oh-so-cute "myopia". Laanat hai!

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10055
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby sum » 07 Jun 2011 09:53

A low-key interaction--MKB

The scheduled visit by the Afghan defence minister Abdul Wardak to Delhi last week took place in a period of acute contradictions in the regional security scenario. One has to be incredibly audacious to build sinews of military content into India-Afghanistan relationship at the present juncture of extreme fluidity.

The war is poised to enter an uncertain phase as the date for the expected drawdown of the American troops in July draws closer and an incremental transfer of responsibility to the Afghans becomes necessary. The Russian estimate is that professionalism in the Afghan army ranks is abysmally low — around 20 per cent — despite 3-4 year long western attempts at ‘nation-building’.

The scale of US troop withdrawal remains unclear. The Congress is impatient about the heavy budgetary burden of the war — exceeding a billion dollars per day — and public opinion disfavours the war, while Pentagon warns against premature withdrawal.

Despite tall claims by the US military that the Taliban have been weakened, the signs are mixed. The insurgency has spread to western, northern and eastern regions and even in provinces where North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) claims to have established supremacy over Taliban, military gains aren’t sustainable. The security situation continues to deteriorate. A rushed American military pullout is not on the cards.

Everything, therefore, devolves upon the reconciliation of Taliban. The US admits that a political settlement becomes imperative and contacts have begun between Taliban and American diplomats. How soon these contacts would gain traction is the big question.

Much depends on cooperation from Pakistan, which wields considerable influence over Taliban. The latent frictions in the US-Pakistan relationship since the detention of a key American intelligence operative in March in Lahore have been greatly exacerbated by the Abbottabad operation to kill Osama bin Laden, which in turn, reinforces Pakistan’s determination to pursue an independent course on Afghanistan. How this calculus works will be critical for the peace process and the Americans seem unsure themselves.

On the positive side, however, rudiments of a regional consensus may be accruing and the possibility of a critical mass forming in a near future cannot be ruled out. Russia has entered into unprecedented levels of interaction with Pakistan over regional security issues.

The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit meeting on June 16 in Kazakhstan has listed Afghan problem as a top agenda item alongside the admission of India and Pakistan as new members of the grouping and of Afghanistan as ‘observer’. An active SCO role can lead to new opportunities to stabilise Afghanistan insofar as competing interests and search for influence among the regional powers may get somewhat reconciled in the process.


Unsurprisingly, Wardak was accorded high protocol, including a guard of honour, but Delhi was careful not to lend hype to the visit that might raise hackles in Islamabad (or Washington). This is judicious thinking since there are variables in the regional security scenario and a transitional period is just about to commence.

To be sure, India has high stakes in Afghanistan’s stability but a military deployment in that country is unthinkable. Equally, Pakistan’s legitimate interests in Afghanistan cannot be overlooked; nor is it in India’s interest to identify with the big-power rivalries unfolding in the Central Asian and Indian Ocean regions.

The benchmark should be, as Antony implied, defence cooperation that is kept strictly on bilateral footing within flexible parameters entirely in accordance with Kabul’s comfort level. Kabul is no doubt keen to tap Delhi for building up the Afghan capacity to shoulder responsibilities of national security, but it also carefully factors in the criticality of Pakistan’s goodwill and whole-hearted cooperation for achieving enduring peace and stability in Afghanistan.

:-?
Wow, we have really had some real dhimmis as our diplomats!!!
Last edited by sum on 07 Jun 2011 10:34, edited 1 time in total.

Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby Arjun » 07 Jun 2011 10:02

sum wrote:Wow, we have really had some real dhimmis as our diplomats!!!

Never understood why this Bhadrakumar joker continues to have any credence on BRF.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10055
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby sum » 07 Jun 2011 10:12

Well, he was a senior diplomat posted in central Asia and Pak and so would have shaped lots of our policies towards this region. Am sure he would still be having lots of influence in current IFS since junior guys might turn to him for advice...Scary that such a dhimmi thinking communist card carrying guy was once India's eyes and ears in Pak.

Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby Arjun » 07 Jun 2011 10:22

sum wrote:Well, he was a senior diplomat posted in central Asia and Pak and so would have shaped lots of our policies towards this region. Am sure he would still be having lots of influence in current IFS since junior guys might turn to him for advice...Scary that such a dhimmi thinking communist card carrying guy was once India's eyes and ears in Pak.

Have a feeling Nirupama Rao is from the MKB school of thought. The few public pronouncements I have seen from her have not impressed me - but I may very well be wrong. Anybody have any interview of her that at least conveys some degree of insight relating to Indian interests?

saadhak
BRFite
Posts: 188
Joined: 17 Mar 2011 21:37

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby saadhak » 07 Jun 2011 10:56

US contradicts groper on Kashmiri
“No confirmation,” Pentagon spokesman Col Dave Lapan told reporters during his off camera daily briefing when asked about news reports coming from Pakistan that Kashmiri has been killed. “The Department of Defence has no confirmation (on the death of Kashmiri),” he noted when told that Pakistan Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani said on Monday that the US has confirmed the death of Kashmiri.
Gilani told a news conference in Quetta, the capital of Baluchistan province, that “as far as the death of Kashmiri is concerned, US has confirmed that his death occurred on Friday”.
:
Pakistan’s Interior Minister also said Monday he was “100 per cent” certain that had been Kashmiri was killed.


Uh-oh - first Malik said 98% sure, now 100%. He is inching towards 400% :wink:

US cautious to claim victory but Pakis very keen to hand them credit for the kill. Taqqiya alert?

GuruPrabhu
BRFite
Posts: 1169
Joined: 01 Apr 2008 03:32
Location: Thrissur, Kerala 59.93.8.169

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby GuruPrabhu » 07 Jun 2011 11:08

JE Menon wrote:Actually, have been circling overhead for a while now. No Hellfires in the bay, and no need seen as yet. But would strongly recommend sticking to thread topic, and taking non-conforming discussions to another thread


Ah, excellent -- I had missed this. Not all admins found my posts worthy of a warning.. Thank you Saar!

Indeed we should stick to thread topic, which is Paki, and in keeping with certain sensitivities I recommend that we do a WKK and understand the compulsions of ISI while quietly musing the grand myopia that we SDRE are too lowly to understand.

I had an epiphany into how a small slip of a myopic incident caused uncle to form the NSG. UQ absentmindedly fell into this myopia which was infectious. While in their myopic dreams they sleepwalked into convincing 3 dozen other countries to become myopic about Indian interests and join the NSG.

Before we knew it, there was a cluster-Fuk-D of myopia.

Clearly, this was needed. Early myopia of NPT was not enough myopia. And then, someone came up with the idea that myopia is such a good thing that they should enter hyper-myopia about Paki nukes. In between, there was a myopic loss of evidence from Mumbai blasts. Dang this myopia! Makes one lose items of evidence right from one's workbench. I tell ya, this myopia is so darn right dangerous, it can't even see flush under its nose.

Now we have Headly types slipping through the cordons of myopia. When will this end? Can we get together and collect donations to perch some large glasses on Uncles nose to cure this myopia?

Theo_Fidel

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby Theo_Fidel » 07 Jun 2011 11:29

Sadler wrote:Not quite. I did not mean to say "Indians" and therefore did not write "Indians." An attack on a church in India with the slaughter of innocent indian christians (or the jewish equivalent) would evoke a far greater (emotive) response in the US than would the murder of an equal number of hindus. I will plead mea culpa to blunt talk. Even the LET trial in the US is because some of the victims were my fellow jews and americans. Were it not for these six (?)-odd victims, there would be no such trial in the US and news coverage of the Nov 26 carnage would disappear from US media and american conciousness without a trace.


Actually it is not that simple. There are Christians and then there are Christians. SDRE Christians have been eliminated in much of TSP with nary a comment from the West. Christians have been slowly exterminated in much of Iraq & the Middle East with little resistance. As recently as a century ago the Middle East was 25% Christian. One must also remember Rwanda.

The American machine does not think in religious terms at the very top despite media mouth frothing.

One thing amongst many that the American machine appears to react to is any attack on a group that it perceives to have future necessity/influence in. Thus it is the South Sudan Animists/Christians get a state (Oil), East Timor gets a State (Oil), Libyan rebels are supported (Oil), but Syrian rebels are not supported (no oil) and Christian Copts are not supported (no Oil).

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby RajeshA » 07 Jun 2011 11:35

sum wrote:A low-key interaction--MKB

Unsurprisingly, Wardak was accorded high protocol, including a guard of honour, but Delhi was careful not to lend hype to the visit that might raise hackles in Islamabad (or Washington). This is judicious thinking since there are variables in the regional security scenario and a transitional period is just about to commence.

To be sure, India has high stakes in Afghanistan’s stability but a military deployment in that country is unthinkable. Equally, Pakistan’s legitimate interests in Afghanistan cannot be overlooked; nor is it in India’s interest to identify with the big-power rivalries unfolding in the Central Asian and Indian Ocean regions.

The benchmark should be, as Antony implied, defence cooperation that is kept strictly on bilateral footing within flexible parameters entirely in accordance with Kabul’s comfort level. Kabul is no doubt keen to tap Delhi for building up the Afghan capacity to shoulder responsibilities of national security, but it also carefully factors in the criticality of Pakistan’s goodwill and whole-hearted cooperation for achieving enduring peace and stability in Afghanistan.

Ahh-thoooooooo!

He is not just an Indian ex-diplomat, but an ex-Indian diplomat and a full-blown Packee at heart!

Narad
BRFite
Posts: 854
Joined: 04 Jan 2010 15:15

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby Narad » 07 Jun 2011 12:32

X post from Oppression of minorities in TSP

A Christian can’t present the provincial budget in Pakistani Punjab
Several provincial legislators in Punjab belonging to the ruling Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) have objected to Punjab cabinet member Kamran Michael presenting the budget on grounds that he is Christian, sources within the party told The Express Tribune.
Sources say PML-N leaders are in a bind trying to figure out who to assign the finance ministry portfolio before the budget is presented before the Punjab Assembly on June 10.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22840
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby chetak » 07 Jun 2011 12:37

sum wrote:A low-key interaction--MKB

The scheduled visit by the Afghan defence minister Abdul Wardak to Delhi last week took place in a period of acute contradictions in the regional security scenario. One has to be incredibly audacious to build sinews of military content into India-Afghanistan relationship at the present juncture of extreme fluidity.

The war is poised to enter an uncertain phase as the date for the expected drawdown of the American troops in July draws closer and an incremental transfer of responsibility to the Afghans becomes necessary. The Russian estimate is that professionalism in the Afghan army ranks is abysmally low — around 20 per cent — despite 3-4 year long western attempts at ‘nation-building’.

The scale of US troop withdrawal remains unclear. The Congress is impatient about the heavy budgetary burden of the war — exceeding a billion dollars per day — and public opinion disfavours the war, while Pentagon warns against premature withdrawal.

Despite tall claims by the US military that the Taliban have been weakened, the signs are mixed. The insurgency has spread to western, northern and eastern regions and even in provinces where North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) claims to have established supremacy over Taliban, military gains aren’t sustainable. The security situation continues to deteriorate. A rushed American military pullout is not on the cards.

Everything, therefore, devolves upon the reconciliation of Taliban. The US admits that a political settlement becomes imperative and contacts have begun between Taliban and American diplomats. How soon these contacts would gain traction is the big question.

Much depends on cooperation from Pakistan, which wields considerable influence over Taliban. The latent frictions in the US-Pakistan relationship since the detention of a key American intelligence operative in March in Lahore have been greatly exacerbated by the Abbottabad operation to kill Osama bin Laden, which in turn, reinforces Pakistan’s determination to pursue an independent course on Afghanistan. How this calculus works will be critical for the peace process and the Americans seem unsure themselves.

On the positive side, however, rudiments of a regional consensus may be accruing and the possibility of a critical mass forming in a near future cannot be ruled out. Russia has entered into unprecedented levels of interaction with Pakistan over regional security issues.

The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit meeting on June 16 in Kazakhstan has listed Afghan problem as a top agenda item alongside the admission of India and Pakistan as new members of the grouping and of Afghanistan as ‘observer’. An active SCO role can lead to new opportunities to stabilise Afghanistan insofar as competing interests and search for influence among the regional powers may get somewhat reconciled in the process.


Unsurprisingly, Wardak was accorded high protocol, including a guard of honour, but Delhi was careful not to lend hype to the visit that might raise hackles in Islamabad (or Washington). This is judicious thinking since there are variables in the regional security scenario and a transitional period is just about to commence.

To be sure, India has high stakes in Afghanistan’s stability but a military deployment in that country is unthinkable. Equally, Pakistan’s legitimate interests in Afghanistan cannot be overlooked; nor is it in India’s interest to identify with the big-power rivalries unfolding in the Central Asian and Indian Ocean regions.

The benchmark should be, as Antony implied, defence cooperation that is kept strictly on bilateral footing within flexible parameters entirely in accordance with Kabul’s comfort level. Kabul is no doubt keen to tap Delhi for building up the Afghan capacity to shoulder responsibilities of national security, but it also carefully factors in the criticality of Pakistan’s goodwill and whole-hearted cooperation for achieving enduring peace and stability in Afghanistan.

:-?
Wow, we have really had some real dhimmis as our diplomats!!!



dhimmi??

You are being really polite! :twisted:

VikramS
BRFite
Posts: 1839
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby VikramS » 07 Jun 2011 12:40

Arjun:

Currently active diplomats will rarely make strategic comments in public. Their prime focus is tactical.

Retired diplomats will often talk about strategic/big picture issues.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby Singha » 07 Jun 2011 12:56

I think all they care about is pleasing their political masters, securing prime postings, a base in delhi to educate the kids in DPS-rkpuram, a post-retirement/deputation international posting in some UN org, and the sensibilities of every other country but India.

thats about it.

VikramS
BRFite
Posts: 1839
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby VikramS » 07 Jun 2011 13:22

a_kumar:

There have been some suggestions, including the Komireddy article on denuking Pakistan under a US protection umbrella.

I do not think GOI will or wants to make any overt statements. It will be a vindication of the TSP's irrational behavior. Right now TSP is killing a lot more US personnel than Indian, so the thrust should come from the US. I propose that the US do the following:

1. ISAF stops recognizing the Durand line as a legit border and start chasing the Good Taleban into their caves.
2. Recognize an independent Balochistan as a US protecterate.
3. Give an unqualified warning to the TSPA/ISI that any nuclear misadventure will be met with city busters, neutron bombs etc.
4. Reward the rump left of TSP with a lot of trade and financial assistance, while it is demartialized, denuked and deradicalized. Rope in other countries to perform the TSP-detox.

This requires two things:
-> The end of the Iranian bomb effort
-> A strong carrot to the PRC that her strategic and commercial goals can be met in the new environment; they still have a rump state of Pakjab/Sindh left to play their politics with but without the Jehadis/Taleban to deal with.

I doubt that something like the above will ever come true. TSP has made itself useful to enough masters tat one or the other will stand up for its existence.

I think the managing Pakistan's failure thread has some more thought.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22840
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby chetak » 07 Jun 2011 13:26

VikramS wrote:Arjun:

Currently active diplomats will rarely make strategic comments in public. Their prime focus is tactical.

Retired diplomats will often talk about strategic/big picture issues.


Bhadrakumar......

Hoping to pickup some lucrative speaking assignments, no doubt.

On the peace mongering circuit apparently!!!

His back may not be up to the exacting back channel standards :wink:

Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby Arjun » 07 Jun 2011 13:32

VikramS wrote:Arjun:

Currently active diplomats will rarely make strategic comments in public. Their prime focus is tactical.

Retired diplomats will often talk about strategic/big picture issues.

I wonder how that compares to the state of affairs in the UK, US. I do recollect the US deputy secretary of state giving a detailed interview regarding foreign policy....presumably he is Nirupama's counterpart?

Seems to me the public has a right to hear from the top civil servant regarding India's strategic interests in international relations. Should not be left totally to the politicians.

VikramS
BRFite
Posts: 1839
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby VikramS » 07 Jun 2011 13:54

Arjun: Most of the detailed interviews are for the masses. Unless they are trying to sell something new, it will most often be a regurgitation of previously known positions. Diplomats who actually have to meet and work with other nations, will rarely do anything which can be considered significantly controversial.

shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6846
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby shyamd » 07 Jun 2011 14:19

sum wrote:A low-key interaction--MKB

Unsurprisingly, Wardak was accorded high protocol, including a guard of honour, but Delhi was careful not to lend hype to the visit that might raise hackles in Islamabad (or Washington). This is judicious thinking since there are variables in the regional security scenario and a transitional period is just about to commence.

To be sure, India has high stakes in Afghanistan’s stability but a military deployment in that country is unthinkable. Equally, Pakistan’s legitimate interests in Afghanistan cannot be overlooked; nor is it in India’s interest to identify with the big-power rivalries unfolding in the Central Asian and Indian Ocean regions.

The benchmark should be, as Antony implied, defence cooperation that is kept strictly on bilateral footing within flexible parameters entirely in accordance with Kabul’s comfort level. Kabul is no doubt keen to tap Delhi for building up the Afghan capacity to shoulder responsibilities of national security, but it also carefully factors in the criticality of Pakistan’s goodwill and whole-hearted cooperation for achieving enduring peace and stability in Afghanistan.

:-?
Wow, we have really had some real dhimmis as our diplomats!!!

Its official - MKB has lost the plot. He has access to good data though, however his interpretation is just off the mark.

Rajiv Lather
BRFite
Posts: 287
Joined: 20 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Karnal, Haryana, India

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby Rajiv Lather » 07 Jun 2011 14:19

5.4 scale temblor in Sargodha - whats going on ?

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 30, 20

Postby Altair » 07 Jun 2011 14:23

Rajiv Lather wrote:5.4 scale temblor in Sargodha - whats going on ?

Bumispot!!

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10055
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby sum » 07 Jun 2011 14:36

Its official - MKB has lost the plot. He has access to good data though, however his interpretation is just off the mark.

Hope that current Indian crop doesnt have been 1% of Shri MKB's thought process else India is royally screwed...

Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby Arjun » 07 Jun 2011 14:38

VikramS wrote:Arjun: Most of the detailed interviews are for the masses. Unless they are trying to sell something new, it will most often be a regurgitation of previously known positions. Diplomats who actually have to meet and work with other nations, will rarely do anything which can be considered significantly controversial.

Hmm....

Anyway here's an interview of Chinese top diplomat: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/china/interviews/jiechi.html
Here's a speech by Nirupama: http://www.ambinde.fr/en/component/content/article/282-transcript-of-foreign-secretary-smt-nirupama-raos-speech-at-the-french-institute-of-international-relations-ifri-paris-may-5-2011

Note the language used by the Chinese is way more direct and aggressive - take his views on Taiwan as an example. India's language is typical wishy-washy 'diplomatese'....One would think Pakistan is a close ally of India based on her speech.

Anyway, I guess ultimately the direction has to come from the executive on this - probably unfair to blame the bureaucrats.
Last edited by Arjun on 07 Jun 2011 14:41, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby Lalmohan » 07 Jun 2011 14:38

the US did indeed embrace a non judeo-christian culture whole heartedly when it suited its purpose - I am thinking of Thailand during the Vietnam war, and perhaps even South Vietnam and South Korea, possibly even Japan. During WW2, the US was starting to feel this love for the Chinese nationalists too

I am sure that the US would have developed deep but stand-off love for us had we not been non-aligned in the 50's and chosen to become part of SEATO/CENTO or whatever, i.e. go poodle. pakistan went fully poodle and then went a step further to gubo. therefore it figures that the US establishment allowed itself to be sucked into that vortex.

by the doctrine of 'with us or against us' our non-alignment translated into 'warsaw-pact-ally' - and we were of some unfathomable religious mindset too... sometimes we forget or underestimate the deeply ingrained anti-communist/anti-soviet mentality of the post WW2 american state

VikramS
BRFite
Posts: 1839
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby VikramS » 07 Jun 2011 14:52

RajivLather ji
Is Sarghodha in a seismically active area?

Rajiv Lather
BRFite
Posts: 287
Joined: 20 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Karnal, Haryana, India

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby Rajiv Lather » 07 Jun 2011 14:54

Not that I know of - hence my question

Rajiv Lather
BRFite
Posts: 287
Joined: 20 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Karnal, Haryana, India

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby Rajiv Lather » 07 Jun 2011 15:04

Magnitude 4.7 - PAKISTAN
2011 June 07 09:08:34 UTC

Earthquake Details

This event has been reviewed by a seismologist.
Magnitude 4.7
Date-Time Tuesday, June 07, 2011 at 09:08:34 UTC
Tuesday, June 07, 2011 at 02:08:34 PM at epicenter
Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones
Location 32.761°N, 71.809°E
Depth 39.8 km (24.7 miles)
Region PAKISTAN
Distances 110 km (68 miles) NW of Sargodha, Pakistan
133 km (82 miles) NE of Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan
140 km (86 miles) S of Peshawar, Pakistan
162 km (100 miles) SW of ISLAMABAD, Pakistan
Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 30.1 km (18.7 miles); depth +/- 14.6 km (9.1 miles)
Parameters NST= 24, Nph= 24, Dmin=>999 km, Rmss=0.93 sec, Gp=155°,
M-type=body wave magnitude (Mb), Version=5
Source USGS NEIC (WDCS-D)
Event ID usc00041jg


* Seems safe looking at the depth. Although it is 22 kilometre north of Khushab

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12155
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby Aditya_V » 07 Jun 2011 15:20

Bah! 4.7 Magnitude Earthquake is like no earthquake at all, no damage done.

Venkarl
BRFite
Posts: 962
Joined: 27 Mar 2008 02:50
Location: India
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby Venkarl » 07 Jun 2011 15:27

MKB's family is living on a IED with Paki's finger on the trigger..... :lol: hence all that bull$hit

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11209
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby Gagan » 07 Jun 2011 16:03

A few points that I would like to raise:
1. I don't agree with the west's christian mindset coming into play. This argument is a bit too simplistic.

One can understand that a caucasian christian president can make a certain policy, but then are all the diplomats, advisors, GOTUS all in tune and in harmony with policy just because it is christian inspired?

Not at all. The US isn't a super power because they have a 'christian' thought process.
They would not be courting Ayub and the various Middle eastern arab states if things were so simplistic.

Attributing everything to some christian suspicions about a pagan religion is to me a shallow argument.

My thinking is that India's leadership did not build bridges with the superpowers in that era. They did well right after independence, because hollywood tended to show indians as great scientists. I remember a 50s era movie about a mars mission with an indian scientist dressed like JLN who was supposedly one of the 3 greatest minds on earth! I think that after JLN, there were a string of SDRE leaders and ambassadors and interlocuters who for whatever reasons were unable to further develop partnerships that were built initially after independence.

Events took a certain course, the US made certain set of choices based on their impressions about India, that resulted in them and India ending up opposing each other rather than working together. They needed a munna, we are too proud to be one. Pakistan presented itself as both TFTA and eagerly willing to satisfy all demands.
Some fault has to lie with us also. We also have to look at how much we invested in building relationships, were we pontificating all the time, and yet had huge social and economic issues that were unresolved?

2. I feel that we should not take the argument about, only India being able to help pakistan out of their current crisis, any forward. That thought is begining to take root in Pakistan too with Nawaz Sharif talking about economic integration with India.

Pakistan after murdering 50,000 Indians shouldn't be allowed to go scot free, trade with us, build itself economically and then to stab us in the future.

No Sir!

There is no evidence that they have changed their anti-india ideology. This is just another taquiya.

It is along the lines of them wanting to settle the 'Siachen' issue. What phucking Siachen issue hain ji? Those guys can't even see the siachen glacier from where they are located. They are sitting in the lower glaciers that approach the Saltoro range, with the Indian Army on top of the saltoro range, and brushing off, frustrating any feeble attempts they make to come up the mountains. And we are discussing 'Siachen' with them. They don't even want to authenticate the AGPL, that is the hard reality, 100% meaning that they want to take on the negotiating table what they could never take on the ground militarily.

Our think tanks wanted greater trade with Pakistan all these years didn't they? This MFN thing? What happens if they actually say they want to trade with us? We will only be postponing Pakistan's day of judgement to another day, delaying it by a decade, and in the process lose a few thousand innocent indian citizens along the way. They are not going to change, they can't control the armies of armed terrorists who will be unemployed after the US draws down.

Not in India's interest at all. The only way India can have peace in the foreseeable future is dismantling Pakistan altogether, THEN solving Kashmir once and for all.

3. This dismantling Pakistan is actually going to be a blessing for everyone around. The people most benefited by this will be the people who live in Pakistan today. The best example I can come up with is India's division of states that happened earlier this decade. India carved out three states out of larger states which were under performing. The result is that the smaller states are better managed, are harnessing resources much better.

This analogy can't be applied straightforward to Pakistan's plan of dividing their states into smaller sub states. That is a bad idea. The reason this was successful in India was because the country was doing well, but these states were under performing. In Pakistan's case, both the country and the states are under performing, creating new smaller states within that country will see expenditures rise with new power centres, new bureaucracies come into being, it will be too expensive for them to manage. The only reasonable solution is division of that country itself.

I believe that the people of Pakistan will heave a sigh of relief should Pakistan be divided. They are currently trapped in a nation that has the military as the all-powerful entity that is sucking them dry, there are Jihadists and terrorists who want to destroy everything that is sensible, in order to enforce their bigoted viewpoint. There is no economy, no security, no peace, no healthcare, no education other than a madarsa, and consequently no future. If one were to read between the lines, I believe that the people of Pakistan are pleading for deliverance from Pakistan. I say division of Pakistan, because between them, the Army, the Jihadis and the Feudals, they are prospering with the current state of affairs. Their power and hold of the nation is such that they will take the nation down with them but will not release their grip. And nothing on earth can get them to release that grip short of a WW2 style invasion and complete military defeat - something that no one seems willing to want to do.

Division is the only sensible solution, that will be acceptable to the vast majority of people of Pakistan. The only people who will be cribbing about it will be the Army and the Feudals. The Jihadis I suspect will divide along the lines of those that want a division and those that don't want it. The pashtuns would want such a division, while the Punjabis won't.

So let us all deliver the people of Pakistan from the mess that they are in.

My do naya paisa.

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7043
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby JE Menon » 07 Jun 2011 16:22

GuruPrabhu,

One admin's warning is the same as any one elses. No admin wants to let loose the hellfires out of choice or because it's fun. Let us pull away from this distracting sideline and stick to thread topic please.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11209
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 20

Postby Gagan » 07 Jun 2011 16:28

Was that an earthquake or did a bum go off?

I hope all those tunnels with bums / special stuff inside them didn't collapse.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests