Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Feb. 12, 2011

[Rony]

http://pakistanhindupost.blogspot.com/

Pakistan Hindu Post (PHP)

Welcome to Pakistan Hindu Post.The Post which is most comprehensive and up-to-date source of Hindu-Related News in Pakistan.Established for spreading the light of Vedic/Hindu culture through Internet media, The Post provides the latest in Hindus relating news Nationwide & Worldwide from a wide range of areas including Hindus achievement,persecution, demand for justice,News Media study etc.(PHP) is Independent News & Media providing a progressive voice for over 8 million Pakistani Hindus.

[abhishek_sharma]

1. Defence expenditure - It is a good proxy for capacities - because finally thats what matters...In WWII, Germany finally lost because it could not outspend the US! If India raises salaries for its soldiers, doesnt Pak as well? If anything, the perks and privileges of military office in Pak should be greater...For a 10 year period, these things balance out...Steve Cohen is a good analyst, but soemtime he really goes over the top...30% increase in the defence budget was ALL spent on PC recos?! Out of a defence budget of nearly 1 lac crore, salaries and pensions would account for about 30k...A 30% increase in salaries would only account for a 9-10% of the increase in the total budget...

I did not say all of it was spent on pay commission recommendations. The word "mostly" was used. Pakis have been getting billions from US and I would like to know if their aid is included in those numbers.

Since I mentioned KRC, a point about the recos made by the KRC...It made tons of observations, identified lots of gaps...But a major gap in conventional force levels wasnt one of them...It made some general comments on delays in modernisation, and in fact only identified light infantry mountain warfare as the priority area gap! Nothing on any major gaps in prosecuting a conventional war against Pak! Tells you something....

It does not tell me much. It is known that the committee had a limited mandate. For example:

From: http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/India/KargilRCC.html

However, the actual conduct of military operations has not been evaluated by the Committee as this lay outside the Committee's mandate and would have called for a different type of expertise.

In any case, as I mentioned before, page 71 of Kargil Review Committee report mentions that "On the Indian side, it had been made abundantly clear that the Indian Army has not for sometime enjoyed a punitive edge over the Pakistan army to adopt an effective proactive strategy".

Do you have the full report? I don't. Please post a link if possible.

[Gagan]

OT for this thread,
But of the three defense forces of India - Army, Navy and Air Force.
The army is the one with the least edge over our regional adversaries.

The latter two have decent-good edge over the adversaries.
Also, is it a co-incidence that the latter two are also more open to indigenous defense products.

As far the IN goes, its claims about it being completely pro indigenous goods should be analyzed. As far as platforms and ships are concerned, yes the Navy accepts DRDO / BEL products. But the overwhelming amount of even the Navy's sensors and offensive weapons are imported.

[shiv]

7. Perhaps as a result of the time you spent studying the TSP, you put too much emphasis on the internal fissures within the TSP. The same fissures were not as visible ten years ago; they might fade away in another decade.

Vikram - I am yet to see any information that suggests the fissures will fade away, or that they were not there more than 10 years ago. Bangladesh is the obvious fissure that split open in 1971. But if you read Sajad Haider's autobiography you will see how the rebels in NWFP were being bombed by the PAF even in 1964. And an conspiracy hatched to assassinate Bhutto senior was blamed on Ahmedis in the 70s.

The fissures have always been there and those fissures are pretty much like India's fissures. Naipaul's first India book (an Area of Darkness) relates how he and a Sikh travelled on a train in South India and there were clear TFTA/SDRE feelings then (1950s?) and Naipaul has a very funny passage on how the Andhra guys on the train ate "curd-rice" with pickles.

TSPs fissures are just like Indian fissures and TSP has always known about them and has always predicted India's downfall because of its fissures. Indeed TSP has tried to make the most of India''s fissures. India can still spilt - even now there is a crisis with Naxals having taken a hostage and the Orissa government powerless.

I put it to you that the only reason why India has pulled through is because of political representation of most, if not all groups. That political representation does not exist in Pakistan. Instead Pakistan took the route of uniting under the banner of Islam and later Islamism - which are indeed like communism. One can say that Communism has united China and made China into a formidable force, and therefore Islamism should be able to unite Pakistan and make it into a similar formidable force. I think one needs to look at the fine print here.

Communism took hold in China using bestial violence and widespread jailing and murders. Perhaps China was helped by a degree of ethnic and linguistic unity of the Han people. Islamism too is spreading through Pakistan using bestiality and violence. The killing of Shias and Ahmedis are akin to the opposition to non communists. Communism and Islamism do not allow political representation but rely on force. Unlike democratic systems - neither communism nor Islamism need national boundaries. They are ideologies that can spread across boundaries. What is happening in Pakistan today (in my view) is a spread of Islamism as a new uniting force in Pakistan. This force is in addition to other ethnic and linguistic fissures which could well be removed and bulldozed by Isiamism. One could argue that Islamism is not a fissure but is a uniting force. It was always meant to be a uniting force. (Islam is one remember? )

Still Islamism is using its tactics to spread inside Pakistan. the "Talibanization" of Waziristan and Lal Masjid are all indicators of the spread of Islamism. The media promotion of Zaid Hamid and the intense anti-US and anti-India rhetoric are based on support for Islamism. Islamism is the great uniting force of Pakistan and if, as you predict, the fissures of Pakistan "fade away" in a decade, those fissures will fade away not because of a common language or common ethnicity or even common problems - but because of the force of Islamism and the brutal killing of opponents to Islamism.

This is how I see it: It is the US that is arming and encouraging Pakistani groups to fight Islamists. The US is now encouraging the defeat of the very same Islamist forces that it supported during the cold war - the same forces who were freedom fighters. In other words a split in Pakistan is being encouraged by the US. In order to fight the Islamists the US is pouring in money and aid into Pakistan and is trying to wean the Pakistani army away from Islamism - which I see as a futile exercise. But as part of that futile exercise they are filling Pakistan up with arms and hardware that will eventually go to the Islamists.

A large number of Pakistanis do not want to fight the Islamists. That is why there is now such a strong anti-US sentiment in Pakistan. The US does not want to let the Islamists win - which is, in fact pure sophistry on the part of the US because just a couple of decades ago those same Islamists were the US's blue eyed boys. Even now they may cooperate with the US until their armed strength becomes formidable. That is why I worry about all the arms like F-16s and AMRAAMs being poured into Pakistan.

I would like to see the Islamists win and take over Pakistan. I am saying this for the nth time on this forum. As I see it - I am not currently worried about the fissures or absence of fissures between Islamists and others in Pakistan. I would first like to see the aid that the US has given to stop and for the US to stop supporting the single most dangerous force in the region - that Pakistani army. A reduction in the strength and order of the Pakistani army would benefit us although the ragtag Islamist forces (the "20 million jihadis with guns") would still be going strong. I see less of a threat from an irregular army in a strife torn Pakistan that from an organized Pakistan which has been the source of the most deadly attacks on India. No. Mumbai was not the most deadly attack on India. Mumbai and other acts of terrorism were only the latest manifestation of a war against India that started in 1947 with the occupation of PoK. At worst, the Islamist armies will be no more powerful than the current Pakistani army simply because US aid will come to a halt.

It is being expected and anticipated on here that China will step in and take over the role of the US. That is inevitable. A Pakistan army that is losing strength in relation to India (and other forces) will desperately seek aid from China and china may well be a generous supplier of arms. But we must not confuse a supply of arms with the stability required to run a nation and build roadways. That is a separate issue. China will definitely supply arms in the requisite numbers. For arguments sake let us assume that China pours in arms as generously and wastefully as the US has done. Those arms will all go into the hands of the victorious Islamists who have just seen the US off. No harm. Everyone accepts that China is at least number 2 power. What difference will it make to India if number 2 power sits in Pakistan as opposed to number 1 power?

Let me assume that this will usher in a great new era - an era in which a Taliban government forms in Pakistan, supported by communist China. Islamism and communism - two great forces coming together, uniting the people from Shanghai to Karachi.

What will all this mean for India? As I see it Pakistan and China have been cooperating against India for 50 years. Pakistan has received nuclear arms, nuclear material and nuclear capable missiles from China. A China-Talibanistan combine will make little extra difference to India. OK there may be some extra danger - so we have to arm ourselves but at least we need not worry about US aid to that Taliban-China alliance. And we need not be under US pressure to talk to a Taliban government in Pakhanastan.

Of course the scenario I have painted would be a big worry for the US. But who cares?

If wishes were horses...

[A_Gupta]

India has nothing to fear from it? Pakistan had its way for only two days? I don't think Taliban needed Massoud's permission for doing anything in most of Afghanistan. IC 814 was not taken there between 9/9 and 9/11.

You haven't shown anything for India to fear. BTW, IC 814 landed in Dubai before Kandahar - why?

[abhishek_sharma]

You haven't shown anything for India to fear. BTW, IC 814 landed in Dubai before Kandahar - why?

*sigh*

The fact that Taliban govt did not cooperate with India during that episode shows that we should worry about them.

I do not know why the plane was taken to Dubai. If the govt in Dubai behaved like Taliban, then we should worry about them too.

[Pranay]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/21/opini ... ml?_r=1&hp

Pakistan’s Nuclear Folly
Published: February 20, 2011

With the Middle East roiling, the alarming news about Pakistan’s nuclear weapons buildup has gotten far too little attention. The Times recently reported that American intelligence agencies believe Pakistan has between 95 and more than 110 deployed nuclear weapons, up from the mid-to-high 70s just two years ago.

Pakistan can’t feed its people, educate its children, or defeat insurgents without billions of dollars in foreign aid. Yet, with China’s help, it is now building a fourth nuclear reactor to produce more weapons fuel.

Even without that reactor, experts say, it has already manufactured enough fuel for 40 to 100 additional weapons. That means Pakistan — which claims to want a minimal credible deterrent — could soon possess the world’s fifth-largest arsenal, behind the United States, Russia, France and China but ahead of Britain and India.

[Mahendra]

NYTimes conveniently forgets about Israel's arsenal which is rumoured to be around 250 head e wars since the 80s. Interestingly articles appearing in news magazines in the 80s were speculating that India had more weapons grade nuke material than China.

[A_Gupta]

You haven't shown anything for India to fear. BTW, IC 814 landed in Dubai before Kandahar - why?

*sigh*

The fact that Taliban govt did not cooperate with India during that episode shows that we should worry about them.

I do not know why the plane was taken to Dubai. If the govt in Dubai behaved like Taliban, then we should worry about them too.

Since Dubai allowed the plane to land only under US pressure, I guess, India should worry about them too. UAE also turned back a plane carrying Indian commandos who might have attempted a rescue - not different from the Taliban, who also prevented India from attempting a rescue. UAE was also only one of three govts that recognized the Taliban govt in Afghanistan, so that is strike two.

[RajeshA]

X-Posted from Managing Chinese Threat Thread

Some aspects of how U.S support to Pakistan differs from a future enhanced support from China:

1) Financial Aid
USA: Gives lots of financial support to the state directly thereby enabling it to prevent "state collapse". The state then channels money to the TSPA making it stronger. Stronger Pakistan means stronger TSPA. Even so USA pays TSPA directly through the Coalition Support Fund. USA makes no commercial use of Pakistan, which makes such support less than self-sustainable and a burden for the American taxpayer.

China: Through investing in transit and logistics infrastructure in Pakistan, could increase a new source of income for the TSPA, lessening its need for state funds or direct financial aid from a foreign patron, like USA. If China uses Pakistan for Xinjiang-Gwadar transit of commercial goods as well as military supply lines to a Chinese presence in Gwadar, then the funds could be substantial also. The commercial use of Pakistan, enables China to make its support self-sustainable.

2) Arms Supplies
USA supplies a lot of arms to the Pakistanis, which can be used against India. However USA keeps control over Pakistan, through understandings requiring regular monitoring of these weapons, and a tight leash on supplies of spare parts. This control can be useful. In a war of which the Americans disapprove, they can cut off or delay vital supplies of spare parts, virtually condemning the Pakistanis to a limited war.

China too is moving ahead with arms supplies to Pakistan. With improved manufacturing base and a lot of reverse-engineering, it is to be expected that China would be able to supply even better arms to Pakistan in the future, than what it can supply now, at much lower costs.

3) Aims of Patron
USA's interests are at variance with Pakistan today. USA wants Pakistan to hunt down the Islamists, the Taliban, AQAM, etc. TSPA takes the money and gives questionable support to American aims. At the moment, India is not such a big power or a power at variance with America's interests in the world, that America would consider it needful to bring down India, at least not yet. In fact, America seems willing to see India and Pakistan make up, for whatever reason. By giving arms to Pakistan, USA is hurting Indian interests, however one would not consider USA India's enemy. Some look upon USA as even benign wrt India, at least in designs. The question to pose is, is America encouraging Pakistan to destroy India? Not, as far as I know.

China on the other hand is India's neighbor with a big border dispute between us. India is also the only country in Asia standing between China and its hegemony over Asia. In short, we are strategic enemies. Again the question to pose is, is China going to encourage Pakistan to destroy India! In that, at least, I have no doubt!

So one way or another, Pakistan would always be able to get access to conventional arms, either through USA or in the future through PRC; the question is would Pakistan's patron try to hold back Pakistan's hand or try to push it against India!

The question is not who gives the gun, but who controls the finger on the trigger!

[Brad Goodman]

Compare paki actions from 1980 - 1989 then from 1990 - 2000 then 2001 - 2002 and 2003 - current. Now paki adventurism started in 1st phase with Punjab and then escalated n 90's in Kashmir. Post 9/11 we have seen Kashmir pretty much wind down. Would we not consider this an acheivement for diplomcy. MEA has been able to convince unkil & world to reign in pakis. I agree 26/11 needs a strong response but least for now what r we losing by talking its not like any one is going to give or take anything from these secretry level talks.

Brad, the response to the bolded portion is a plain NO.

Code: Select all

Jammu & Kashmir

Year  No. of Incidents  No. of SFs killed  No. of Civilians killed  No. of Terrorist killed
2008     708                        75                     91                           339
2009     499                        64                     78                           239
2010     254                        34                     20                           114
(Upto June 30 only)

With all respect Sir. I just want to expand the data source so that we can take a more holistic view

Code: Select all

Year Killings

1988 100  
1989 1,500  
1990 11,500  
1991 14,000  
1992 19,000  
1993 26,000  
1994 29,000  
1995 28,500  
1996 29,000  
1997 24,000  
1998 23,000  
1999 26,000  
2000 33,500  
2001 44,800  
2002 29,000  
2003 25,500  
2004 18,500  
2005 17,500  
2006 11,000  
2007 1,500  

* Source : The Economist, 4/7/07; South Asia Terrorism Portal

Killings in Kashmir

So from close to 45,000 killings in 2001 to 170 in 2010 you do not see something on ground changed? There are multiple factors that might have contributed here. Better Army strategy, Better Israeli weapons for CI, Paki change of tactics, Unkil pressure, Better response from Central and State Gov's but please consider may be there was something that MEA and babus might have also contributed how ever small it might be for you.

[Dipanker]

^^
Your numbers does not look right and it does not add up given that total between 1989 - 2010 is supposed to be in 50,000 - 75,000 range.

Added Later:

http://in.reuters.com/article/2008/11/2 ... 4520081121
India revises Kashmir death toll to 47,000

[arun]

......... {Snipped} ......... Killings in Kashmir

So from close to 45,000 killings in 2001 to 170 in 2010 you do not see something on ground changed? There are multiple factors that might have contributed here. Better Army strategy, Better Israeli weapons for CI, Paki change of tactics, Unkil pressure, Better response from Central and State Gov's but please consider may be there was something that MEA and babus might have also contributed how ever small it might be for you.

You have added an extra zero to number of killings in J&K in 2001.

The killings in 2001 were 4507.

That number is from the SATP website which the Economist quotes as its source.

Your numbers for 2002-2006 also have an extra zero.

Check out SATP:

SATP

[shiv]

^^
Your numbers does not look right and it does not add up given that total between 1989 - 2010 is supposed to be in 50,000 - 75,000 range.

True - a figure of 44,800 for 2001 is definitely wrong. The total for all years is in the 50,000 range. I need to find the tables I have archived - but they are on the net IIRC

I see Arun has figured the issue

[Brad Goodman]

......... {Snipped} ......... Killings in Kashmir

So from close to 45,000 killings in 2001 to 170 in 2010 you do not see something on ground changed? There are multiple factors that might have contributed here. Better Army strategy, Better Israeli weapons for CI, Paki change of tactics, Unkil pressure, Better response from Central and State Gov's but please consider may be there was something that MEA and babus might have also contributed how ever small it might be for you.

You have added an extra zero to number of killings in J&K in 2001.

The killings in 2001 were 4507.

That number is from the SATP website which the Economist quotes as its source.

Your numbers for 2002-2006 also have an extra zero.

Check out SATP:

SATP

I have added the link from where I got the numbers. May be I am wrong with data here but the intent was to point that violence has come down substantially.

[shiv]

I have added the link from where I got the numbers. May be I am wrong with data here but the intent was to point that violence has come down substantially.

Please don't give more hits to that link

[arun]

Moving on to death and mayhem in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan seems that another round of target killing has commenced in Karachi starting on Saturday:

Five killed in latest target killing wave in Karachi

And on Sunday:

Target killing: MQM supporter gunned down

[ramana]

Nightwatch on the RD affair

Nightwatch 20/2/2011

Pakistan: The Lahore Province High Court gave the government three more weeks in which to make a case that the American Raymond Davis possesses full diplomatic immunity.


Dawn News reported on 17 February that investigation teams have discovered Raymond Davis's alleged connections in North Waziristan. Unidentified sources disclosed that a GPS chip recovered from Davis was used to identify targets for drone attacks in the tribal region. They say that during investigations the U.S. official was hesitant to share information about his visits to the tribal region, but the sources contend Davis made up to 12 visits to the tribal areas without first notifying Pakistani officials.


Comment: Looking beyond the legal aspects of the case, the Pakistan government is afraid to release Davis because of the storm of anti-American and anti-government sentiment it might stimulate. Pakistan is not immune to the organizing power of social media in reaction to an attractive cause. Favoritism to Americans qualifies as such a cause because the pro-American tilt of the Gilani/Zardari government is not popular.

[surinder]

The day is coming when the PA will draw as much domestic political capital from being seen to fight America as it gains from being seen to fight India.

Well put. This is a quotable line.

[shravan]

Pakistan intelligence confirms Davis is CIA guy

[ramana]

Its like Gary Powers redux. Only thing is TSp is an al lie of USA.

[CRamS]

I don't get this NFU funda. What's to prevent me from using nukes first, despite declaring to the world that I will not use them first? When did the Chinese ever honour their own guarantees anyway?

Please read the reports, commentary etc in immediate aftermath of Pokhran-II. Clinton & Halfbrght were so furious, that Clinton is said to have remarked that "we need to come down on these guys (SDREs) with a ton of bricks". Immediatlly, Halfbright started this "Kashmir is nuke flashpoint" hype. The fury only abated when Jassu bhai started guboing before "my friend Strobe", and it was during those turbulent times that India enunciated NFU. I empathize with our position. At that time, whatever western liars, chimpanada, and TSP say, India had to demonstrate some muscle after TSP was threatning to hit India with Ghauri etc. But having done that, India did not want to escalate further and hence the NFU carrot. So India's position is understandable. But US is not going to rest until India is nuke nude, or at least whatever nukes India has gather dust. And that is where TSP nukes come in as a useful presure point. The idea is to force India to hand over Kashmir, and then US goes and tells TSP that now that you have Kashmir and SDRE nukes are impotent, you need to give up your nukes as well (read that NYT editorial that was posted). This should be a cake walk, because after all, TSP nukes are ding dongs painted green. India TSP equal equal onlee, and India is an impending "super power" of the 21st century.

[Dipanker]

I am guessing that this official admission that Raymond Davis worked for CIA is part of climbdown strategy adopted by US.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/22/world ... tml?emc=na
American Held in Pakistan Shootings Worked With the C.I.A.

WASHINGTON — The American arrested in Pakistan after shooting two men at a crowded traffic stop was part of a covert, C.I.A.-led team of operatives conducting surveillance on militant groups deep inside the country, according to American government officials.

[Dipanker]

I don't get this NFU funda. What's to prevent me from using nukes first, despite declaring to the world that I will not use them first? When did the Chinese ever honour their own guarantees anyway?

AFAIK Indian NFU also applies only to non-nuclear nations. Notice that Pakistan and China do not belong to that category.

[A_Gupta]

But if you read Sajad Haider's autobiography you will see how the rebels in NWFP were being bombed by the PAF even in 1964.

Ever since air power was invented, air power has been used to inflict collective punishment on the tribals of the frontier region and to keep them in check. Pakistan did not invent this policy, it merely continued the British policy. The only prominent person that I know of who thought that alternate and more enlightened means of dealing with the tribes should be devised was Nehru, in 1946, when he visited the area.

[A_Gupta]

However the article says nothing in terms of stating what role Powell had in talking to Musharraf in the 2002 standoff.

It would seem that one thing Powell sought was a commitment from Musharraf not to go nuclear.

e.g. May 30, 2002
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/asia/jan ... _5-30.html

JIM LEHRER: If there is, in fact, a conflict, how likely is it that it would eventually lead to the use of nuclear weapons by these two countries?

COLIN POWELL: I can't answer that question, but I can say this: In my conversations with both sides, especially with the Pakistani side, I have made it clear that this really can't be in anyone's mind, I mean, the thought of nuclear conflict in the year 2002 - with what that would mean with respect to loss of life, what that would mean with respect to the condemnation, the worldwide condemnation that would come down on whatever nation chose to take that course of action would be such that ........

JIM LEHRER: Now when you said that to President Musharraf, what response did you get?

COLIN POWELL: I have a clear understanding from President Musharraf that he understands that message, and that he sees things in the same way. But at the same time, you know, he is the president of a country that has such weapons under his control and possesses such weapons, and so you don't get ironclad guarantees with these kinds of issues in this dangerous a situation. And so I will continue to discuss with both sides now how important it is for us to start moving in the other direction and not toward conflict with all the unintended consequences that often come with conflict.

JIM LEHRER: And you delivered that same message to the Indian side?

COLIN POWELL: I have been in touch with the Indians. I haven't - I'm sure that in the days ahead I will have an opportunity to debate the message in the same way. I started really speaking about nuclear issues this past week with President Musharraf.

[anandsgh]

When Do Bandar come one roof ke Andar..... This happens..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... TDoA_ecIXw

Two nut cases (Zaid Hamid and Ahmed Qureshi) analyzing Samjhauta express... KurKure....Hanood et Yahood lobby etc etc...

[Dipanker]

^^
No point giving these idiots any publicity.

[VikramS]

PrasadZ:

I do not know enough about PolPot except that if there was no China there would likely be no Pol Pot or at least no Pol Pot with a cultural revolution of his own. Further the Cold War bought about strange bed-fellows and alliances. As I have written earlier CONTEXT is very important. And the Context is different.

The one big difference between the West and the Islamism/Communism combo is that there is some form of accountability in the West. The soldiers coming home from Vietnam were spat on; during 1971 Nixon-Kissinger could do little to stop IG as their own diplomats had "gone native", their media not whitewashing TSPA; there were checks and balances in the system. Now compare that to what the Islamists and the CCP have...

shiv:

When it comes to the internal analysis of TSP, you perhaps have forgotten more than I have ever known.

I agree with you about the fissures. I also agree with you on how Islamism and Communism can use brute force to force submission and how India has been kept together thanks to her ability to give representation to most groups.

I also believe that everything moves in cycles. The fissures too become prominent, and then fade. I have no doubt that the Baluchistan/NWFP will always be only under marginal TSP control. However I also feel that the degree of that control has a greater chance of increasing if it is the CCP which is calling the shots.

If you look from the CCP's point of view they face the biggest strategic challenge from S. Asia. There is no one to challenge the CCP in S. E. Asia, a bulk of which is now economically dependent on China. Taiwan is on its way to becoming another Hong Kong. They may continue to be separate and have a separate military but economic integration is happening fast. And forget about other powers using Taiwan as a potential base to trouble the CCP. Japan and Russia both face demographic issues and are in position to challenge the CCP; they could still contain her.

It is in the Tibet/Xianxing area where the dangers lie. The population has not be suppressed completely, they are close to vital economic regions. Moreover, India is the only country which can challenge the CCP. So if the CCP has to consider making those wasteful expenditures, it is the TSP which offers a significant reward, even if the risks are high. And once your economy grows and you have the ambitions to be the lord of the universe, your purse strings do loosen.

What actually happens on the ground of course is a question mark, especially given the multiple power centers in TSP. However in the big-picture, I see a lot more conflicts between the US and the different power centers in TSP; I see much lower fundamental disagreements between the CCP and the multiple power centers. That is why I feel that the fissures are likely to follow the path towards the cyclical low if the US cedes.

I also wish that the fissures break the cycle and go parabolic. I am not sure whether that will happen if the US cedes. As I have written earlier, I believe that there is much greater chance of TSP following its destiny if the US calls the shots. As Johann put it, the TSPA now draws more mileage from fighting the US than supporting it. If these dynamics continue something will have to give. I just hope it is not the US' will to fight out the TSPA.

I do not believe that the US arms aid to TSP is a game changer; further the kind of arms the TSP is getting are available from other sources. I have requested a detailed analysis of the arms and the impact the US contribution has had but I have not seen one. I presume that it is a tacit admission that at the end of the day the US arms may alter the tactical process but do not affect the strategic balance.

As RajeshA wrote, it is not just who carries the arms, it is also who pulls the trigger which matters.

[saip]

I don't get this NFU funda. What's to prevent me from using nukes first, despite declaring to the world that I will not use them first? When did the Chinese ever honour their own guarantees anyway?

AFAIK Indian NFU also applies only to non-nuclear nations. Notice that Pakistan and China do not belong to that category.

How does that work? So we will only nuke non-nuclear states only if they borrow some nukes from others and use them against us, is that it?

[ramana]

A-Gupta, KS garu said many times that Indo-Pak nukes is not a two person game and its in the P-5 interest to ensure that TSP does not cross the defacto moratarium on non-use of weapons since WWII.
Your link to Powell advise to Mushy is one such example.

[Dipanker]

How does that work? So we will only nuke non-nuclear states only if they borrow some nukes from others and use them against us, is that it?

I will have to say that you are thinking on the right line!

[CRamS]

A-Gupta, KS garu said many times that Indo-Pak nukes is not a two person game and its in the P-5 interest to ensure that TSP does not cross the defacto moratarium on non-use of weapons since WWII.
Your link to Powell advise to Mushy is one such example.

Boss, just asking, why is it in the interest of P-5 to prevent TSP from nuking and annhilating India, especially when they control TSP?

[ramana]

CRS, Just think it over why would the P-5 want to stop TSP from nuking India? If you want we can explore this in the KS garu Tribute thread.

[Chinmayanand]

'CIA spy' Davis was passing nuke tech to Al Qaeda?

Double murder-accused US official Raymond Davis has been found in possession of top-secret Central Intelligence Agency documents, which point to him or the feared American Task Force 373 (TF373) operating in the region, providing Al Qaeda [ Images ] terrorists with "nuclear fissile material" and "biological agents," according to a report.

Russia's [ Images ] Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) is warning that the situation on the sub-continent has turned "grave" as it appears that open warfare is about to break out between Pakistan and the United States, The European Union Times reports.

The SVR warned in its report that the apprehension of 36-year-old Davis, who shot dead two Pakistani men in Lahore [ Images ] last month, had fuelled this crisis.

According to the report, the combat skills exhibited by Davis, along with documentation taken from him after his arrest, prove that he is a member of US' TF373 black operations unit currently operating in the Afghan War Theatre and Pakistan's tribal areas, the paper said.

While the US insists that Davis is one of their diplomats, and the two men he killed were robbers, Pakistan says that the duo were ISI agents sent to follow him after it was discovered that he had been making contact with Al Qaeda, after his cell phone was tracked to the Waziristan tribal area bordering Afghanistan, the paper said.

The most ominous point in this SVR report is "Pakistan's ISI stating that top-secret CIA documents found in Davis's possession point to his, and/or TF373, providing to al Qaeda terrorists "nuclear fissile material" and "biological agents", which they claim are to be used against the United States itself in order to ignite an all-out war in order to re-establish the West's hegemony over a global economy that is warned is just months away from collapse," the paper added

[CRamS]

CRS, Just think it over why would the P-5 want to stop TSP from nuking India? If you want we can explore this in the KS garu Tribute thread.

I cannot seem to locate it, but I do distinctly recall that there was commentary on rediff soon after 26/11 when TSP was going bersek, and India backed off, by a CIA operative who said that there is no way US will allow TSP to launch nukes, and if TSP is on the threshold of doing so, US will step in and take them out (I am of course paraphrasing). But in the equal equal breath, he was blaming India for TSP terrorism, why India needs to talk Kashmir etc etc. At the end of reading the piece, it was not clear if he was really sympathetic to India which was the victim of an act of war, or TSP, the pepetrator of that massive crime.

So my underlying thesis remains: TSP nukes are a pressure point on India used by US-led P-5 to cap, and eventually roll back India's nukes. Whatever chimpanada and US disagree on, they are in cahoots when it comes to militarily castrating India.

[RamaY]

Dr K Subrahmanyam: No, we tried our best. After all, when the Soviets moved into Afghanistan, which was a result of the provocation by the Pakistanis and the Americans, Indira Gandhi sent special envoys to Zia-ul-Haq—Swaran Singh went there, then Narasimha Rao went there. We tried our best to reassure the Pakistanis. But they weren’t looking for reassurance. They wanted to become a nuclear weapon power, which is the price the Americans had to pay in order to get Pakistani support. They had to look away from the Chinese arm in that. And once the Pakistanis got nuclear weapons, they didn’t want to just drop it on anybody, which is what the western strategists talk about. The Pakistanis got the derivative of nuclear weapons, which was terrorism. And they are using the derivative terrorism not only against US but against the US, UK and Europe.

[ramdas]

CRamSji,

We indeed have to keep in mind this possibility about TSP nukes being a pressure point. This also tallys with the sudden reports that TSP has more nukes, etc. Tallys with NPAs revising our stockpile estimates downwards.

There is a distinct possibility that the TSP facilities are a shell with the real maal being P-5 maal. The estimates for TSP are upped so as to try a "You are carrying a donkey and not a goat" trick like the thieves did to the brahman in the panchatantra tale.

So long as MMS is around, there is an outside chance they could achieve something. They could not roll things back even when Morarji Desai the anti-nuke activist was around. MMS has at most 3 more yrs....probably less. Still the probability of their pulling off something is low. But we must be on guard

[vijayk]

Pakistan intelligence confirms Davis is CIA guy

I wonder what would be Ombaba's reaction if some idiot in Puke land takes law into his own hands and harms this guy. Will he be advised by Kerry et al to increase the aid or will they dare to do something severe against the Pukes?

[Dipanker]

CRS, Just think it over why would the P-5 want to stop TSP from nuking India? If you want we can explore this in the KS garu Tribute thread.

I cannot seem to locate it, but I do distinctly recall that there was commentary on rediff soon after 26/11 when TSP was going bersek, and India backed off, by a CIA operative who said that there is no way US will allow TSP to launch nukes, and if TSP is on the threshold of doing so, US will step in and take them out (I am of course paraphrasing). But in the equal equal breath, he was blaming India for TSP terrorism, why India needs to talk Kashmir etc etc. At the end of reading the piece, it was not clear if he was really sympathetic to India which was the victim of an act of war, or TSP, the pepetrator of that massive crime.

So my underlying thesis remains: TSP nukes are a pressure point on India used by US-led P-5 to cap, and eventually roll back India's nukes. Whatever chimpanada and US disagree on, they are in cahoots when it comes to militarily castrating India.

If West could not stop India between 1974 - 1998 period despite all its shenanigans, West can't do it now. What West has been trying to do is well known to Indians. Now it past time, that train left the station a long time ago.

Anyway OT, this discussion may be moved to appropriate thread.