Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 30, 2011

[shiv]

Delhi test for Pak’s young lady minister
http://telegraphindia.com/1110627/jsp/f ... 165283.jsp

The ignorance of the media bursts through. This broad will be the mouthpiece of the army with no independent thought.

[CRamS]

So she is an admirer of MMS and vice versa. I sense a combined Paki/US sinister strategy developing here. They are really convinced that MMS will deliver the goods, starting with Kashmir. And so far MMS has not disappointed, his not only sweeping 26/11 under the rug, but shaming India and making it look like a self-loathing coward by bringing in Samjotha as the equivalent of 26/11.

What could very well unfold is heaping excessive praise on MMS, perhpahs even speculating his candidature for nobel piss, and more sinister of all, trying to drive a wedge between him and other Indian leaders based on his Sikh heritage. A narrative which says, Sikhs, Muslims, Christians, and even "lower caste" Hindus are all for reapproachement with TSP, but "upper caste" Hindus including Brahmnins are thwarting MMS's grandiose peace plan to bring prospertity to a billions of poverty stricken "South Asians". Imagine something like this on the front pages of the NYT or WP or Economist or CNN/BBC etc. It will truly test India's unity and ability to stand up against such machinations. But I won't hold my breath. Bakara & Sagarika can be counted on to hold a town meeting to push this POV.

[SSridhar]

Nehru was bitten by the socialist bug in the late 20s, strangely when he was in Europe. In the 1931 Congress Conference, he did actually pass a resolution that key sectors like Railways, Shipping, Large and heavy industries etc. would be under State control. he wanted rapid industrialization because he felt that was the way for India to maintain neutrality with respect to the two power blocks and also get the Indians out of grinding poverty. As early as 1938, a National Planning Commission was formed under Nehru's chairmanship and policies were discussed (mostly only by the Congress members) and decisions were arrived at though WW II interrupted the process. One may find fault with Nehru's approach but he and the INC had an approach. The Muslim League never gave a thought to such weighty issues. All its efforts were spent on creating a paranoia in the minds of the Muslims in India and subverting any attempts by the INC at good governance or achieving Independence. This trait was carried forward by the ML leaders into their new State. Added to that was the political instability and large-scale religious rioting and posturing in the country for 11 years when over a dozen Prime Ministers assumed office. Jinnah's arrogant assumption that the US needed Pakistan more than vice-versa became an immutable mantra and unsurprisingly has remained so up until now. I am giving below some statistics to compare India and Pakistan during the 60s and the 70s (I really hate to do this). These are GNP figures (in current USD) from World Bank sources

Code: Select all

Pakistan                                        India
1962 	$4,376,788,000.00                    1962 	$34,435,090,000.00       7.87 Times             
1963 	$4,770,640,000.00                    1963 	$38,227,850,000.00       8.08
1964 	$5,191,198,000.00                    1964 	$44,034,740,000.00       8.47
1965 	$5,909,694,000.00                    1965 	$46,810,440,000.00       7.92
1966 	$6,603,830,000.00                    1966 	$49,292,080,000.00       7.46
1967 	$7,313,858,000.00                    1967 	$54,327,440,000.00       7.42
1968 	$8,204,006,000.00                    1968 	$53,236,170,000.00       6.49
1969 	$9,115,272,000.00                    1969 	$58,429,900,000.00       6.41
1970 	$10,332,790,000.00                   1970 	$62,925,600,000.00       6.09
1971 	$10,841,840,000.00                   1971 	$66,532,720,000.00       6.13
1972 	$10,800,020,000.00                   1972 	$70,834,190,000.00       6.59
1973 	$9,823,848,000.00                    1973 	$85,066,090,000.00       8.66
1974 	$9,966,438,000.00                    1974 	$101,700,600,000.00     10.20
1975 	$10,709,460,000.00                   1975 	$117,177,600,000.00     10.94
1976 	$13,082,270,000.00                   1976 	$113,547,000,000.00      8.68
1977 	$15,449,760,000.00                   1977 	$119,205,800,000.00      7.71
1978 	$19,160,890,000.00                   1978 	$136,115,300,000.00      7.10
1979 	$22,486,350,000.00                   1979 	$150,312,400,000.00      6.68
1980 	$27,481,370,000.00                   1980 	$186,003,100,000.00      6.76

Another measure has been the Composite Index of National Capability (CINC) which is based on six parameters (demographic (National and Urban Population), production of Iron and Steel, military strength and expenditure, and energy consumption). This was uniformly around 5 times for India over Pakistan, going up above that value between 1962 and 1966. But, in the period between 1969-1975, it shot up to almost 7 times in India's favour and has stayed consistently above 6 since then.

[sum]

The ignorance of the media bursts through. This broad will be the mouthpiece of the army with no independent thought.

Shiv avare, isnt that what even the article states?

Many in Pakistan see Khar as too young, and as too close to the military. But sources said this could be an advantage: having her as foreign minister would suit the military as she is not as independent-minded as Qureshi was.

Sources said that with Khar in the saddle, foreign secretary Salman Bashir would be calling the shots. They said Khar relied heavily on Bashir’s experience and military contacts and was happy being the ministry’s public face.

[Stan_Savljevic]

The next FS level talks are in Delhi. Expect some shenanigans a la Musharraf in Agra. That is the coded message.

[somnath]

These are GNP figures (in current USD) from World Bank sources

The numbers are wonky - most likely they have not been normalised for differential exchange rates used...

For example, India's GDP is shown to have grown 20% in 1973, and then again 15% in 1974, and 17% in 1975! The CAGR (1962-80) seems to be in the high teens...And these were firmly "hindu growth rate" years...

As Sanjaya Baru refers, Pak real GDP growth rate outstripped India's by 200 basis points on an average from the '60s to the '80s...

[disha]

700 million over 12 years, thats about 60 million a year...Its a large amount (for those days), but surely not enough to underwrite the entire defence budget...

The big advantage to Pak actually was the other side of aid, economic..Which was the "no questions asked" cash (compared to defence aid, which has to be necessarily used in buying American equipment)...That cash enabled Pak manage its external account, and created some policy flex....

Just to put some mis-information to rest from the above post:

1. 60 Million USD a year in 1954 dollars is roughly equivalent to 500 Million USD in 2010 dollars (inflation of average 3.78 percent in US over 57 years)

2. Over 12 years, that is equivalent to 6 Billion USD. Or getting 100 planes using the Indian MMRCA contract.

3. USD 2 Billion dollars in 1954 then is equivalent to 80 Billion USD now. It is equivalent to underwriting the entire Pakistani economy of an entire year in aid money. Note that most of this aid went to the millitary (remember that bakis were ruled by the millitary for most of their existence).

So in effect, all the aid in 1954 for the next 12 years not just under wrote the baki economy, but also their *entire* defence budget.

[Theo_Fidel]

This entire SoKo economy thing is a complete myth. I think it was one of the TSP rags itself that revealed that all it was a inter governmental Tea session that was never repeated. This particular myth started in the late 90's. There is no record of it mentioned earlier. Ayub himself never mentioned it despite being the foremost braggart. It is the classic muslim tactic of taking credit for the hard work of others. There is entire bit of revisionism going on at the moment with muslim 'academics' trying to take all the credit for the western enlightenment/renaissance and even the industrial revolution. The point is entirely lost on them that it does not matter who knew what when, but what they then did with the knowledge.

Other silly myths.
- PIA was #1 airline of the time, based entirely on some adverts and their self image of costumed air hostesses.
- Pak military ran the entire Middle East defense forces. Based entirely on the fact that PAK pilots trained some Middle East pilots on American planes because they were much cheaper.
- Habib building was tallest in Asia in 1960!

[disha]

But Pakistan's defence expenditure was completely underwritten by the US at this time while Pakistan was held up as a great model to follow despite not really doing the stuff they had to do.

Another of those urban legends...Pakistan received very substantial amounts of US money - but nowhere near underwriting the entire defence budgets...More so after the '65 war....

An account here..
http://www.newsweek.com/2009/10/21/abou ... lions.html

Since sir you are uber comprehension man, can you please comprehend the following:

1. Giving 500 million USD a year for pure millitary purposes for next 12 years (today)
2. Giving 8 billion USD a year for next 12 years to the millitary ruling the country

To me, that is underwriting several small countries entire economy!

[Lalmohan]

Guardian: Pakistan expels British trainers of anti-Taliban soldiers

18 'trainers' who worked with the FC have been sent home. it seems about 120 US advisors working with the FC have also gone. TSPA is focusing on stripping away support for the FC

given that the FC is largely pashtun... is this the forerunner of the Pashtun-Pakjabi war?

[shiv]

The ignorance of the media bursts through. This broad will be the mouthpiece of the army with no independent thought.

Shiv avare, isnt that what even the article states?

Many in Pakistan see Khar as too young, and as too close to the military. But sources said this could be an advantage: having her as foreign minister would suit the military as she is not as independent-minded as Qureshi was.

Sources said that with Khar in the saddle, foreign secretary Salman Bashir would be calling the shots. They said Khar relied heavily on Bashir’s experience and military contacts and was happy being the ministry’s public face.

The ignorance of the media is in projecting this broad as if she matters. She does not matter. The only good thing about that is that all sessions will be pure chai biskoot but on the downside the woman will talk crap but the media will love her and quote her and we will suffer heartburn. Buy Pepto Bismol shares now. For Indians try Pantodac.

[A_Gupta]

This is the kind of figure that is really relevant "The gross domestic product (GDP) in constant prices increased an average of 5.3 percent per year between 1950 and 1993, roughly 2 percent per year faster than population growth." (supposedly true for Pakistan).

Let us remember that West Pakistan had 33.8 million people in 1951, and India 361.1 million. Today India has 1,210.2 million and Pakistan is rumored to have 187.3 million people (as per the CIA World Fact Book). I.e., the population ratio has fallen from 10.7 to 6.46. So, e.g., suppose India and Pakistan started at the same point, and grew equally per person, the Indian economy/Pakistan economy ratio would be continuously shrinking.

PS: To put it another way, on the average if India's GDP grew at 5.1% per year, and India's population grew at 2.2% per year, while Pakistan's GDP grew at 5.3% per year and population grew at 3.3% per year, Indians end up being better off. This kind of statistic Pak real GDP growth rate outstripped India's by 200 basis points on an average from the '60s to the '80s... can be rather misleading.

[shiv]

http://www.paf.gov.pk/history.html

Until mid-1950s PAF’s fighter force comprised nearly 100 Hawker Furies and a dwindling number of Tempests.

This is a Hawker Fury


In 4 years from 1956 to 1960 Pakistan's Air Force was completely replaced with new aircraft and they had a larger air force than they started with. They also had the first Supersonic aircraft in the subcontinent. They got F-86 Sabres, T-33 trainers, C-130 transports, F-104 Starfighters with Sidewinder missiles, and B-57 bombers.

[somnath]

Since sir you are uber comprehension man, can you please comprehend the following:

1. Giving 500 million USD a year for pure millitary purposes for next 12 years (today)
2. Giving 8 billion USD a year for next 12 years to the millitary ruling the country

To me, that is underwriting several small countries entire economy

As you are singularly incapable of rising beyong petty rudeness (which is usually correlated with lack of interest/ability to learn/listen), I would only point out the "common sense" logic...

1. Take the GDP numbers from SSridhar's post above, say 1962..
2. Calculate defence expenditure from that - typically Pak's is generally estimated to be 5-8% of GDP over the years, say 6.5%..
3. 60 as a % of ~250 = ?

Of course, this is quite silly..US military aid of course was life saving for Pak...Given that, and a number of other factors, they performed better than us for about 2-3 decades.....Ergo, someone taking an economic bet vis a vis India in 1965, or 75 or 80, would find it challenging placing one against them..Its another matter that we ourselves were a very low benchmark then...

Comprehendible?

[somnath]

This is the kind of figure that is really relevant "The gross domestic product (GDP) in constant prices increased an average of 5.3 percent per year between 1950 and 1993, roughly 2 percent per year faster than population growth." (supposedly true for Pakistan).

Let us remember that West Pakistan had 33.8 million people in 1951, and India 361.1 million. Today India has 1,210.2 million and Pakistan is rumored to have 187.3 million people (as per the CIA World Fact Book). I.e., the population ratio has fallen from 10.7 to 6.46. So, e.g., suppose India and Pakistan started at the same point, and grew equally per person, the Indian economy/Pakistan economy ratio would be continuously shrinking.

But we do not grow "equally"..India has outstripped Pak by an average of 300-400 basis points annually over the last 10 years..Adn Pak's population growth has been higher..Hence, India's per capita income has gone ahead of Pak's - from AFAIK 2002-03 onwards, adn now is at least 30-40% higher....

[shiv]

Hmm - I wonder what Pakistan would have been like if the US had not given any aid at all? What would the India-Pakistan ratios look like?

[A_Gupta]

^^^ Exactly. The 200 basis points by which Pakistan outgrew India during the 60s-80s has to be looked at in the context of higher population growth rate.

[Prem]

Why is it, that despite their close ties to the US, Pakistan never developed any South Korean type companies like Samsung, Lucky Goldstar, Hyundai or Dawoo, or even anything comparable to what India has presently, the Tatas, Ambanis, Birlas etcDilbu is correct. Another reason could be, to use an old saying, the US never taught them to fish, it simply supplied them fish.

Pakistani failure in this regard ought to be seen from social, cultural, religious angle. Values are inherrent and cant be infused from outside.Religon onlee and not economic or human welfare occupy Paki mind. Lesson for others is that Uncle values no values but servitude.

[A_Gupta]

Hmm - I wonder what Pakistan would have been like if the US had not given any aid at all? What would the India-Pakistan ratios look like?

Counterfactual history is always tough - Pakistan would have learned it has to earn its living. Instead of relying till 1971 on exports from East Pakistan as its main source of foreign exchange (apart from US aid), it might have tried actually industrializing.

[somnath]

^^^ Exactly. The 200 basis points by which Pakistan outgrew India during the 60s-80s has to be looked at in the context of higher population growth rate.

On per capita terms, I think they would still have been better off...dont think their population growth rate was higher by >200 basis points....

[shiv]

Why is it, that despite their close ties to the US, Pakistan never developed any South Korean type companies like Samsung, Lucky Goldstar, Hyundai or Dawoo, or even anything comparable to what India has presently, the Tatas, Ambanis, Birlas etcDilbu is correct. Another reason could be, to use an old saying, the US never taught them to fish, it simply supplied them fish.

Hey - they make footballs and mascara. Ever see Samsung or LG making those?

[somnath]

Hmm - I wonder what Pakistan would have been like if the US had not given any aid at all? What would the India-Pakistan ratios look like?

Counterfactual history is always tough - Pakistan would have learned it has to earn its living. Instead of relying till 1971 on exports from East Pakistan as its main source of foreign exchange (apart from US aid), it might have tried actually industrializing.

The bolded part is true...Howver, the East Pak business is a bit of a mixed bag, regardless of the propaganda....While jute from BD was a big source of forex, BD also screwed up all macro indicators of Pak - GDP growth, population growth, HDI the works - it was the basket case in classical sense...

[g.sarkar]

deleted.

[shiv]

Why are we feeding the troll by discussing India here?

[milindc]

^^^^ Seriously, lets not derail this important thread with uber-comprehension debate

[Varoon Shekhar]

"Two, Pakistan never completed the process...they had a bunch of favourable circumstances and policies - performed well for a time..And outperformed us by some distance."

It would be diffilcult, if not impossible, to believe that this advantage had to do with capability, even allowing for India's relative backwardness then. Simply put, is it safe to say that the sectors Pakistan was involved in, did very well in those years( textiles, leather, agriculture?). India from the beginning, has always had more capablility, qualitatively and quantitatively( or is this inaccurate as far as the 50's and 60's are concerned?). But is the idea that the few things Pakistan did, they did very well, enough to have a slight growth advantage.

[Patni]

Pakistani Taliban splits, top commander shot dead

The dreaded Pakistani Taliban [ Images ] has split over the issue of suicide bombing and the first casualty seems to have been a senior terrorist commander, known for training and deploying over 1,000 suicide bombers, who was shot dead on Monday in the restive North Waziristan.


Fazal Saeed Haqqani, a Taliban commander in Pakistan's volatile tribal belt has broken away from the militant outfit to form his own group as he is opposed to suicide attacks on mosques and civilians.

Haqqani, operating in the Kurram tribal region, separated from the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan and formed the Tehrik-e-Taliban Islami, Geo News channel reported. Haqqani told the media that he had taken this step to protest suicide attacks on mosques and civilians.

Incidentally, hours after the reports of the split emerged, unidentified gunmen in a car with tinted windows opened fire at commander Shakirullah Shakir, who helped train and deploy over 1,000 suicide bombers in the restive North Waziristan tribal region.

Shakir was riding a motorcycle near Miranshah, the main town in North Waziristan Agency, when the attack happened, officials told the media.

Shakir was a senior commander and spokesman for the Fidayeen-e-Islam faction of the Pakistani Taliban. He once claimed to a newspaper that his group had trained over 1,000 suicide bombers at camps in North Waziristan.

No group claimed responsibility for the killing. North Waziristan and South Waziristan regions are sanctuaries for the Pakistani Taliban and Al Qaeda [ Images ] elements.

Meanwhile, Geo News quoted its sources as saying that Haqqani earlier led TTP fighters in Kurram Agency and had set up training centres in several areas.

In the past, Haqqani's associates kidnapped people and kept them in their training centres. They would then kill their captives or release them after being paid ransom, the channel reported.

Observers said the move by Haqqani could be part of efforts by the government and security forces to engineer split in the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan, which is led by Hakimullah Mehsud.

There was no word from the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan on the development.

[Patni]

US Predators kill 13 in South Waziristan strike

US Predators struck for the first time in a week, in Pakistan's Taliban-controlled tribal agency of South Waziristan today, killing 13 "militants," according to reports from the region.

The remotely-piloted Predators or the more deadly Reapers fired four missiles at a vehicle traveling in the village of Kond Ghalay Pnaga in the Birmal area of South Waziristan. Thirteen "militants" were killed in the strike, according to SAMAA.

The target of the strike is unclear. The strike took place in an area close to the border of North Waziristan, and is used by fighters loyal to Taliban Hafiz Gul Bahadar as well as the Movement of the Taliban in Pakistan.

Also today, in North Waziristan a Taliban commander named Shakirullah Shakir was reported to have been gunned down while riding a motorcycle near Miramshah. Shakir is a spokesman for the Fedayeen-e-Islam, the suicide squad for the Movement of the Taliban in Pakistan. Shakir has claimed that the Fedayeen-e-Islam executed suicide attacks in Lahore in September 2010 and January 2011. Most recently, Shakir boasted that more than 1,000 suicide bombers were training at three camps in the Mir Ali area of North Waziristan.

Today's strike is the first in Pakistan's tribal areas since June 20, when Predators hit a Taliban training camp in the Kurram agency. The US has carried out 11 strikes in Pakistan this month, exceeding the previous monthly high of nine strikes in January. There were 3 strikes in February, seven in March, two in April, and seven in May. The previous four months, from September to December 2010, averaged almost 16 strikes per month (21 in September, 16 in October, 14 in November, and 12 in December).

So far this year, the US has carried out 39 strikes in Pakistan, and is well off the pace of the 117 attacks that took place in 2010. In 2010, the US more than doubled the number of strikes that had occurred in 2009; by late August 2010, the US had exceeded 2009's strike total of 53 with a strike in Kurram. In 2008, the US carried out a total of 36 strikes inside Pakistan.

[A_Gupta]

Supposedly Pakistan will have a census starting this September.
http://www.census.gov.pk/

[putnanja]

They should ponder over the rather contemptuous and intemperate references to India by both Nixon and Kissinger in their dialogues with Maozedung and Chou Enlai in 1971 and understand who tilted where first.

Dont quite blame them...A country high on rhetoric and low on delivery is always subject to such narratives...Their references have changed now!

It would have suited the US in today's context if Pak became soemwhat like India - moderate, econmically buoyant and all that...It isnt..And some of the reasons are bedded in decisions that Pak took in the '50s and more crucially, the '80s...But then, thats just wistful "what might have been"!

Wow, can't believe the bolded line, given the circumstances under which those comments were made, and when pakis were butchering bangladeshis!

[Virupaksha]

Supposedly Pakistan will have a census starting this September.
http://www.census.gov.pk/

hellulujah, we will get a correct Pakistan population and gdp count next year



and pigs will fly, mahdis will arrive and so on......

[Stan_Savljevic]

Wow, can't believe the bolded line, given the circumstances under which those comments were made, and when pakis were butchering bangladeshis!

And what we now know (thanks to one PV Rao) as to what Nixon and the whole Senate knew thanks to one, Ted Kennedy.

[UBanerjee]

These are GNP figures (in current USD) from World Bank sources

The CAGR (1962-80) seems to be in the high teens...And these were firmly "hindu growth rate" years...

Let's stop using this term please. I prefer the 400% more accurate "socialist growth rate"

[Hari Seldon]

OK. Rumor is that the US is using Indian intel inputs also in its drone strike program. The packees have always suspected this, of course, and routinely made noises about it during gubo sessions in private. High time India tried testing some of its own drones over poki territory, IMVHO.

[UBanerjee]

^^^ Exactly. The 200 basis points by which Pakistan outgrew India during the 60s-80s has to be looked at in the context of higher population growth rate.

Well, economic growth is economic growth, even if partially achieved simply by fertility. We take advantage of this ourselves.

[A_Gupta]

Hamid Mir writes - unfortunately in Urdu - about the "Mass murder by Pakistan Army in Mohmand"
http://criticalppp.com/archives/52478

[Sai.U]

From the new Economic Survey.
http://www.finance.gov.pk/survey_1011.html

Pakistan’s per capita real income has risen by 0.7
percent in 2010-11 as against 2.9 percent last year.
Per capita income in dollar term rose from $
1073 last year to $ 1254 in 2010-11, thereby
showing tremendous increase of 16.9 percent.
This is mainly because of stable exchange rate as
well as higher growth in nominal GNP. (Effectively, the 16.9% growth in dollar terms is not "real"... it is nominal.)
Real private consumption rose by 7.0 percent as
against 4.0 percent attained last year. However,
gross fixed capital formation lost its strong growth
momentum and real fixed investment growth
contracted by 0.4 percent as against the
contraction of 6.1 percent in last fiscal year.
The total investment has declined from 22.5
percent of GDP in 2006-07 to 13.4 percent of
GDP in 2010-11. The national savings rate has
decreased to 13.8 percent of GDP in 2010-11 as
against 15.4 percent of GDP last year. Domestic
savings has also declined substantially from 16.3
percent of GDP in 2005-06 to 9.5 percent of GDP
in 2010-11.

[shiv]

It would be diffilcult, if not impossible, to believe that this advantage had to do with capability, even allowing for India's relative backwardness then. Simply put, is it safe to say that the sectors Pakistan was involved in, did very well in those years( textiles, leather, agriculture?). India from the beginning, has always had more capablility, qualitatively and quantitatively( or is this inaccurate as far as the 50's and 60's are concerned?). But is the idea that the few things Pakistan did, they did very well, enough to have a slight growth advantage.

I think things went a little beyond Pakistan "doing well" in the sectors they were involved with. Basically Pakistan hid and ignored its poverty and illiteracy behind a wall of educated English speaking elites. The poverty was there. The illiteracy was there. If you went down on the ground and measured the "levels" both were similar to India's figures. But the negative attention was received by India. I am not complaining. The "negative attention" was because India followed a deliberate policy of exposing that which was bad and trying to address it as a matter of policy rather than sugar coating it and pretending that there was no problem or that Islam would automatically take care of all that was inconvenient.

Pakistani leaders wised up very quickly after 1947 and plunged headlong into the "western bloc" deliberately. And the US fell hook line and sinker for this "great new hope". The media swallowed and welcomed Ayub Khan's assertion that the people of the subcontinent are not ready for democracy. Those were sweet words for a Britain smarting from having lost the empire. How could these bloody upstarts have democracy? Like us? India was the basket case. Pakistan was led by honest realistic people. The West saw in Pakistan what they wanted to see in newly independent nations - a basically inferior people who would look up to the west as an ideal and understand their own limitations. The country that tried to address and improve its poor human condition was criticised as a basket case that could not change. The country that dismissed its poverty as part of the game was praised as realistic and forward looking.

If India had spent its own money to acquire armed forces that were proportionately larger than Pakistan's based on the population, India too would not have had much left over for development. It astounds me that Pakistan, having received a whole new army and air force for free still frittered away its "superior economy" on even more arms and luxuries for the wealthy rather than addressing the poverty and illiteracy that were of such huge proportions in 1947 that it would not be fully correctable for many decades anywhere in the subcontinent. Of course in the "world order" such correction is not sought. What is sought is a system of inequality where some nations (along with their people) stay down socially and economically while other nations benefit.

"Keep both sides fighting and indebted to us" is a policy that has been followed for centuries by teh colonial states and now the USA. It just has a different name now - its called "holding the ring" or "balance of power". Note how Pakistanis love the term balance of power.

[shiv]

Pakistani Taliban splits, top commander shot dead

Is this an ISI success?

[Ambar]

OK. Rumor is that the US is using Indian intel inputs also in its drone strike program. The packees have always suspected this, of course, and routinely made noises about it during gubo sessions in private. High time India tried testing some of its own drones over poki territory, IMVHO.

Why would they need Indian intel in S.Waziristan ? ( if at all there is any such thing as Indian humint left in Pakistan). Most of the targeted ones so far have been "bad taliban". Pakis would have gladly given co-ordinates and intelligence of those locations. The big guns of talibs have long been shifted to Quetta,Karachi and Pindi.