Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 2011

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby shiv » 14 Jan 2012 09:08

The Spirit of the 1965 war
http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDe ... 604&Cat=13

India launched her ignominious, undeclared and blatant aggression on Pakistan on 6th September, 1965. The invaders appeared to have been under the impression that they would not meet much opposition in securing their objectives, including the city of Lahore.

<snip>

Completely unruffled, Pakistani people accepted India’s challenge defiantly, stood resolutely behind their armed forces and thus were a source of strength and inspiration for them. During the war hardly any social crime was reported from any part of the country. Similarly, the prices of the essential commodities came down. Thousands of people rushed to blood bank centres to donate blood for war wounded. It became difficult for the blood bank centres to store and preserves such large quantities of blood. The National Defence Fund was opened on the demand of public, who donated large sums of money within few weeks. The people of Lahore instead of running away from the city went to Wagah border with cooked food for the soldiers and hordes of displaced people who vacated the border areas. They also helped out the jawans by providing buckets of water to help the gunners to keep canon barrel cool.

Pakistani artists, poets, composers, painters and newspapermen, made an inspiring contribution to the war effort in their own way to keep the national morale at its peak. Radio Pakistan broadcasted patriotic songs in the voice of Noor Jehan, which prompted every soldier to fight harder.

<snip>

India was unable to withstand the patriotism of Pakistani forces and people and signed a ceasefire agreement with Pakistan after fighting only for 22 days. When the ceasefire came, Pakistan was in occupation of more Indian territory than the enemy had captured in Pakistan. Even Time magazine reported that “despite claims from both sides the awkward fact is Khem Karan is under Pakistan administration.” The Globe and Mail, Canada of 27th September said, “The Pakistanis still hold Khem Karan and an area around its six miles wide that extends three miles deep into Indian territory. This is apparently why civil servants in New Delhi were never told the story. They did not want to admit that Pakistan had gained a foothold in the Indian Punjab.”

India suffered more casualties, the ratio between the two sides was, 1:3 against India. Pakistan captured more prisoners than India. In the Untold Story, Lieutenant General BM Kaul stated, “All I will say here is that we failed to defeat Pakistan — a smaller power than us — which we should have done.”

Pakistani nation will never forget the Shuhada (Martyrs) of 1965 who gave their lives while defending the motherland. There is need that Pakistani nation should exhibit the spirit of 6th September, 1965 and make the country a progressive, enlightened and democratic Islamic welfare state, as envisaged by its founding fathers.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24173
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby SSridhar » 14 Jan 2012 09:29

Abhijit wrote:A thought occurred to me recently. One of the byproducts (possibly intended by the Chankian part of the South Block, if it does exist) of India's continued bhaichara with the pakis despite the gravest of provocations is that the jihadi side has slowly shifted its Islamic hate towards the Unkil more than the cowardly Yindoos. If India had maintained a continuous hostile posture, the jihadis would have had less reason to turn their guns against Unkil and PA would have easily channeled the jihadis energies entirely towards India. So the Chankian calculation would be, If paki jihadis started with absolute and single-minded hatred of India and Yindoos, why not give them a chance to hate somebody else by not doing something that would concentrate their India hatred?

Abhijit, like so many other confusions within Pakistan, there has been this division between Nationalists (aka India-haters) and the Boundaryless Islamists (aka West-haters). These two streams of hatred have existed within Pakistan from Day One. Both reinforced each other. One was regional and the other which was against the West (read US, the leader of the West and the largest stakeholder in Pakistan until recently). Since there was no particular reason to go so forcefully against the West until 2001 (notwithstanding the Israel issue or the rumours of occupation of Makkah by the US in 1979), and since the immediate focus was India, the anti-West forces were mostly collaborating with the regional forces. Until 1971, the predominant thinking amongst the Pakistanis (and their American backers) was that India could be broken by them. Things changed dramatically in December, 1971 and the anti-West forces realized that they would need the West's support to conquer India. The anti-West forces remained largely subdued and much more so after Afghan jihad started in 1979. In the earlier period, ZAB tried to turn the country against the West (though on political grounds) but his (in)equation with the the ulema meant he could not enlist their support in that project. But, he could succeed in developing friendship with the Chinese though.

The Idea of Pakistan itself has morphed so much that today it is enmeshed in global jihad. Of course, the base still remains hatred for the kafir Indians and to that extent one can call the non-bearded jihadists such as Aslam Beg, Hamid Gul, Imran Khan, Nawaz Sharif et al as nationalists, but it does not end there. What started off as 'thousand cuts to bleed India' would not merely stop with India, just as jihad against the USSR did not stop there but has engulfed the whole world today. The nationalist Gul and the anti-West Osama became close friends, for example. When questioned at the end of Afghan jihad in c. 1989 about the fate of foreign mujahideen, Gul reportedly said, "If the West can have a NATO, why not a multi-ethnic mujahideen force for Muslims ?" Of course, Gul introduced these multi-ethnic wahhabi mercenaries into J&K after 1989, but there is reason to believe that his plans also extended to the US. Ms. Bhutto has admitted that during her tenure top Pakistani generals wanted to fight the Americans. The two top Generals during her regime were Aslam Beg and Hamid Gul and one can surmise she was indeed referring to them. The duo's hatred of the USA equals their hatred for India. Once the US becomes such a visceral enemy of a powerful Islamist with deep connections and who had been in the spy-business for some time, it strains one's credulity to suppose that they were mere nationalists and are not involved in wider operations. Indeed that is the beauty of Islamism as it quickly transcends borders and narrow regional considerations.

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby shiv » 14 Jan 2012 09:31

I believe that some serious misconceptions exist regarding Pakistan. The US press IMO is partly responsible for making English speaking Indians imagine that there is a separate set of "jihadis" in Pakistan opposed to the Pakistani army.

This is utter nonsense. The Pakistan army is the biggest jihadi group that keeps non-uniformed jihadis as its allies so thatthey can deny any connection with acts of war. When these jihadis allies of the Pakistan army attacked India, the Pakistan army denied any connection. At least India did not have any illusions about who was responsible

When the same jihadi allies of the Pakistan army attacked the USA it took a decade for the US to have a "duh" moment to understand that the jihadis and Paki army are on the same side. So it is gross misinterpretation of reality to even say that the "jihadis are against the Pakistan army" They are not. They are mostly on the same side.

Now here is the rub that a lot Indians who imbibe the US viewpoint find very hard to swallow:

When the jihadi allies of the Pakistan army attacked India, the US did not give a damn and continued to support the Pakistan army. The US found it convenient to think that the Pakistan army and jihadis were two different entities exactly like JohneeG has stated in his post

But the US gradually discovered that missing bits of its own ass were being chewed off by jihadis. They asked the Pakistan army for help. The Pakistan army tried to play it both ways by pretending to say "yes massa" to the US and "Allah ho Akbar" to their jihadi friends. When the US discovered this they decided finally to stop or reduce aid to the Paki army. Now the Paki army has got into an internal squabble where it is continuing to fight tribes who were always against the Paki army - which the Paki army has been fighting since the 1950s. But they are no longer getting US arms and money to do that.

Pakistani internal unity was forcefully held together by the Pakistan army and that meant putting politicians down whenever there was a real or cooked up "national threat". The national threat was always india, until bin Laden was caught by a nigger president when gora aadmi had been sucking Paki d*ck for decades.

What the Pakistan army is now facing is a civil unrest at a time when the army is at its weakest. So the internal fight in Pakistan is not between Army and Jihadis. It is between army and civilians. That rift has always been closed using the "India threat" because Army and civilians hate India. Normally the army responds to civil-military disputes with a coup. It is more difficult this time.

The role India may or may not have played in this would require another 5000 words to describe. Maybe some other time. But I think the record needs to be set right.
Last edited by shiv on 14 Jan 2012 09:35, edited 1 time in total.

jash_p
BRFite
Posts: 284
Joined: 03 Feb 2008 05:56

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby jash_p » 14 Jan 2012 09:33

I think Zardari will resign in name of bad health to and desolved parlament , order new election as compromise

johneeG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3473
Joined: 01 Jun 2009 12:47

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby johneeG » 14 Jan 2012 09:36

shiv wrote:JohneeG - do you believe that the "jihadis" are different from the Pakistan army? Would you be able to name a few jihadi groups who are going against the Pakistan army? I would classify the Lashkar e Toiba as a jihadi group. The LeT is not going against the Pakistan army. It is a branch of the Pakistan army. The Haqqani faction and the Quetta shura are all allies of the Pakistan army. Hamid Gul a known advisor and sympathiser of the "jihadi" groups, is on record saying that "the jihadis" would join together and support the Pakistan army of India were to attack. The original YouTube videos exist and are in Urdu, but here is an excerpt - that has subtitles.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cw3VqBt7aKA


I searched my post to see where I have said(or came across as saying), "jihadis are different from PA".

I found the following part that can be seen as saying so:
The answer, to me, seems to be that they have a more important, and urgent threat at home in the form of US and a PA, that carries out US' directives.


What I meant by above is that the Jihadis would be unhappy with PA because it is seen as being under the influence of US.

Now, are Jihadis different from PA? We know that Jihadis are nurtured, trained and sponsored by PA. But whether the Jihadis are still in control of PA or not is open to speculation. Also, if Jihadis are in the control of PA, what is the exact nature of control? One really does not know the ground situation and can assume it either way.

Hamid Gul's statement that you mentioned got me thinking: Why make a statement if its a obvious? i.e. Why would Hamid Gul be forced to make a public statement if all Jihadis are under the thumb of PA? And what would PA/Jihadis gain by making such statements?

I think the statement was made after 26/11(correct me if I am wrong) when there were still apprehensions that India may retaliate. That was also a time when PA was going after the paki taliban(Tehriki-Taliban/TTP). The statement seemed more aimed at creating such a camaraderie by war-mongering than actual presentation of the situation.

There are also reports/claims that PA scuttled Jihadi groups attempts to make deal with US independent of PA.

Even if Jihadis are in complete control of PA, they would not be very happy with what is seen as PA's kowtowing to US.

However, I never meant to say that Jihadis are different from PA in my post. Infact, when I said Jihadis, I included the radical elements within PA. When I said 'PA', I meant the leadership of PA. And leadership of PA is its COAS.

To me, Jihadi infighting includes the growing rifts within PA due to growing radicalization.

rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby rajanb » 14 Jan 2012 09:40

Nandu wrote:
rajanb wrote:
One way the civvies can strike back is to petition the SC to investigate the death of the journalist Saleem Shahzad? I think the civvies have enough to create a stand off, if they have the guts.

I don't see how this can possibly work as a counter measure by Zardari and Co. SC is clearly allied with the army and will not do anything to help Zardari out.


The Saleem Shahzad commission findings say we can't find out who did it but anyone could have done it. And the whole issue has been buried by the coup/no coup predictions.

There was a statement that his murder was sanctioned by Kiya-nahin's office and the ISI were involved. (by Adm. Mike Mullen?)

Putting the ball into the Supreme Court would then do the following which can be used for propaganda purposes, by the civvies:

Worldwide media would lap it up and so would the brave section of the local press. (After all, the Yanquis stand to gain if the civvies stay in power.)

The SC's action or inaction in this matter could be used to or even twisted to point out that the SC is an arm of the TSPA, like the jihadis are, and a reflection on the SC's stance in the current crisis.

rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby rajanb » 14 Jan 2012 09:53

Abhijit wrote:A thought occurred to me recently. One of the byproducts (possibly intended by the Chankian part of the South Block, if it does exist) of India's continued bhaichara with the pakis despite the gravest of provocations is that the jihadi side has slowly shifted its Islamic hate towards the Unkil more than the cowardly Yindoos. If India had maintained a continuous hostile posture, the jihadis would have had less reason to turn their guns against Unkil and PA would have easily channeled the jihadis energies entirely towards India. So the Chankian calculation would be, If paki jihadis started with absolute and single-minded hatred of India and Yindoos, why not give them a chance to hate somebody else by not doing something that would concentrate their India hatred?


Abhijit, well put. I have always believed this.

Unfortunately some posts, repeatedly have pooh-poohed this line of thought. I refuse to let my local political affiliations come in the way of this pov. There are a lot of factors leading to the jihadis seemingly changing their target of hate. Drone attacks, arrest of some "key" elements of the Jihadis to satisfy Massa, we offering a lot of things seeminly on a plate. I have been a strong proponent of our chai biskoot sessions. A few press articles also thinking aloud that in spite of all these sessions nothing moves forward!

The other side of the coin and my belief is that we do a lot of things to make life difficult for the Porkis, and harder for them to regain the 'strategic depth" in Afghanistan which they once enjoyed. Alas, such details are not for the public fora.

The only dal mein kala is the Yanquis, particularly those on Capitol Hill, some of whom seem to be sitting on their brains, being continuously taken in by the Porkis, even to the detriment of their own brave soldiers on the ground. Much to their military's frustration.

Suppiah
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2569
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: -
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby Suppiah » 14 Jan 2012 10:19

shiv wrote: The Pakistan army tried to play it both ways by pretending to say "yes massa" to the US and "Allah ho Akbar" to their jihadi friends.


Perhaps they say massa-allah with each side hearing the 50% they want to hear..

BTW, all this coup talk and empty threats seems to have achieved is push this thread to an early martyrdom...so disappointed.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21175
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby Prem » 14 Jan 2012 10:28

http://www.dawn.com/2012/01/14/haqqani- ... -ijaz.html
Haqqani not alone in authoring memo: Ijaz

NEW YORK: Mansoor Ijaz, the main character in the memo case, is reported to have told his US go-between Gen Jim Jones in a private email that there were three people who “prepared” the now-infamous document, not just former Pakistani ambassador Husain Haqqani, according to a report published in Foreign Policy magazine on Friday. The report contradicts his previous assertion that Haqqani alone authored the memo.
“I personally know two of the three men,” Ijaz wrote to Gen Jones, referring to the three men who allegedly prepared the document. “I believe they are men of honour and integrity, although they have been away from the games played in Islamabad for some time.”In an October 10 Financial Times article where Ijaz revealed the existence of the memo, he wrote that the scheme was devised by “a senior Pakistani diplomat”, who he later alleged was Haqqani.In an interview on Thursday with The Cable, Ijaz confirmed the authenticity of the email he sent to Gen Jones but said its contents did not contradict his various other statements. He said the email was meant as a general overview but didn’t reflect the details of the involvement of the other two men, whom he identified as Jehangir Karamat, who served as chief of army staff and US ambassador under former military dictator Gen Pervez Musharraf, and Mahmud Ali Durrani, a former national security adviser to Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani.“There was only one author of the memo and that was Haqqani, but the way Haqqani presented it to me was that there was a team of people back in Pakistan involved and the two names he gave me were Karamat and Durrani,” Ijaz told The Cable.He said his current understanding was that Karamat and Durrani were involved in some unclear way in the scheme to overhaul Pakistan’s military and intelligence leadership but were not involved in the actual drafting or delivery of the memo.“My impression at the time I wrote the email to Jones was that they had been probably a part of the thinking process about the ideas in the memorandum. They were probably involved at least in thinking through how you execute these things,” Ijaz told The Cable.“They certainly did not have anything to do with the actual drafting of the memorandum or the delivery of the message. Then again, maybe they did, I don’t know. Who the hell knows? What I put down in the email was what Haqqani told me.”
In his written statement to the Supreme Court, Ijaz claims that Karamat and Durrani were names given to him by Haqqani “as people that would be involved in forming the new national security team”, but he did not identify them as being involved in the preparation of the document.“(Haqqani) said there was a like-minded group of people in Islamabad that would be brought on board by ‘the boss’ — a reference I understood to mean President Asif Ali Zardari — as the new national security team once tensions had dissipated.“He mentioned two names I recognised (Jehangir Karamat and Mahmud Durrani) but added that they would be approached once this was all over — a point I took to mean they were unaware of this operation in advance,” Ijaz wrote in his statement.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24173
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby SSridhar » 14 Jan 2012 10:31

rajanb wrote:Putting the ball into the Supreme Court would then do the following which can be used for propaganda purposes, by the civvies:

Worldwide media would lap it up and so would the brave section of the local press. (After all, the Yanquis stand to gain if the civvies stay in power.)

The SC's action or inaction in this matter could be used to or even twisted to point out that the SC is an arm of the TSPA, like the jihadis are, and a reflection on the SC's stance in the current crisis.

rajanb, the SC is out to oust the PPP from power and Zardari from Presidency. In fact, it is more interested in the latter than in the former but because the latter cannot take place without the former, it is gunning for both. From its selective taking up of issues and selective interpretation, its aims are crystal clear. The Registrar of the SC may therefore simply not allow the Syed Saleem Shehzad case to be even listed.

The golden moment to cause hugest embarrassment was immediately after the Abbottabad incident. The PPP acquiesced in the diversionary tactic put out by the PA/ISI of 'US violation of sovereignty' and let them completely off the hook. The PA again used the same tactic in the Memogate as well, this time gunning the President & PPP big time. Today, PPP is so unpopular (most of it not its own fault) that it has no support from the people, from the judiciary and of course the PA. It is just a matter of time.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14734
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby pankajs » 14 Jan 2012 10:31

Drone attacks again
After a gap of nearly two months, American CIA drones have resumed operations in Pakistan and during the past 72 hours, two such attacks in North Waziristan have claimed nine lives. The Thursday raid in Dogga area of NWA claimed five lives, while earlier on Tuesday, a similar attack had killed four innocent civilians. The general understanding was that following the vacation of the Shamsi Airbase and discontinuation of NATO supplies to Afghanistan, drones would never again enter Pakistani airspace. It may be recalled that the American television channel MSNBC aired a report saying that on December 12 last year, Prime Minister Gilani and COAS Gen Kayani resolved, at a meeting, that any further drone attack would be considered an act of aggression. Not only this, the report said that the top civil and military leadership has also decided to shoot down any drone entering into Pakistani airspace. It is strange that no action against these invading planes was taken and not even protested. It gives credence to another US newspaper report that Pakistan has agreed to selective drone strikes. These fresh attacks have once again caused the nation utter disappointment and despair. Does this silence mean that both our civilian and military leadership has been overstating their promises to take action against drone attacks? If our national leadership is convinced that drone attacks are against territorial integrity and national sovereignty why is action not taken to stop them? Why has Pakistan Air Force not been directed to shoot them down? The government must honour its pledges, made with much fanfare. During the suspension of these raids, there has also been a lull in suicide bombing incidents across the country.
The civil and military leadership will have to put their heads together and decide once and for all whether they are going to continue making empty promises to Pakistanis or whether they will finally put their money where their mouth is. People are no longer willing to be hoodwinked about the clarity of the policy on this issue. If there is some renewed understanding with the Americans, that too must be clearly stated, failing which the government may face a strong spate of protest demonstrations. The US too must recognise, that whether or not its drone policy is one it officially recognises, it is having a justifiably negative impact on its perception as a whole in Pakistan. The policy must be suspended immediately and work then begun to improve its image among Pakistanis, who are exhausted by participation in a war, invitation to which was extended by a Hobson's choice to begin with.

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6885
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby habal » 14 Jan 2012 10:32

rajanb wrote:The only dal mein kala is the Yanquis, particularly those on Capitol Hill, some of whom seem to be sitting on their brains, being continuously taken in by the Porkis, even to the detriment of their own brave soldiers on the ground. Much to their military's frustration.


If they listen to their soldiers, then one way or other they will play into India's hands. It's a catch-22 for them, but let's not be too bothered with understanding their self-created problems.

While their entire engagement with Pakistan is at the core dedicated 99% towards containing India, though that is left unsaid.

So they are forced to swallow all manner of humiliation from Pakistan Army while bursting out and hitting out every once in a while to keep up soldier's morale. Against India, they may launch covert ops under Indian Mujahideen cover like 26/11 just out of spite and vengeance so that they can make the Indians feel as helpless as they do.

More I think about it, the more I feel that all the terror attacks against India are games played by the Americans so that India doesn't sit pretty watching them squirm in Afghanistan. They are the only ones to gain from any terror attack in India.

rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby rajanb » 14 Jan 2012 10:40

habal wrote:
rajanb wrote:The only dal mein kala is the Yanquis, particularly those on Capitol Hill, some of whom seem to be sitting on their brains, being continuously taken in by the Porkis, even to the detriment of their own brave soldiers on the ground. Much to their military's frustration.


If they listen to their soldiers, then one way or other they will play into India's hands. It's a catch-22 for them, but let's not be too bothered with understanding their self-created problems.

While their entire engagement with Pakistan is at the core dedicated 99% towards containing India, though that is left unsaid.

So they are forced to swallow all manner of humiliation from Pakistan Army while bursting out and hitting out every once in a while to keep up soldier's morale. Against India, they may launch covert ops under Indian Mujahideen cover like 26/11 just out of spite and vengeance so that they can make the Indians feel as helpless as they do.

More I think about it, the more I feel that all the terror attacks against India are games played by the Americans so that India doesn't sit pretty watching them squirm in Afghanistan. They are the only ones to gain from any terror attack in India.


:shock: Containing us? That is a nice ego stroke. It validates my point that they sit on their brains. In automotive parlance it means they need a rim job. :mrgreen:
Last edited by rajanb on 14 Jan 2012 10:42, edited 1 time in total.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14734
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby pankajs » 14 Jan 2012 10:41

NAB springs into action against NRO beneficiaries
ISLAMABAD - Following the strong admonishment by the Supreme Court, National Accountability Bureau (NAB) has sprung into action on the cases reopened after the scraping of National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) by the apex court.
The government gives in a little

Govt seeks NRO case adjournment
ISLAMABAD - The federal government on Friday filed an application in the Supreme Court for the adjournment of National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) implementation case that will be heard on January 16.
And seeks a little time.

From an earlier post
Pakistan: Is A Judicial Coup in the Offing?
The main player that would determine the future scenario is Pakistan’s Supreme Court, although its actions in the recent past have not been above board. The timing of the crisis ostensibly is the forthcoming senate election scheduled in March, which would allow the PPP to win a majority of seats and thus give it an important say in matters of state till 2015. The Army and other political actors do not want this; hence their willing participation in efforts to topple the government through the judiciary and force an early election.

Let us see if the offer is sufficient to buy them time till March.
Last edited by pankajs on 14 Jan 2012 10:44, edited 1 time in total.

abhijitm
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3679
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 15:02
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby abhijitm » 14 Jan 2012 10:43

No Uranium to pakistan :((
Prime Minister Julia Gillard has reiterated that Australia will not agree to export uranium to Pakistan, which is imploring Canberra to make a similar policy change as done recently for India.

This policy is an exception which recognises the compelling rationale and national interest for a change in relation to India only, Gillard told IANS in an interview.

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6885
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby habal » 14 Jan 2012 10:44

A hostile Pakistan locks India into South Asia and cuts off access from central asia. A hostile Pakistan is thus extremely necessary for containing India from cultivating business links, oil pipelines between west asia and central asia. These are ways countries are kept isolated.

rajanb wrote: :shock: Containing us? That is a nice ego stroke. It validates my point that they sit on their brains. In automotive parlance it means they need a rim job. :mrgreen:

abhijitm
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3679
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 15:02
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby abhijitm » 14 Jan 2012 10:53

New 'act-within-limits' resolution. Kya tamasha hai :D

Code: Select all

http://www.dawn.com/2012/01/14/act-within-limits-resolution-tabled.html

“This house believes that the present democratic dispensation, which is about to complete four years, came into being as a result of great sacrifices rendered by the people of Pakistan.

“This house reiterates the belief of the democratic forces that the future of Pakistan and well being of its people lies in the continuation and strengthening of democratic institutions and constitutionalism for the resolution of national issues, strengthening of the federation and empowering the people of Pakistan.

“This house believes that for the furtherance of democracy and democratic institutions the basic constitutional principle of trichotomy of powers must be fully respected and adhered to and all state institutions must strictly function within the limits imposed on them by the constitution.”

“This house reiterates that sovereignty lies with the people of Pakistan and the parliament is the repository of the collective wisdom of the people.”

“This house endorses and supports the efforts made by the political leadership for strengthening democracy and reposes full confidence and trust in them.”

rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby rajanb » 14 Jan 2012 11:15

^^^ Standard Pollywood screenplay from Porkistun. The sentries attacking their massas and the house.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24173
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby SSridhar » 14 Jan 2012 11:20

abhijitm wrote:http://www.dawn.com/2012/01/14/act-with ... abled.html

“This house reiterates that sovereignty lies with the people of Pakistan


Blasphemous. Sovereignty lies with Allah. The entire National Assembly members have committed shirq by associating partners with Allah.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14734
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby pankajs » 14 Jan 2012 12:02

PM Gilani may quit to ease pressure on President Zardari
LONDON: The Times has disclosed, quoting a Pakistani military official, that the generals would “only step in if asked by the senior most judge in Pakistan.”

The disclosure is included in a report filed by two reporters of The Times, Francis Elliot and Aoun Sahi, who reported that “following the (corps commanders’) meeting, a military official told The Times that the generals would only step in if asked by the most senior judge in Pakistan.”

“There is no chance of a coup in Pakistan right now. The military is not going to allow the PPP to become political martyrs,” the newspaper said. Quoting the military officer, The Times said: “We believe in democracy and the Constitution of the country and we are looking towards the Supreme Court. We will consider helping implement (the) court’s decision if civil authorities fail to implement it.”

These words attributed to the Pakistan Army are the first direct signal that the army generals would follow the orders of the Supreme Court of Pakistan if they were asked to help implement the judgments of the SC under Article 190.

The Times report also made the disclosure quoting “some observers” who predicted that Prime Minister Gilani may be considering to resign as part of a move to deflect the pressure on the president and regain the moral high ground for the government led by President Zardari’s Pakistan People’s Party (PPP).

The newspaper report said President Zardari has also asked Aitzaz Ahsan, a leading lawyer and former ally of his late wife, Benazir Bhutto, to conduct secret negotiations with the court. Aitzaz Ahsan is also being tipped as a possible replacement for Gilani.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14734
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby pankajs » 14 Jan 2012 12:09

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2012\01\14\story_14-1-2012_pg3_1
SECOND EDITORIAL: Senate elections
The announcement of the schedule for holding the Senate elections for 54 seats on March 2 has laid to rest the uncertainty and speculations about these elections being held at all, or in any case before the besieged Pakistan People’s Party (PPP)-led government makes shipwreck.
All other things being equal, an analysis of each political party’s seats in the provincial assemblies suggests the likelihood of the PPP winning a majority of seats in the Upper House where it already has 27. Despite the retirement of five of these members, the PPP expects to secure over 20 seats more owing to its strength in the Sindh, Punjab and Balochistan assemblies. With 40 or more seats in the Senate, the PPP will be the biggest bloc in the Senate till 2015.
There has been a lot of anxiety related to the perception that the PPP might gain a simple majority and have a stronger hand in the Senate even if it fails to form its government at the federal level after the next general elections. Different tactics have been tried to prevent the PPP from gaining this obvious advantage.

g.sarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2652
Joined: 09 Jul 2005 12:22
Location: MERCED, California

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby g.sarkar » 14 Jan 2012 12:51

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/14/world ... wanted=all
As Crisis Festers, Pakistani Government Plans Confidence Vote
By DECLAN WALSH
Published: January 13, 2012
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — "Threatened with prosecution by a hostile judiciary and fearing an intervention by powerful generals, Pakistan’s embattled government turned Friday to its last bastion of strength, the national Parliament, in a bid to stall the momentum of a crisis that threatens to engulf the governing party.
Addressing Parliament, Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani announced that he would ask for a vote Monday on a resolution seeking “full confidence and trust” in his coalition government. It was his latest gambit in a complex power struggle set off by the American raid that killed Osama bin Laden in May.
Pakistan’s fractious politicians must choose between “democracy and dictatorship,” Mr. Gilani said, speaking hours after President Asif Ali Zardari returned from a brief trip to Dubai, in the United Arab Emirates, that reignited rumors of an impending military coup.
Pakistani analysts and Western diplomats believe that the prospects of a coup are receding, for now. But the situation remains volatile as the country’s most powerful figures — senior judges, generals and politicians — engage in a bare-knuckle and unusually public bout of power games in which the United States finds itself sidelined.
At heart, the governing Pakistan Peoples Party and the military, led by Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, are struggling for control of national security policy, including the right to direct the strained relationship with the United States. A strident judiciary and the possibility of elections as early as this summer add complicating factors.
The beginning of the struggle came in the fall, when an American businessman of Pakistani origin, Mansoor Ijaz, made a startling claim: that in the acrid aftermath of the Bin Laden raid on May 2, he had been asked to take a secret letter to the Americans seeking protection for Mr. Zardari’s government from a possible military coup. In exchange, it offered to dismantle part of the country’s powerful spy agency........"
Gautam

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14734
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby pankajs » 14 Jan 2012 13:13

Revealed: PPP-led govt all set to write Swiss letter
LAHORE: After over two years of dilly-dallying on an apex court order to reopen graft cases against President Asif Ali Zardari in Switzerland’s courts, the embattled government has apparently relented.
The government has also agreed to grant a key opposition demand and announce the parliamentary election schedule upon completion of new electoral rolls and finalisation of the makeup of an interim set-up.
Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani is to announce the election schedule as soon as the new voter lists are finalised which, officials say, would take another three months to complete. This means the election would be held in August or September.
The government has proposed that Aitzaz Ahsan {PPP politician} could lead the interim set-up, sources said, adding that most opposition parties have apparently agreed to the choice. However, they decided to meet again to finalise the name of the caretaker prime minister and makeup of an independent election commission.
Sources in the PPP also confirmed to The Express Tribune that the government has decided in principle to write a letter to the Swiss authorities. In the letter, the government would state that, although it believes President Zardari enjoys constitutional immunity, it wrote the letter in the best interest of the country and democracy and not doing so would have jeopardise democracy in Pakistan.

Still early days and we will have to wait for the courts nod but if the above happens.

1. Government survives beyond the crucial "March 2nd" senate elections.
2. Upholds the H&D of the judiciary by appearing to have give in to courts. A little additional give and take may not be out of order.
3. Prevents the Army from taking over. The Army will still have other options including a hard coo.
4. Control the Interim government during elections if things work out as above.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8307
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby Pratyush » 14 Jan 2012 13:26

Since the Pakis are already printing FICNs. The thught that comes to minds is why not let them print genuine ICNs. :P

Why print rupee notes here when Pakistan does it for free?

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24173
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby SSridhar » 14 Jan 2012 13:30

Gilani & Kayani to come face-to-face today

Will Kayani skip the meeting ?

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24173
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby SSridhar » 14 Jan 2012 14:03

Jhujar wrote:General Ashfaq Kayani: vital to the Sino-Pak nexus
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2012\01\14\story_14-1-2012_pg3_6

As the guest of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), General Kayani would normally have had little to do with China’s chief executive except for a brief courtesy call and a photo op. The extended exchange of views bearing practically on all the important aspects of the Pak-China relationship was exceptional and a real show of importance attaching personally to General Kayani.. . . Such unqualified assurances of help and support are normally extended to heads of state and governments rather than to visiting army chiefs.. . . Such an extended exchange of sentiments and notes between a premier and a visiting army chief is certainly out of the ordinary. Premier Wen Jiabao spoke at length of the “complex and evolving regional and global situation” stressing the need for “closer and strengthened coordination” between the two countries. General Kayani for his part assured the Chinese premier of ‘unswervingly’ boosting cooperation with China and ‘firmly’ supporting China’s effort to maintain its ‘core interests’.The Chinese premier expressed his appreciation of the ‘important contribution’ the Pakistan armed forces had made towards boosting China-Pakistan ‘strategic cooperation and partnership’ . . . General Kayani also spent a busy time with the deputy Chief of General Staff General Liang Guanglie on a wide rage of subjects pertaining to bilateral defence cooperation issues.


The above must be interpreted not only in terms of the evolving situation within Pakistan but also in the light of the recently concluded ASEAN meeting, East Asia Summit and the naval facility that the US has opened in Australia. The long-duration meeting between the Army Chief of a country with one of the most powerful persons on this planet is truly unusual. China knows which side of the bread is buttered and is talking directly to the PA as the US has been doing since the 50s. China has been pushed back in ASEAN & East Asia Summit. Its principle of only talking bilaterally with the nations of South China Sea and West Philippine Sea had to be swallowed hard and Wen Jia Bao had to assure of China's peaceful intentions etc. in South China Sea. The strong trilateral convergence of India, Japan and the US as well as the surging strategic collaboration between India and Japan are all matters of grave concern for Beijing. China has few friends in the region today and increasingly a strong alliance against it is under formation. China needs PA strongly on its side. A sense of 1950s deja vu for the PA with China replacing the US.

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7007
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby Anujan » 14 Jan 2012 14:29

Najam sethi had predicted something like this in the latest issue of TFT.

Basically that the government will agree to a half hearted letter. Give in a bit to the court. Come in to an accommodation with the army and everyone walks away with their echandee intact.

Problem is that no player *at this point in time* can conclusively win the standoff and they know it.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14734
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby pankajs » 14 Jan 2012 15:10

SSridhar wrote:The above must be interpreted not only in terms of the evolving situation within Pakistan but also in the light of the recently concluded ASEAN meeting, East Asia Summit and the naval facility that the US has opened in Australia. The long-duration meeting between the Army Chief of a country with one of the most powerful persons on this planet is truly unusual. China knows which side of the bread is buttered and is talking directly to the PA as the US has been doing since the 50s. China has been pushed back in ASEAN & East Asia Summit. Its principle of only talking bilaterally with the nations of South China Sea and West Philippine Sea had to be swallowed hard and Wen Jia Bao had to assure of China's peaceful intentions etc. in South China Sea. The strong trilateral convergence of India, Japan and the US as well as the surging strategic collaboration between India and Japan are all matters of grave concern for Beijing. China has few friends in the region today and increasingly a strong alliance against it is under formation. China needs PA strongly on its side. A sense of 1950s deja vu for the PA with China replacing the US.

On the last line I think some key questions need to be answered before any conclusion can be reached.

1. Is China willing to bankroll PA and the pak economy to the extent the US is doing?
2. What about the multilateral taps that the US controls?
3. Will China get involved in the domestic politics of pukeland?
4. What will China's response be to an increasing turmoil in Xinjiang and PA's inability to control the jehadi flow?

I think the pakis are playing one against the other to get tactical advantage but the puke land will come to strategic grief in the end.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14734
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby pankajs » 14 Jan 2012 15:32

Anujan wrote:Problem is that no player *at this point in time* can conclusively win the standoff and they know it.
To me that means that the strongest player has lost and the weakest player has won, given their relative strength.

It was the reason for my original question about the H&D of the Army in the eyes of mango abduls, army insiders and future civvies.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24173
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby SSridhar » 14 Jan 2012 17:23

pankajs wrote:
SSridhar wrote: A sense of 1950s deja vu for the PA with China replacing the US.

On the last line I think some key questions need to be answered before any conclusion can be reached.

1. Is China willing to bankroll PA and the pak economy to the extent the US is doing?
2. What about the multilateral taps that the US controls?
3. Will China get involved in the domestic politics of pukeland?
4. What will China's response be to an increasing turmoil in Xinjiang and PA's inability to control the jehadi flow?

I think the pakis are playing one against the other to get tactical advantage but the puke land will come to strategic grief in the end.

During the 60s too, when the Cold War was peaking, the Pakistanis were able to maintain a relationship with the US and the Chinese, even while being part of SEATO & CENTO. An aspiring Caliphate, Pakistan was able to maintain relationship with Godless Communists and explain it away to the brotherly and fanatical ummah nations as well as its own fanatical Islamist parties and citizens. Why, the US knew all along the perfidious double game of Pakistan in maintaining close contacts with the Taliban and simultaneously being the Most Allied non-NATO Ally in the Global War on Terror. I am sure therefore that Pakistan will be able to maintain this duality between the US & PRC in the years ahead even as PRC's stake holding grows significantly over Pakistan. The US is also not too keen to lose Pakistan even though the relations have suffered a lot of damage. Such cyclical ups-and-downs are common in the US-Pak transactional relationship anyway.

No, China would most definitely not be even a fraction as generous as the US in money matters. But, the US interests in Pakistan are waning as it usually does after a decade of close cooperation as previous marriages & divorces between these two nations have shown. So, Pakistan is going to lose anyway on that front. The multilateral financial agencies can be a source of problem to Pakistan. China will not be able to offer much help there. But, will the US go very far into using that leverage ? For the realpolitik practice of the US, Pakistan is still a very useful tool so long as it is kept in a semi-comatose state.

In 2009, China entered into an agreement with Jama'at-e-Islami (representing the Pakistani Islamist parties) in which JI promised not to get involved in Xinjiang terming it as an internal matter of China to be decided between the two parties concerned. Of course, the jihadis are not bound by this and that is where PRC applies pressure on the civilian government and the PA to capture ETIM separatists, bust their training cells and protect Chinese citizens within Pakistan. At least, the Chinese have withdrawn the 'theoretical support' for Xinjiang separatists within Pakistan. Simultaneously, PRC is unleashing severe repressive measures in Xinjiang even as they concentrate on developing trade and related activities on a very large scale in that region especially in Kashgar and Urumqi. The new railway lines, oil&gas pipelines from Gwadar, larger Hun migration etc are expected to open a new silk route and subdue the rebellious Islamist separatists there. The Chinese are attacking Xinjiang in multiple ways.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24173
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby SSridhar » 14 Jan 2012 18:11

Zardari & Kayani meet
President Asif Ali Zardari and Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani met on Saturday, DawnNews reported. The meeting was held on the request of the army chief.

Television reports said the two discussed the memo scandal and issues related to national security.

Sources told DawnNews that the meeting between the army chief and the president lasted for over an hour.

Sources said General Kayani told the president that he had reservations over Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani’s statements in a Chinese daily regarding the replies submitted by the army chief and DG ISI in the memo case.

The military chief reportedly requested the president to direct the premier to retract his statements made to the newspaper.


Meanwhile, the more pious kill 6 less pious Policemen

abhijitm
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3679
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 15:02
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby abhijitm » 14 Jan 2012 19:27

^^ starting new year, more pious are really frying less pious uniformed. TTP has clearly said they will target police and armed forces. I wonder whether the friction between Hakimullah and Wali-ur-Rehman causing this sudden spree. Note that attacks are mainly happening in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa which supposedly managed by Hakimullah, but South Waziristan, which is under control of WuR is relatively quiet. Looks like both the leaders are not aligned. Could it also means that Hakimullah is trying to prove that he is more fearsome and adventurous than WuR?

anupmisra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8289
Joined: 12 Nov 2006 04:16
Location: New York

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby anupmisra » 14 Jan 2012 19:31

Meanwhile, Khanisms of the Imran Type:

From the Mouth of The Khan

Imran Khan says he’s not anti-West (wait! there's more...)

Imran Khan...said his vision for an Islamic society looked like Scandinavia
Khan, an Oxford graduate, said he was one of the few Pakistani politicians to have spent substantial time in the West.
“To be anti-Western makes absolutely no sense at all. The West is geography. How can you be anti-geography?
“And to be anti-American…how can you be anti-a whole country
I still don’t know what is victory in the war on terror
But Khan — whom former military ruler Pervez Musharraf once called a “Taliban without the beard” — said that he had to “demystify” to Western audiences his idea of an Islamic society.
“If you ask me today what is closest to that ideal, I would say the Scandinavian countries,” Khan said, praising them for their “humane society, where there is rule of law, a society that looks after its weak, its handicapped”.
Khan.. promised a “good tsunami” against injustice and corruption.


And, IK on Mushy's return to the pakiland:

“No longer being the president and having the protection which he has, I would not be the insurance company to give him life insurance,” Khan said.

anupmisra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8289
Joined: 12 Nov 2006 04:16
Location: New York

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby anupmisra » 14 Jan 2012 19:38

Gita Jeyanti observed with reverence

The programme, organised by the Shree Gita Art Publication Welfare Trust, concluded with the prayer for the integrity and solidarity of Pakistan....


Why does every Hindu or Sikh or Christian religious / cultural event in pakiland end with the standard "solidarity with..." statement? Is that a pre-requisite?

Muppalla
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7096
Joined: 12 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby Muppalla » 14 Jan 2012 20:13

Abhijit wrote:A thought occurred to me recently. One of the byproducts (possibly intended by the Chankian part of the South Block, if it does exist) of India's continued bhaichara with the pakis despite the gravest of provocations is that the jihadi side has slowly shifted its Islamic hate towards the Unkil more than the cowardly Yindoos. If India had maintained a continuous hostile posture, the jihadis would have had less reason to turn their guns against Unkil and PA would have easily channeled the jihadis energies entirely towards India.


shiv wrote:I believe this is exactly what India has done and have said so on this forum. But I am not sure that it required any great chankianness - the option must have become pretty obvious to anyone who was following Pakistan closely - like diplomats and intel agencies and by extension the government.

Pakistani spokesperson have openly stated that they yearn for a return to Pakistan's finest hour in 1965 when the entire nation stood united against big bad India. From time to time - whenever there has been a crisis involving India , Pakistanis have actually buried their differences and put up a united front. It is only when India lies low that Pakistan's internal squabbles come to the fore.

This is also why it was stated by many respected and respectable Indian analysts that both the parliament attack and 26/11 were operations that sought to engineer a crisis with India, uniting all Pakis and making donors like the US "see the light" that India is the main problem. There is actually a social split within Pakistan. People are not necessarily very happy with things in Pakistan but can be swayed by the "India threat". If the India threat goes the army and whole lot of other vested interest in Pakistan lose out.

But for Indian leaders in an increasingly powerful India, it is politically difficult to deliberately go soft on Pakistan and risk the wrath of an angry Indian population baying for blood. Any political leader who declared war on Pakistan would have got instant popularity in 2002 and 2008. The cursing of GoI as "weak", "spineless", "cowardice" etc stems from this "chankian" action of going soft on Pakistan. But it had better work


This kind of chanikianess is the most useless one if someone is even planning this as a strategy. Just jotting down the chronology of hostility towards India Vs hostility towards uncle will give us the answer that this is the most foolish strategy.

It takes a hell lot of time and several events including sacrifices to make Pakis to become hostile to uncle. However, it just takes shortest possible time to make the entire pakis to become hostile to India forgetting what uncle did or doing to them.

Assuming that we are doing this Chanikianess - Few of uncle's worthies need to make solidarity statements about Cashmere and how great the Pakis are is all that is needed to remove the hostility towards uncle and then pitch them against India. All it needs for uncle is couple of Robin Rafels to turn Pakis against India. Every two bit skirt wearing gori will come and lecture Indian PM about the importance of solving Cashemere and asking India to show some magnanimity towards Pakis. Meanwhile TSPA will do a Bombay, a Delhi or "try a Kargil". Even if 100% of Indians are Gandhian and are showing their other cheek in pursuit of this "chanikian strategy", the turn from "hostility towards uncle" to "hostility towards India" is complete.

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby shiv » 14 Jan 2012 20:50

The Pakistan army was first invited to take power to maintain internal order in Pakistan. That is when the Paki army got their first taste of total power and control over Pakistan. Pakistan's first governor general liberally used the Pakistan army to dismiss civilian governments until 1958 when Ayub Khan took power in a coup.

Ayub Khan was Birtish accented TFTA and the UK/US press went gaga over him. Ayub Khan probably genuinely believed that Pakis were superior to India. But his army's plan was defeated in 1965 - even if it was not a spectacular Indian victory. The Pak army's hour of ignominy really came in 1971 after which they were forced to leave power. But it appears that the power and perks bug was already endemic in the Paki army and Zia came to power, deposing Bhutto.

But it is important to look at some of the actions of the Pakistan army before Zia.

Ayub Khan did not actually want to enter into direct war with India. If you read Pakistani critiques of the 1965 war - it was again an army affair where Ayub hoped to send in mujahideen into Kashmir and get them to take over Srinagar radio station after which the Pakistan army would "walk in". Ayub did not want or expect total war and when war started h was reticent and reluctant.

Yahya never wanted war with India as a planned conflict. Yahya actually conducted fair elections in E and W Pakistan, won fair and square by Mujib. But W Pakistanis - especially Bhutto from what I have read did not want the Bengalis to rule. That is what prompted the March 26 1971 crackdown on Bangla intellectuals that eventually led to war.

Let me move forward briefly to 1999. Even in 1999 the Pakistan army did not look forward to a direct all out confrontation with India. It was hoped that a local conflict by "mujahiddeen" (actually NLI soldiers from PoK) would block the Siachen road and make India give up.

The point I am trying to make is that the Pakistan army has been realistic enough to accept that direct war with India would be a disaster for them - the army. But the Pakistan army has always sought power in a Pakistan that was ethnically and linguistically diverse - a country that would not come under one banner in the absence of a uniting factor. That uniting factor had to be "fear of India" and since Pakistan was an Islamic state, it was necessary for the Pakistan army to claim a threat to Islam. That is what drove Zia's Islamization of army and civilians.

The Pakistani army would have a full country to rule and international recognition of that country only if the country held together. The country could be held together only by the army. The army had to use fear of India and threat to Islam as the reasons for keeping power and perks in Pakistan. It was necessary to continuously provoke conflict in India, but direct conflict, army to army was too dangerous for the Pakistan army.

This is where history came to Zia's aid. The USSR walked into Afghanistan. This gave Reagan a chance to avenge Vietnam where Soviet aid had brought US plans to a standstill. The CIA had mastered the art of covert operations and psy ops. That is exactly what they recruited Pakistan and bin Laden for. So US aid, which has more or less stopped between 1971 and 1979, as restarted in earnest. The Pakistan army and ISI learned a lot about covert ops from the CIA and applied them against India to avenge the humiliation of 1971 and punish India. But again it was covert ops - not direct war. Just like the US would not be drawn into direct military confrontation with the USSR, Pakistan did not want direct military confrontation with India. The war was fought by proxies. Initially it was Khalistanis and after 1989 it was "Kashmiris".

After Zia was killed in 1988, Pakistan went into a phase of political turmoil marked by "civilian rule" of the RAPE/feudal elite who had their taste of moneymaking. It was Nawaz, then Botox Bebe and then Nawaz again. But throughout those years Islamic jihadi groups were supported by the "civilian" government to fight India. Names like the Harkat ul Ansar, Harkat ul mujahiddeen, and Jaish e Mohammad came and went as each morphed into something new. All were supported by the Paki civilian governments and trained by the Pakistan army which had indirect control of Afghanistan after 1990.

This phase lasted till 1999 when Musharraf tried his Kargil trick. It bombed and the blame was put on Nawaz Sharif. A shamed Nawaz tried to oust Musharraf who then took over. Soon after Musharraf's regime started, 9-11 took place - with the terrorists using the same trick they had used to hijack IIC 814 in Nepal. Musharraf was a truly patriotic smart operator. He played the US like an expert. He allied with the US and got all his men out in the Kunduz airlift. He allowed the US to kick the shit out of Arabs, Uzbeks, Algerians, Chechens and other assorted Islamic assholes while he protected the Pakistanis. And he gave free rein to the Lashkar e Toiba in India, having the US describing him as a great ally. He used the US to help hit Pasthun separatists and continued to suppress Baluchis, selectively allying with and paying off those Taliban who were pro Pakistan army.

But all this Pakistan army chankianness meant that Islamists were given free rein. It is the Islamists whom they are unable to control now. With Islam going overboard, even the Paki civilians are beginning to feel the heat, and suddenly, India is looking attractive to at least some percentage of Pakistani civilians.

But this time it is the Pakistan army that is in deep shit form several sides.
1. First of all it was forced/bribed to move troops away from the Indian border to do the US's job. Paki soldiers - trained to see ONLY India as the enemy hated this.
2. The Paki army played a double game with the US and as the US figured out what was happening, they started accurate drone attacks. The people who were being killed by drones started attacking the Paki army for its support to the US. The Paki army tried to retaliate and started facing a discipline problem with Paki soldiers deserting and not fighting the Islamist forces.
3. The biggest public humiliation after 1971 came with bin Laden's death and the PNS Mehran raid. All under Kiyani's watch. he is the new Yahya.

These events really put the Paki army on the back foot in Pakistan. Even today, most of the jihadi forces will be content to make peace with the Paki army. The LeT is anyway an ally of the Paki army. But Islamization will spread and as Islamization spreads the Paki civilian population - the much vaunted "silent. moderate" majority are beginning to get screwed.

This is an interesting situation, and my reading is that the Paki civilians will prefer Islamization rather than being "subjugated" by India. But if India is not a threat, they would rather keep islamization at bay. However the Pakistani army is no longer capable of keeping Islamization at bay. The army itself is islamized and its allies are all jihadis.

I suspect that there is a very clear end-game plan from India. The idea is to old the hands of the "silent, moderate" majority Paki civilians who hate India but are afraid of Islamization. Paki civilians are stuck between fear/hatred of India (engendered by their education and their army) and Talibanization. Paki civilians are now willing to hold India's hand.

For India this can only be a mixed bag. If India scares the shit out of Pakis, the islamists will take over. This is what i have always wished for Pakistan, But the Paki army will stay in power, fully Islamised along with its jihadi allies. But if India acts friendly with Pakis and they hold India's hand, the army is isolated. The army cannot fight their allies the jihadis. They cannot fight India, They cannot fight the US. If Paki civilians look for support and normalization of ties with India, the Paki army is essentially screwed. This is where we are now. What happens from here is uncertain.

What will the army do? This is how I read the tea leaves:

1) If the Paki army retains a majority of people who are "moderate" and understand the significance of what the civilians are saying, then they may be able to hold the jihadi factions in check and massage the morale of their men while relations are eased with India

2. If the Paki army has "turned the corner" and is mostly Islamized, there will be a coup. It could get dangerous, but a war sparked by a jihadi Paki army will see it getting hit by India and the US. IMO

Just my analysis. Let's see how this pans out..
Last edited by shiv on 14 Jan 2012 22:02, edited 1 time in total.

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): 06 Dec 201

Postby Altair » 14 Jan 2012 21:17

shiv
Great post. I have a question.
What about the crown jewels? Are they not a dimension in assessing or analyzing Pakistani Islamist Army?
Altair

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby ramana » 14 Jan 2012 23:48

I believe its the Indian demonstration to use force in Kargil and in Op Parakram that deflected the jihadi wave inward. They couldn't go berserk inside India without paying consequences. This allowed the policy of showing a carrot for the stick is getting ever ready. The Running Start is now three days from 21 days.
All those jihadis all primed up had no where to go but stay inside TSP.

Satya_anveshi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3532
Joined: 08 Jan 2007 02:37

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby Satya_anveshi » 14 Jan 2012 23:55

Shiv ji,

you have black belt at many a arts :P ; you show karate in this post and kung fu here and here.
How do you reconcile these two? Especially considering (even 10% of what is listed here to be true) the # of terrorist attacks that have happened in Pak.

pgbhat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4129
Joined: 16 Dec 2008 21:47
Location: Hayden's Ferry

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 201

Postby pgbhat » 15 Jan 2012 00:02



Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: KJo and 105 guests