Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 15 Jan 201

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.
Samudragupta
BRFite
Posts: 625
Joined: 12 Nov 2010 23:49
Location: Some place in the sphere

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by Samudragupta »

SSridhar wrote:
ramana wrote:I heard a radio talk show on NPR where the author discussed his book on Europe after WWII. It was a savage place with hardly any civilization. What struck me is the comparison to TSP now which seems to be on its way that lower limit.
You are right. Anything evil, savage, maniacal etc., then the comparison can be easily made with TSP. I had posted a detailed comparison before between Nazi Germany and present-day TSP.
OT for this thread but just want to correct....

Its basically hurling abuse on Nazi Germany if they are compared with the Bloody TSP looser....without trying to be politically correct Nazi Germany at the end of the day was a world beater...its only their innovative socio-political experiment went wrong due to their rashness in correcting the historical wrong....
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25382
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by SSridhar »

Here is what I posted a long time back
It has been said that the Nazis were radicals in the garb of the traditionalists. They placed emphasis on such things as honour and dignity as well as Christianity. In their scheme of things based on the Aryan Master Race, moral obligations are owed only to them but not to the inferior races. The Nazi attack on the Jews stemmed from the fact that they were superior and were committing all atrocities (which to them were glorious deeds) for the common good of the superior community. The genocide by the Pakistani Army in the then East Pakistan compares with the holocaust that killed millions of Jews in Nazi Germany. The genocide drove away 10 million Pakistanis, almost 70% of them Hindus, into India and killed several millions within East Pakistan. In her book, “Women, War and the Making of Bangladesh”, the Bangladeshi Author Yasmin Saikia says, “The Pakistan Army killed Bengali Hindus simply for being Hindus”. The West Pakistanis who always thought the East Pakistanis had lost their purity because of mingling with the Hindus and thus polluted by them, decided to re-establish the purity by exterminating the Hindus. Author Saikia says, “ Muslim Pakistani (read: Pure) men assumed that the sacrifice of the Hindu women was necessary to undo the malaise.” Apart from the hatred for the infidel Hindus, the contempt that the meat-eating, tall, fair and handsome West Pakistanis had for the rice-and-fish eating, small, dark and ugly Bengalis drove the policy makers in West Pakistan and the West Pakistani army to launch a massive genocidal programme. Again, much on Nazi lines.

Similarly, Pakistanis and their regimes were also religious fundamentalists in the disguise of “traditionalists”. Having sliced a secular Bharat into two to get his Islamic country, Jinnah could not have reasonably expected anything other than religious fundamentalism as time passed by, especially as Islam does not have the concept of separation of the Church and Caesar. On the contrary, Islam pervades every aspect of individuals, societies and governance. Jinnah himself adopted the Hitlerian techniques of ‘propaganda’ and ‘mass instigation to cause atrocity’. The traditional society that Pakistan inherited was already used to placing ‘honour and dignity’ above anything else and the federal government could not stop crimes being committed on that account. Barbaric practices of honour and dignity such as Wani, Swara, Karo-Kari thrived and were not curbed. ‘Honour and Dignity’ was used to inspire terrorism against India and possibly even other infidel countries.

Both placed too much dependence on the military might to achieve their goals. Both of them believed in their racial superiority and eliminated the minorities in their respective countries, Jews in the case of Germany and Hindus, Sikhs and Christians in the case of Pakistan. In fact, some of the hardline Deobandi clerics, like Zafar Usmani who wanted a separate nation felt that a union with the Hindus will erase their cultural identity and only when the Muslims were the rulers they could wipe out the majority Hindu’s culture. The draconian Balsphemy Law, though it did not result in actual execution of a blasphemer due to judicial ruling, nevertheless put minorities at an immediate disadvantage. Once somebody was accused of blasphemy, that person’s life was in danger even if finally acquitted by the Court of Law. They either were killed by fellow prisoners within judicial custody or were killed after release or they had to seek asylum in a foreign country. Most of the members of the judiciary were either conservative Islamists or were so afraid of them that they released terrorists and sectarian killers and those accused of blasphemy were almost always found to be guilty (only to be released by the highest court or upon Presidential pardon). In one case, that of the Christian Ms. Aisia Bibi, the Lahore High Court expressly prohibited the President from sanctioning any pardon to her. The Nazi judges were ultraconservative nationalists and there was very little Jewish representation in the judiciary. Even the few remaining Jewish judges were removed from their positions by Law in c. 1933. Similarly, the Pakistani judiciary was bereft of any Judges from the Hindu, Sikh, Christian or Ahmedi communities, save the sole Hindu judge Rana Bhagwandas whose tenure as an acting Chief Justice of Pakistan was hotly contested by Islamist leaders and parties.

Both Pakistan and Nazi Germany felt stifled by their geography and needed to expand space. It was ‘lebensraum’ in the case of Germany and “Muslim J&K” and ‘strategic depth’ of Afghanistan in the case of Pakistan. Both relied on a massive propaganda of half-truths and naked lies to not only hoodwink their own people, but the rest of the world as well. Both created a mass hysteria among their peoples to achieve the goals of a scheming few. Both misused religion to achieve their narrow ends, Germany, by condemning one religion and Pakistan by extolling one to the total exclusion of others. Both employed extensive, sometimes subtle and many times blatant, social engineering to condition the minds of their peoples. The Nazi Germans believed that their actions were morally correct helped by the intelligentsia and academic who justified Nazi actions. Same has been the case in Pakistan where the mullahs incite people and justify jihad, terrorism and suicide bombing. In addition to playing the religion card, the vested Pakistanis have been emphasizing aspects of honour and dignity, conecpts which are dearly held in a feudalistic country most of which is steeped in practices such as karo-kari, swara and wani. Both were evil powers bent upon death and destruction. Both talked of 1000-year wars. Both indulged in genocide and massacre, Nazi Germany those of the Jews and an Islamic West Pakistan, the Muslims and Hindus of East Pakistan, Hindus, Sikhs, Ahmedis, Shi’as and Christians in West Pakistan, and Christians and Jews all over the world. Some of the atrocities committed in the then East Pakistan, like eliminating academics and intelligentsia, closely parallel techniques widely employed by the Third Reich. The West Pakistani elite, by remaining mute, quietly supported these massacres. One of the worst massacres happened on May 28, 2010 when terrorists seized Ahmedis praying in their mosques on a Friday afternoon and killed in cold blood over 90 of them. There was stunning silence from the President downwards because condemning the Ahmedi killing would have invited the wrath of the clergy.

Both Pakistan and Nazi Germany developed WMDs (V2 rockets and almost a nuclear weapon in the case of Germany and nuclear weapons and missiles in the case of Pakistan) with the sole intent of using them, not merely for deterrence. Pakistan believes that there is miliataristic use value for nuclear weapons rather than merely a political deterrence value that the possession of such a weapon bestows on a nation. Even their tactics bear a lot of resemblance. For example, both resorted to circulating fake currency in their enemy countries to destabilize them, both spewed out lies to their own countrymen and the rest of the world etc.

Both were racists, Hitler’s Germany believing in their Aryan master race while Paksitan believed in their own martial race and held the Indians and the East Pakistani Bengalis to ridicule for being cowardly, dark, short and mostly rice-eating. Interestingly, both referred to their countries as “Fatherland”. Both gave international covenants and practices a go by and indulged in reckless actions. Both were appeased early on by world powers, by Neville Chamberlain of Britain in the case of the Third Reich and successive US regimes in the case of Pakistan, much against saner counsel from others. While Germany turned against Britain later on, we are yet to see Pakistan do the same against the US overtly. However, a large majority of Pakistanis, including influential members of the Pakistani intelligentsia and the armed forces, see the US as a villain. Both countries entered into “alliances” with others with the sole intent of pursuing their own war ambitions. Both of them wanted to rule the world. While Hiltler’s Germany believed that as the master race, they had the mandate to rule the rest, most Pakistanis felt that they were the uncrowned leaders of the ummah and hence were legal descendants of the Islamic caliphate. The rulers of both the countries conducted plebiscites to consolidate their power. Hitler conducted one on Aug. 19, 1934, after the death of Chancellor Hindenburg, to be ‘accepted’ by the Germans as the head of state or Führer (leader) and Reich Chancellor, both rolled into one. The Army rulers in Pakistan also resorted to the same tactics. Both Pakistan and Nazi Germany had an affinity for “Thousand Years”. While Nazi Germany’s Third Reich spoke of a “Thousand Year Rule”, Pakistani leader Z.A.Bhutto spoke of a Thousand Year War with India. Both nations blatantly violated international treaties or norms of diplomacy. Germany violated the conditions of the “Treaty of Versailles” and annexed Saar region and Rhineland, thus gaining valuable economic and industrial strengths. Again, in blatant violation of the Treaty, Hitler built up a huge Army and Navy. The European Powers simply registered verbal protests and did nothing beyond that. In fact, Britain went to the extent of appeasing Hitler by entering into a naval pact with Germany. Similar was the case in Pakistan. In blatant violation of the India Independence Act, Pakistan wanted to annexe Kashmir under the pretext of that area being Muslim-majority while the real reason was economic. Again, in blatant violation of international treaties, it proliferated missiles and nuclear weapons. The US and the friendly Western powers simply kept quiet but for occasional objections of a routine nature.

There are other similarities as well, like their belief in and propagation of a “bogus history” leading even to “fabricated” civilizational aspects. While the Nazis made their people believe in a superior Master Aryan race, the Pakistanis tried to inculcate among their people a myth that they belonged to races from Central Asia or even the Middle East. The attempt in both cases was to segregate and elevate one set of people from the others leading to xenophobia. The Nazi Germany went to great lengths to identify certain racial features that made them superior to the others. As Hans F.K. “Rassen” Gunther, a reputed Nazi anthropologist of those times describes Aryans in his The Racial Elements of European History, “talented and beautiful...slim, broad-shouldered, narrow hipped...chiselled features, shining skin flushed with blood etc..”, so too many Pakistanis believe that they are “tall, fair, well-built and handsome with longer penises” compared to Indians who are generally “short, dark-skinned and possessing shorter penises”. Similar to the Nazi obsession to introduce racism even in science by calling their brand of Physics as ‘Deutsche Physik’ and science as ‘Aryan Science’ and harass such brilliant physicists as Heisenberg or Einstein because they were Jews, the Pakistanis under Gen. Zia-ul-Haq introduced ‘Islamic Science’ and they also hounded out a brilliant and the only Nobel-prize winning Pakistani physicist Dr. Abdus Salam because he practised a brand of Islam unacceptable to the Sunni majority. Again, like the Nazis, especially Hermann Goering, the Pakistani top generals also looted precious antiquities from Afghanistan after 1992 when the Taleban had captured major cities. The atrocities committed by their Armies are despicable. The Pakistani army launched Op. Searchlight in the then East Pakistan on March 25, 1971 and implemented a pogrom of genocide. Nothing exemplifies the brutality of the Army more than what its top most commander in East Pakistan, Gen. A.A.K. Niazi, said of the rapes there insensitively: “You cannot expect a man to live, fight, and die in East Pakistan and go to Jhelum for sex, can you?”. Both Nazi Germany and Pakistan employed terror as a tactics by the State organs to make their people submit to the will of the State. While the much feared Gestapo and Schutz Staffel (SS) were the instruments of terror in Nazi Germany, Pakistan employed various intelligence agencies like the most powerful ISI, the Intelligence Bureau (IB) tasked with internal political activities and the Federal Investigative Agency (FIA) tasked with investigation corruption cases. These Pakistani agencies regularly kidnapped and murdered hundreds of Pakistanis and only a suo motu step by the then Chief Justice of Pakistan, Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry, in circa 2006 saved many of them. They even kept tabs on Pakistanis staying in other countries issuing threats to keep them from speaking openly about Pakistan’s government.

After the Potsdam Agreement of Aug. 1945, the victorious Allies, especially the Western powers, started the denazification process purging the bureaucracy and the military of these evil people. An almost similar process has been started in Pakistan as well after the 9/11 incident with the Western Powers, led by the US, forced the Musharraf regime to start the process of “enlightened moderation” including altering the curricula being taught to the students. Though the detoxification process was more easily and verifiably implementable in Germany as the Western powers were occupying the land, the same could not happen at all in Pakistan for obvious reasons including the duplicity of Gen. Musharraf. Both Nazi Germany and Pakistan have also employed the intelligence agencies extensively within their countries to suppress dissension, force disinformation and forcibly extract support for Government’s policies. It is no wonder therefore that the most widely respected clergy of Pakistan, Maulana Mawdudi of Jama’at-e-Islami (JI), admired the German Nazi and the Italian Fascist parties for their ‘blind faith’ and ‘totalitarianism’ because in an Islamic society as well, there can be no distinction between private and state’s affairs and masses must simply obey their rulers. The student wing of JI, Islami Jamiat Talaba (IJT) terrorize campuses in the same way the Hitler Youth Brigade of Nazi Germany ran rampant across the German academic institutions. The Waffen SS, the criminal organization that under the control of the Wehermacht indulged in war crimes and the Holocaust, had a parallel organization in Pakistan, the jihadi Islamists. While Waffen SS had about a million strength, Pakistan had three million jihadi Islamists. Like the Nazis, who justified the Holocaust by publishing white papers, Gen. Zia-ul-Haq also published the white paper, “Quadianiat, a threat to Islam” and then proceeded to outlaw their mode of worship.

One of the most striking similarities between Nazi Germany and Pakistan was in the way they both handled the judiciary. Both of them dismissed the judges who were not compliant with the State’s ideology. In the case of Pakistan, such behaviour was not restricted to just the military rulers though they were the ones who directly dismissed and threatened the judges. The civilian rulers like Nawaz Sharif and Ms. Benazir Bhutto also indulged in such behaviour. While Nazi Germany’s judiciary went by the three cardinal principles of the Fuehrer, superiority of the Nazi Party and the superiority of the Aryan master race, the Pakistani judiciary went by the cardinal principles of the superiority of the Army and the religion of Islam. There were some exceptions, in the Supreme Court, for the latter though. Every Army rule required the Judges to take a fresh oath under the Martial Law or the Provisional Constitution Order (PCO). Anybody who refused to oblige was summarily dismissed. Gen. Musharraf’s handling of the Chief Justice, Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry, is well known as well as the handling of Chief Justice Sajid Ali Shah by Nawaz Sharif. For her part, Ms. Benazir Bhutto, during her two tenures as Prime Minister, had suspended 42 judges for various reasons.

Even in the field of art, music and dance, there is a close parallel between what happened in the Third Reich under Hitler and in the sixty year history of Pakistan. The Third Reich frowned upon ‘degenerate art’, that is any art that was not furthering the Master Aryan Race and/or Germany. So also in Pakistan, all forms of art, music and dance were discouraged that were not in conformity with Islam. The people of Pakistan inherited the same forms of music and dance that India had been well known for thousands of years and yet these art forms practically disappeared in Pakistan very quickly. Gen. Zia-ul-Haq banned music, drama and dance as they were considered haraam in Islam. However, there is another angle to discouragement of art forms in modern Pakistan. The reason is similar to that of Nazi Germany where art forms that were construed to be ‘not belonging’ to the same class as the Aryan race were explicitly banned. Similarly, most of the art forms of the Indian subcontinent have the Hindu or Buddhist heritage and were thus anathema in the Land of the Pure. For this very same reason, such historic civilizational sites as Harappa, Moen-jo-Daro, Taxila have been in a state of total neglect. In circa 1959, Ayub Khan setup the Auqaf Department to manage the waqf properties. The management of Hindu, Sikh and Buddhist shrines and temples belonging to the religious minorities was also handed over to the Auqaf. During the regime of the pseudo-secularist Z.A.Bhutto, the powers of the Auqaf were enhanced manifold. The Auqaf has totally neglecetd to preserve the Hindu temples and Sikh gurduwaras scattered all over Pakistan. In many places, once magnificent temples have been leased out to commercial activities bringing in money for the Auqaf which will be spent on other Islamic Waqf properties. This is very reminiscent of how the Nazis razed down Jewish synagogues and used that space for building parks, apartment complexes etc. In Dec. 2009, India was compelled to to voice its concern when 150 acres of land belonging to Lahore Sikh Gurduwara were taken over for a military housing project. During the 1965 war with India, Pakistan confiscated the properties of the Hindus through an ordinance called Enemy Property Act, an act that condemned its own citizens as enemies just because they happened to be Hindu minorities in a Muslim majority state that was in conflict with a Hindu majority India. In East Pakistan alone, the Pakistani government had seized 2.5 Million acres depriving properties of 10 million Hindus. It was only in circa 2009 that Bangladesh, the successor to the then East Pakistan, passed a law to return such properties back to the Hindus. In the summer of c. 1939, the Nazi state decreed that the Jews were to be excluded from involving in real-estate activities and that they could not henceforth own property. In Pakistan, Ahmedis are similarly being excluded from taking part in such activities. For example, sale of lands is prohibited to those who do not declare their faith in ‘Khatam-e-Nabbuwat’, thus automatically excluding the Ahmedis. Buyers also had to give an undertaking that they “would never resell it ever to Ahmedis.”

What is different though was the spectacular early military successes of the German Wehrmacht which the Pakistani war machine could not duplicate even remotely. Though it mounted some audacious but ill-conceived campaigns against India in the last six decades, it has been nothing but a string of wholesome defeats for the Pakistani military. It will not be very surprising if the demise of present day Pakistan will be as equally spectacular as the Third Reich.
SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5874
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by SBajwa »

This Tall, Handsome and Fair "Pakistani" is only because of their inbreeding. They are marrying their own fair first cousins and thus have more and more "fair" inbred children. This point needs to be thoroughly put across!

Apart from having TFTA pakis they also have the higher retardation rate despite having enough food (considering all type of meat available on the ground).
KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 964
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by KrishnaK »

SSridhar,
Superb piece sir. I vaguely remember reading about some Pakistani general (Niazi ?) requiring his soldiers to fill their quota of raping hindu women in Bangladesh. I forget the book this was in. Would you or anybody else on this thread remember ?
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by ramana »

SSridhar, While you essay compares them to the Nazis in ideology and results, I am saying that their current situation is similar to the savagery of post World War II Europe. That Europe lifted itself out of that cauldron with external help, Marshall Plan and Soviet style Commanding Heights economy and internal resolve to move on and create a new Europe. This new Europe was able to reintegrate after the collapse of Soviet Union with hardly a shot being fired.

Contrast that with the situation of TSP. The external aid from US and PRC helps to make them even more virulently intransigent and internally there is no resolve to progress. On the contrary they want to hark back to repugnant practices of past Islamist practices.
Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by Agnimitra »

There is a crucial difference. Nazism talked of a glorious 1000-year Reich, they envisioned and churned out epic movies like Metropolis about futuristic cities, and for them the war was merely to reorder the world with themselves at the top. They envisioned this at a time when European colonial powers like the UK were already in such a position, and the world order was de facto racially stratified and colonial. It was a case of European colonial attitudes and visions coming home to roost, where the loser Germany wasn't doing as well colonially as others like the Brits, Dutch, Portuguese, Spanish, even Italians, and of course, the Russians had reached Japan.

European colonial expansion itself was modelled on the Islamist Caliphate methods used by the Ottomans. they learned a lot from them.

Today's Islamism is a little different from Nazism in that it seeks to get back to what it was - and which the Euros learned from. They also have grandiose delusions of grand architecture and high court-culture. But for the time being the form of Islamism that is widely operational is the doomsday cult martyrdom version, of the brave caveman mujahid with his shalwar pulled above his ankles.

Turkish Islamism is almost an exact copy of Nazism, if only because Nazism is the distillate of European colonial attitudes that were themselves learned from the Turkish Ottoman Caliphate. But Paki Islamism has more to it. It is a hardier strain, and chaos is its natural environment.

The reason for this is that Islamism has within itself already created a racial pecking order. It is not one-pure-race above others, but rather a two-lelev system: (a) one pure religion above all others, and (b) a racial pecking order within that religious system.

Because of this, Islamism is more complex, and hardier than Nazism. Because within it one nation/race uses willing brainwashed slaves from other races. It has core lands and a periphery to play with. The best example of that is TSP.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by ramana »

Nazism threatened the Anglo-Saxon world order and got detested by them. Islsmism is fostered by the Anglo -Saxons against the non Chrsfian world. Yes there is blowback to them but its not significant. The damage they got was more due to self~flagellagtion then any set piece battle.
Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4270
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by Rudradev »

From the Indian point of view Islam (of the West Asia/North Africa/Central Asia variety) plays one of two potential geopolitical roles.

1) As an invading/marauding force, it has the potential to enervate and weaken India, impoverishing her through cultural destruction and extractive overlordship, and thus paving the way for easy conquest by the more sophisticated colonial machines of the Christian West.

2) At other times, when fighting against the West for its own existence or control over its core territories, it can effectively function as a bulwark for Asia (including India)-- slowing down or blocking the ingress of the Christian West's colonial machinery.

Everything depends on whether, at the time in question, Islam is coexisting with the Christian West in some sort of relatively peaceful accommodation...or whether Islam is actively fighting against the Christian West for its own survival and core interests.

Present-day Islamism was engendered by the Anglo-Saxons for precisely this reason: by holding the levers of control, they could make sure Islam serves rather than obstructs their designs, by weakening their intended prey rather than blocking access to it. The rise of a primarily anti-Western neo-Islamism, therefore, becomes an asset to Asian civilization-states (including India) in a grand strategic sense.

In this sense it is possible to conceive of a dedicated anti-Western Pakistan becoming in effect a useful buffer for India, even while remaining avowedly Islamist. It is for THIS reason... rather than a fear of Pakistan being reabsorbed into Akhand Bharat... that the Anglo Saxon west doggedly keeps pouring billions of dollars into ensuring the survival of the Pakistani state structure we know today.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by ramana »

So we need to turn the Cerberus Westwards.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by ramana »

India Today interview with retired IB official on TSP

LINK

I didn't post the title as it does not do justice to his insights.
Empower the army to escalate matters & dare Pak to fight a war, says top intelligence expert on Pak affairs

Jugal R Purohit New Delhi, August 6, 2013 | UPDATED 23:10 IST

From among his initial posting as camp-in-charge of a Prisoner of War (PoW) camp meant for Pakistani soldiers in the 1971 conflict to his multiple postings in the Intelligence Bureau (IB) culminating as a Special Director to his job as the Secretary Security in the Cabinet Secretariat, a post he left on superannuation in 2007, few in our country can claim to have practically studied Pakistan as NC Padhi can. On the day five Indian soldiers were killed by the Pakistani Army in Poonch, Padhi broke his silence.

In an exclusive interview Padhi spoke of the need to 'finally empower the army ground commanders' as well as the worrying 'radicalisation of the Pak Army'. Excerpts follow:

Q. To what has taken place, how do you react?

A. As an Indian, I am outraged but not surprised. The Pakistan Army's unprofessional conduct has been such that in the last 65 years, it has fought multiple wars, at home, along borders or abroad and yet not won even a single one of them. I doubt if we see the last 65 years of world history, any army has fought so much and then lost so much.

Q. Tell us about the state of Pakistan Army, based on your study.

A. Since the time of General Zia, the radicalisation of their army began. I can say that today, more than 50 per cent of the men in their staff have been radicalized. In fact we are aware that the ordinary soldiers, belonging to rural areas of Pakistan and devout Muslims look down upon their seniors for their liberal thinking and cosmopolitan upbringing. This is creating a huge crisis for them in terms of maintaining command and control. To be honest, my apprehension is that one can't say when the remaining liberal elements may be uprooted by the hard core ones.

Q. What about the ISI?

A. Well, as Pakistan Army exists as a state within the Pakistani state, the ISI exists as a state within the army. The element of infiltration which has taken place by the terrorist organisations into the ISI especially is alarming. And this is the first sign of a failed state.


Q. So what is the meaning behind talking to them?

A. Not much. This is situation where neither the civil leadership in that country can rein in its army not can the army chief guarantee the behaviour and conduct of its army. I see no point in talking. And in saying this I must mention that the judiciary in that country has not distinguished itself one bit by not doing what it was required to do to send the army back to the barracks.

Q. For India, what should be the road ahead?

A. Firstly, no party in India whether in power or outside wants a war with Pakistan. But what is clear is that our government will have to do more than what it has hitherto done on this subject. To begin with, there is no doubt we need to launch a strong diplomatic offensive against Pakistan. Our Prime Minister should cancel the proposed meeting on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in New York in September.


Q. And militarily?

A. Our army needs to be given more say in what it wishes to do with Pakistan especially the ground commanders. In fact I would go to the extent of saying that the army should be allowed the freedom to escalate matters to dare Pakistan Army to start a war.


Q. Won't multiple agreements, bilateral and international come in the way? :rotfl:

A. These agreements are meant to be observed between two civilized sides. But the Pakistan Army can no longer be called a civilized one.

Poor guy worried about agreements with uncivilized murderers.


I think we on BRF have pretty much reached the same conclusion but in quite a short time.
We need our members to create a slide deck and socialize the message.
Right now Dilli Billis from the pre-partition era and their kindered sprits think they can appease the uncivilzed folks and get peace in theri life times. Its not possible. Recall Timur invaded and razed Delhi even when it was under Feroz Tughlaq same kind of thinking permeates the TSPA jihadi forces.


As to when the lower ranks will disobey the 'liberal' seniors i.e. failure of command structure, this will happen as soon as the Army is forced to face the TTP or a more jihadi force then themselves. The lower ranks will melt and join the jihadi forces.


While doing so they will grab the nukes under the "proximate secuirty" of the US trained SPD.
And all that US will do is bleat to the Delhi Sarkar and tell them they are on their own!!! And UK will encourage the jihadis to seize the nukes via Dalrymple/Leiven type jihadis in suits.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by ramana »

X-Post...
rgsrini wrote:Even a Mumbai Attack, brought nothing out of this government. They were/are indulging in semantics and dosier exchange with TSP. I expect nothing from this government when it comes to defending Indian interests (Be it China, Pakistan, Bangladesh or even Srilanka). More dosiers will fly across the border. That is the best you can expect. Complete paralysis otherwise.

IA on its own will destroy a few bunkers, kill a few scumbags. The likes of Praveen Swami will use that to blame the IA for the next attrocity committed by TSP.

As NC Padhi described there is schism in the TSP: a hardline jihadi segment (HJS:ryhmes with you know who) and a Western oriented segment (WOS-rhymes with wus!). Both are united in immoderation towards India!

Currently there is a gradual creeping attack on the Western oriented segment (WOS) by the hardline jihadis. You see the signs in attacks on military stations, civil life, enforcement of tribal justice councils and so on. To go down this has to increase and become a tsunami which engulfs them.

Whenever the WOS tries to make some accomodation to stablize the state, they launch barbaric attacks on India. Now the pretence of terrorists is dropped after not evoking a response after 26/11 Mumbai attack.
Overt reaction from India will bring the HJWOs together as we have seen.

MMS thinks instead of reacting he needs to prop up the WOS to make them emboldened to act on the HJS. However they will think this is a good cop-bad cop way to extort from India just with a few incidents. And the nature of the Islamist hold is they will keep doing it as it looks like a winning strategy.

On the contrary MMS instead of giving before should ensure they WOS take on the HJS and then reward them accordingly. Right now its "dono hath me laddo" from gullible Indians who dont seem to learn even after repeated attacks.


Right now as J&K has a LOC and AKA wants to uphold sanctity (like its religious shrine :( ), nothing prevents the IA from hitting with precison arty strikes all the near by TSPA posts. Its not escalatory and is proportionate response. In 1996 when Mulayam Singh Yadav was Def Minister there was an arty barrage for three days that wiped out many TSP bunkers. Right now AKA doesn't even want to lob ping pong balls in response.
member_26255
BRFite
Posts: 151
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by member_26255 »

ramana wrote: In 1996 when Mulayam Singh Yadav was Def Minister there was an arty barrage for three days that wiped out many TSP bunkers. Right now AKA doesn't even want to lob ping pong balls in response.
How much freedom does IA have to take retaliatory action on their own will.
AJ shukla was saying that local commanders have full freedom to do that. Is it so?
If it is, then what is stopping the IA?
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by shyamd »

ramana wrote:India Today interview with retired IB official on TSP

LINK

Poor guy worried about agreements with uncivilized murderers.


I think we on BRF have pretty much reached the same conclusion but in quite a short time.
We need our members to create a slide deck and socialize the message.
Right now Dilli Billis from the pre-partition era and their kindered sprits think they can appease the uncivilzed folks and get peace in theri life times. Its not possible. Recall Timur invaded and razed Delhi even when it was under Feroz Tughlaq same kind of thinking permeates the TSPA jihadi forces.


As to when the lower ranks will disobey the 'liberal' seniors i.e. failure of command structure, this will happen as soon as the Army is forced to face the TTP or a more jihadi force then themselves. The lower ranks will melt and join the jihadi forces.


While doing so they will grab the nukes under the "proximate secuirty" of the US trained SPD.
And all that US will do is bleat to the Delhi Sarkar and tell them they are on their own!!! And UK will encourage the jihadis to seize the nukes via Dalrymple/Leiven type jihadis in suits.
Pretty good article which sums up situation. GoI is waiting for the post pull out scenario - There will be a confrontation once the jihadi's head south and it is clear TSP wants a confrontation - IA has been making preparations for the last year. They wanted to give NS a chance - but from the looks of things - he has asked TSPA to put Kashmir back on the boil. They'll try again in Sept probably. GoI already on back burner with Peace process.

By the way, did you read the results of the latest NBC exercise by the NATO allies working on Syria? Seizing nukes is a pipe dream at the moment, they are not ready for it yet. Syria is a key test for allies - if they can take the 12 CW sites and secure the CW, this will give confidence for N seizure.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by ramana »

Shyamd, Long ago we had a retired person from Ind Miltary "Unkown". He outlined a notional plan to attack and seize the nukes even before 1998. Old timers might remember him. He was also not sure if we can get all of them.
RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5619
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by RoyG »

Give me a break. There wont be any nuclear seizure. We are talking about 100+ nukes many of which I'm sure are in hardened underground facilities. Moreover, will the Chinese just sit by and watch their chief k*ti get denuked against India? We're on our own.
kumarn
BRFite
Posts: 486
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 16:19

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by kumarn »

Gen Bakshi on NDTV was really pissed off. he said, "batallion commander ne kaisi maa ka doodh piya hai? uske ladke maare gaye, aur woh haath par hath rakh ke kya kar raha hai? kuch sharm nahi hai kya use? battalion commander ko kab se order ka wait karna pad gaya dilli se? maaro unko pehle. war hoga to hum yahan dekh lenge. bahut kiya humne apne time pe ye sab. kiska intezaar kar raha hai?" I haven't seen anyone so angry on tv. if he had found a paki in front of him he would have wrung his neck.
habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6922
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by habal »

army's policy of promotions need to be reviewed. Promotions are given superceding 7 more senior officers.

matam to hoga.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by ramana »

X-post....
SSridhar wrote:
CRamS wrote: -------------------------
quote="SSridhar"

We can shout at Antony or Kurshid or MSA for their words and actions or inactions. Ultimately, it is Ms. Antinio Maino and the US who are the puppeteers. I do not believe that the situation would change with a change of governments either. It will then be somebody else and the US. We used to mock at Pakistan for being a faithful servant to the Master. It has devolved on us too. We defer to US wishes. A time may come when we will also end up as a GUBO partner. That would be the next stage in this evolutionary relationship.

---------------------------------

SS, I am not fully convinced that this latest TSP attack was just some random act to highlight the "core issue". While thats always the center piece of TSP strategy, I think the latest has got to do with some form of revenge or some form of pre-emption on TSP's part, warning India (Indian army that is), don't dare taking any action across the LoC.
CRS, I didn't say that either. It is all related to Afghanistan. Today, PigLeT is integrated with the PA. We do not need to distinguish between the two. The latest incident has also to be seen in the context of the Jalalabad attack, again by PigLeT, Haqqani and the PA.

There are multiple levels of lapses in these repeat killings on the Indian side of LOC :Indian Army, MoD, MEA, PM, press hangers on of the ruling party (eg. Jyoti Malhotra) and loose mouth idiots who are given more hawa then they deserve eg. Mani Shankar Aiyar etc..

Need to understand some of these could also be batting for the US which wants to have a piss ful exit without a flag tearing exit from Kabul.

- Just as at Kargil, the IA local area commanders need to ensure they have active patrols in strength. They don't need orders for this from Headquarters. How do they expect Area domination patrols of six soldiers to dominate? Wasn't Lt Saurabh Kalia and his troop of six ambushed and tortured to death and same palusible deniablity from TSP at work? So IA needs to be learning organization and not repeat the same mistake like a dinosaur and get its honored troops murdered. Its not a killing but a murder. After the beheadings to send same six troop strength is idiocy if not moronic.

- Its very clear that TSP has non-state actors as part of their troop formations. So its stupid to point that out. Its a given. In fact the non state actors have a battalion number which shows they are part of the TSP Army order of Battle. Just because they dont have spit and polish parade ground uniforms doesnt make them irregualrs. So stop characteriizing them as non-soldiers. they might not have graduated from Kakul PMA but are soldiers trained in a some camp or the other by the TSP Army. This is the standard modus operandi since 1947 and yet IAndina Army doesnt want to recognize the problem and keeps giving press releases and leaks to dubious journalists who turn around and support TSP. Eg. Pravin Swami.

- Indian Army should stop building up the image of cowardly border raiding razakars by calling them BAT and other honorifics.
They are just plain terrorists in or out of uniform.

- Big picture issues. By giving unattributable briefings to idiot desi journalists all this appears to be local and confined and masks the real intent of the TSP. It might feel good to tell them about what India did or not do but it will make it look like a riot with guns. So dont tell them but do what isnecessary. The country is behind the forces even if termagant politicans and their ilk are not

-The big picture is TSP wants Indian Army to commit more troops at the border to prevent such pin-prick raids. Its not like India has a massive resources of trained soldiers for this and will have to dip into other fronts and or raise more troops eventually. In the short term they have to come from acclimatised troops facing the PRC in the Northern-Eastern borders at the LAC and relieve the pressure. What we are seeing is the defacto or virtual two front war with coordination between the snake and the dragon. Recall the numerous logisitics generals exchanging visits to PRC and TSP?

- If this is correct the right strategy is to keep the troops at the PRC borders and increase the patrol strength from six to what ever the local commander feels is necessary within his resources.

- MEA and their bag holders in media should shut up. They have no bone in this fight. Afghanistan etc are secondary red herrings.

- Also TSP always conducts terrorist attacks on India whenever they are in good books of US. So here the MEA can help by alerting the MoD whenevr they feel the US is more amenable to the TSP which is a definite indicator of past TSP behavior.
Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by Agnimitra »

This is why the dialectic among subcontinental Muslims is basically between Aurangzeb and Akbar. Or theologically between Sirhindi (Imam Rabbani) and a form of religion that comes close to Sikhi.

The problem is that those who lean towards Akbar cannot go beyond that into Indian civilization. They believe what we know of India today was wholly recreated during Islamic rule and it is never possible to know what it was like before. Thus, the MJ Akbars, the Saeed Naqvis, the Salman Khurshids, etc. are non-Paki moderate model Indian Muslims in the sense that they like Akbar more than Aurangzeb. They want Akbar's India.

X-post from TSP thread:
Peregrine wrote:A distortion of History in respect of Muslim Rule & Rulers in India :

Past present : Letters of discontent - MUBARAK ALI

Throughout the Muslim rule in the subcontinent, from the Sultanate period to the Mughal rule, the views of the ulema contradicted those of the rulers. Despite state policies being in contradiction to religion according to the ulema, the rulers did not permit them to interfere with the state.

During Akbar’s rule, the ulema disapproved of his policy of sulh-i-kul or peace with all. When Mullah Mohammed Yazdi issued a fatwa, several disgruntled nobles and the ulema rebelled against Akbar who dealt with it in a diplomatic manner. He cancelled the maddad-i-ma’ash jagirs belonging to the ulema, only to reallocate them after interviewing the ulema and confirming their loyalty. He also appointed bureaucrats to supervise their conduct, so that in case of misconduct they could be reprimanded. He then continued with his policy undeterred.

During the reign of Jahangir, a religious scholar, Ahmad Sirhindi (d. 1624) wanted to convince Jahangir to change Akbar’s policy towards non-Muslims. He tried to influence the nobles to help fulfil his ambitions and wrote letters to them, expressing his fanatical ideas.

In a letter to Shaikh Farid, a devout Muslim who had supported Jahangir’s succession to the throne against his eldest son Khusrau, Sirhindi wrote that Islam was in critical condition, and insisted that as a man of faith, it was Shaikh Farid’s responsibility to take action to revive the glory of Islam. In the same letter he expressed his pleasure on the assassination of Guru Arjan Dev, the fifth Sikh Guru, regarding it an admirable step. He further explained that the government should adopt a policy to humiliate Hindus and that the imposition of jizya rightly kept the infidels in a state of subordination. According to Sirhindi, this was the right time to convince the emperor to eliminate un-Islamic practices which had become a part of the Muslim culture and to eliminate the influence of the infidels. He appealed to Shaikh Farid to play a role in reviving the purity of Islam. If no action was taken and idolatry continued to flourish, the emperor and his nobles would be responsible for damaging the cause of Islam by not creating a consciousness about sharia among the Muslims.

He wrote another letter to Aziz Khan Kuka, Akbar’s foster brother and opposed Akbar’s religious views. In the war of succession, Sirhindi supported Prince Khusrau against Jahangir, yet retained an important position at the court. In his letter, Sirhindi lamented that the forces of Islam were becoming weaker and at this juncture, his contribution would help annihilate irreligious practices and innovations which were influencing the Muslims. He also said that Islam could only be purified by reverting to its original teachings.

Shaikh Ahmad Sirhindi wanted to destroy Akbar’s diplomatic relations with the Hindus. In one of his letters addressed to Lala Beg, he expressed his views that sacrifice of the cow was an Islamic rite.

However, the majority of the ulema and people remained estranged from his movement. Jahangir continued with Akbar’s policy and was a great admirer of his father. In Tuzk-i-Jahangiri, he praised Akbar’s wisdom and sagacity.

Shaikh Ahmad Sirhindi was not popular among the Muslims because of his extremist religious views. When Jahangir summoned him to his court, he found him arrogant and rude and did not hesitate to send him to the fort of Gwalior for a brief period of imprisonment.

During the emergence of communalisn in the 1930s, Shaikh Ahmad Sirhindi was resurrected by some ulema and projected as the champion of Islam. In Pakistani historiography, I.H. Qureshi and S.M. Ikram eulogised him as the defender of Islam and the man who saved it and protected it from the heretical views of Akbar.

Writers of history textbooks portrayed the same image. As a result, Akbar and his policy of sulh-i-kul, multi-cultural unity and secularism were condemned while Shaikh Ahmad Sirhindi’s orthodoxy and religious extremism were appreciated. Sadly, his anti-Hindu, and anti-Shia views are also accepted without criticism, totally negating their dire impact on society today. Today, Pakistani society is paying a heavy price for these misdemeanours.

Cheers Image
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by ramana »

Islamic revolution becoming serious

August 14, 2013
Islamic Revolution in TSP becoming mainstream

The number of cease fire violation on the Line of Control have gone up five fold in the past few weeks and the Indian intelligence agencies say that this is a clear indication to show that the Islamic Revolution in Pakistan is becoming serious.

The Research and Analysis Wing with the Military, Intelligence Bureau has been reading the situation in Pakistan and sources in these agencies tell rediff.com that the problem has become 5 fold. Nawaz Sharrief, Pakistan’s Prime Minister has offered the olive branch, but the resolutions that has been passed in Paksitan blaming India for the violations is a clear sign of things to come.

The surge in cease fire violations and infiltrations over the past few months is a result of many events in Pakistan. Once Nawaz Sharrief took over as the Prime Minister, he has been making the right noises politically regarding better ties with India. These statements have created a problem in various circles in Pakistan. While his own party men who were part of the resolution feel that there is no need to take a soft approach towards India, the army wants to remind him that while talks are fine there are certain No-Go areas which he should be careful while treading on. In addition to this there is the ISI and also the Lashkar-e-Tayiba which have upped the ante and are planning strikes against India to show that they have the upper hand.

According to former Chief of the Research and Analysis Wing, the Loc has always been a dangerous place. A lot of these incidents have been directly related to either cover or diversionary fire. Back in 2003 when the joint statement by the two countries were signed the cease fire violations and also the infiltrations had come to a complete standstill. However when the government changed in India and the civilian government was in force in Pakistan there was a steady increase in the number of such incidents and today it has reached its peak. :!:

Now with Nawaz Sharrief sending messages of peace and repair the political message is positive. The army has been very silent all this while and were all through telling their own flock that they should not be reading too much into these statements. Now with General Ashfaq Kayani’s term coming to an end there is a tussle on on the appointment of the next chief. Would Kayani appoint his man or will the Prime Minister decide on who should succeed him? The Pakistan army is clearly sending a message to Sharrief that we have let two successive civilian governments be in force and are not interested in upsetting the same. But there are certain areas in which the government should not tread on and if there is interference we will try and derail any form of peace process with India. The strategic and security decisions will be driven only by the Pakistan army, Sahay also points out.

According to the intelligence, there is a constant need for both the army and the terrorists groups under the ISI to remind the government of Pakistan that they are still around. Both the ISI and the Hafiz Saeed factions find the need to constantly tell the government while talks are fine, one should remember that they are always around. The intelligence also says that the last message is always aimed at the United States of America. These Pakistan groups only want to tell the US that the more they do business with India, there would be more such attacks.

While these factors have always been part of a Pakistan policy, it is extremely worrisome that the Parliament has passed such a resolution on the LoC violation, This is something that needs to be read in deep and carefully, Indian agencies point out. Now both the Punjab assembly and the Parliament are not under the control of the military or the ISI. In fact it is under the PML today. The resolution is totally contrary to what Sharrief has been saying to India. According to the Intelligence reports this is an indicator of an Islamic revolution which is emerging in Pakistan. It is clearly a resolution which has been aided and backed by the Mullahs of Pakistan who want to get a hold of the political process. This has been an ongoing struggle within Pakistan and the Hafiz Saeeds are trying to take control over the political process and what happened yesterday only indicates that this revolution is becoming serious and the effects of the same are seen in India, the Intelligence Bureau also points out.
So what we on BR have been concluding about TSP is now the flavor of the day!


Even though it is well sourced its ill written.

To sum up there are five factors at play:
1) Election of Nawaz Sharief
2) Intransigence of TSP Army, ISI(which is part of the Army), and the LeT (which is run by ISI!)
3)There is a need for the TSP elements to remind the US to not do business with India.


The recent Pak Assy resolution blaming India for the LOC ceasefire violations are an indication of the extent of Islamization on the political process.

I humbly differ.

The factors in my view are the
1) Impending US drive to reduce troops in Afghanistan which makes them vulnerable to take an equidistant stand between India and Pakistan. The US complusions for a peaceful drawdown make them side with the TSP for they hold the Taliban card. Hence the TSP will stage attacks etc to test the extent of US support to them.

2) The second most important factor is the GOI urge to get peace at any cost with TSP under self and US pressure which will marginalize the jihadi trio:TSPA, ISI and LeT types. Hence again tehy will stage attacks to show their relevance. In fact if GOI makes a peace move, the trio will lclaim its their attakcs that pressured GOI to give inot the peace move.

3) The tieing up the IA arms to retaliate to cross border attacks and the possible group think in the PMO, MEA, and MOD that TSP will react positively to Indian peace give aways shows the Sharam-el-Sheikh appeasement mentality reining in GOI. It also shows a lack of understanding of the nature of the TSP state currently in play. Again TSP will attack for theri will be no pain of retaliation from GOI.

4) Local IA lack of situational alertness. Already the beheading incident had occured. How many incidents do they need to be alert? As such they should be doubly sure of their deployments in strength prior to any UN meeting lest it get derailed. And nothing stopped them from retaliating with effective weapons. All above three factors are not under the IA local command. But to stop an attack after it has begun is in their hands.

The Pak Assy will pass resolution in support of the TSPA for they have no choice. Its not a sign of their Islamization but compulsion to survive in power and thus are not a factor at all. Its a red herring.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by ramana »

Jhujar wrote:MUSLIM ZION: Pakistan as a Political Idea
Al Qitab Begot AlQaida:Tabb Hua Pakistan Paida
Pakistan is, like Israel, an ideological state. Take out the Judaism from Israel and it will fall like a house of cards. Take Islam out of Pakistan and make it a secular state; it would collapse.”

By the time he uttered these words in a 1981 interview with The Economist magazine, Pakistan’s president Zia-ul-Haq was simply mouthing a stereotype. For Zionism had long provided a model for Muslims who sought to carve a new state out of India. Over the course of the nineteenth century, after all, European Jewry had come to represent the archetypical minority for states that were increasingly being defined as the property of their national majorities. Pakistan’s founders routinely invoked the history of non-Muslim minorities, and particularly the Jews, rather than comparing themselves to other Muslim peoples. So in Pakistan and Muslim India, a pamphlet published in 1943 with a preface by Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the man who would become Pakistan’s father, we read that “if small peoples like the Protestant Irish in Ireland, the Christian Arabs in Syria and the Jews in Palestine do not wish to lose their separate political identity, and are supported in this desire for separate existence by two of the foremost democratic nations, there is no reason why Indian Muslims should be forced to accept the position of a minority.”
Given its identification with non-Muslim groups, Pakistan is in some ways not part of Islam’s modern history. Although it was the world’s first Islamic republic, then, Pakistan is also the only country to be created on the basis of Islam alone, just as Israel is the only state to be founded on that of Judaism. And in fact the similarities between these two otherwise very different and even opposed states are striking. Both were created as homelands for dispersed religious minorities; both were conceived by politicians and supported by populations from beyond their borders; and both emerged from bloody partitions supervised by Britain.
Indeed Pakistan’s creation in 1947 was cited as the legal precedent for Israel’s founding a year later. Sir Muhammad Zafrulla Khan, Pakistan’s representative at the UN, tried to deny this similarity, pointing out that the majority of his country’s population was already Muslim before partition, and painting Jewish immigrants to Israel as foreigners. But the partition of India was a far more violent affair than that of Palestine, involving millions more dead and displaced; while Muslims emigrating to Pakistan often originated from much further distances than Middle Eastern Jews proceeding to Israel, and unlike the latter shared neither language nor culture with its existing inhabitants.Yet before their achievement of national homelands, Jews and Muslims were something more than minorities scattered across the vast subcontinents of Europe and India. This was why Zia, in describing Pakistan and Israel as founded on self-conscious ideas rather than inherited prejudices, recognized that they had abandoned the old-fashioned nationalism of blood and soil. It was this kind of nationality, after all, that had done so much to make groups like Jews into suspect minorities. These new countries, then, sought both to join and escape a world of nation states, which in Europe were defined by the romantic myth of a continuous and immemorial link with the land.
Pakistan and Israel are “ideological” states, as Zia put it, founded, like America and other New World countries, not on heredity but the mobility of ideas and peoples. And it is this that also makes of them international entities. For both states claim to represent not simply their own citizens, but all Europe’s Jews or India’s Muslims, with co-religionists from elsewhere at least theoretically capable of joining either nation. The anonymous author of Pakistan and Muslim India, therefore, invoked the idea of a national majority only to internationalize it, by stating that “The Indian Muslims who form one fourth of the total population and number 90 millions are in their opinion comparable to minorities in European countries or even to the Jews who are scattered all over the world.”

At the same time as these minorities were struggling to become majorities in their own homelands, they were also losing their national character within a novel internationalism. Described by their enemies as a Jewish conspiracy or pan-Islamism, this international identity linked European Jews and Indian Muslims to the emergence of new forms of intellectual and political mobility in the wake of the First World War. It is their modernity that makes these nations so distinctive, preventing them from regressing to Europe’s blood-and-soil type of nationalism.
Such conventional forms of nationality are instead characteristic of minority populations in both countries: Hindus, Sikhs and Christians in Pakistan and Christians and Muslims in Israel, whose claims to autochthony stand as a challenge to both the Jewish State and Islamic Republic. For whatever emphasis is put upon the land these new Muslim and Jewish populations have won, both debate and resolve their nationality by a question that in effect divests the nation of its state: who is a Jew and who a Muslim?–

What an idiot. He doesn't understand that Pakistan was created in order to give legitimacy to the creation of Israel one year later.
The day Pakistan gets re-amlagamated into India, Israel will also dissolve. And that will put paid to the millennialism dreams of US Christian fundementalists and hence their support to TSP.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by ramana »

From a POK newspaper, daily Telegram. Very original name!

http://www.dailytelegram.net/pakistan-a ... 065991.htm
Pakistan: a state or an Islamic movement?


June 17, 2013 in Muzaffarabad News

The writer is an independent political and defence analyst. He is also the author of several books, monographs and articles on Pakistan and South Asian affairs

The patterns of human behaviour have undergone major changes in Pakistan with a growing emphasis on the public display of religiosity, religious intolerance and extremism, and a tacit or open admiration of religious militancy. Those who have experienced Pakistan of the early 1970s know how much the state system and society have changed in terms of how the people articulate their identities, their idiom of discourse and historical and cultural references.

There is a strong tendency to reinterpret history in purely religious terms in order to justify the current efforts to describe the management of state and societal affairs as a function of religion. This attempt is understandable because those who want to dominate the present, often attempt to selectively control the past and use this as a justification for what they are doing today.

These trends have created doubts about the role of the state of Pakistan and how it should function at the global level. The key question is, should Pakistan function as a nation state recognised under international law and the UN charter, or should it function as a transnational Islamic movement? Should its global role be supportive of the Islamic movements initiated by hard-line radical religious individuals and groups? As radical groups view every individual and societal activity as a function of religion, they want Pakistan’s foreign policy and international conduct to be shaped by religious considerations and worldview.

If Pakistan has to function as a nation state, it needs to assert its primacy over its territory. It should not allow any group, religious or secular, to use Pakistani territory for activities that threaten other countries. Sovereignty of a state is a right, as well as a responsibility. It is a right of a state that other states should not violate its territory through military or non-military means without its consent. However, sovereignty also signifies the responsibility of a state to make sure that there is no effort to destabilise other states from its territory.

Pakistan cannot isolate itself from the present-day international system or push forward a radical religious agenda at the global level in collaboration with some militant groups. Such groups have a dichotomised view of world politics, wherein the non-Muslim world is viewed as an adversary. This approach breeds conflicts and clashes with the imperatives of the present-day international system, marked by growing interdependence and globalisation in terms of trade and investment and a flow of people, services and ideas across the territorial boundaries of states.

Pakistan’s capacity to play an effective role at the international level depends on its domestic political and societal harmony, economic resilience and positive relevance to the international system through trade and investments, soft diplomacy, cultural exchanges and contribution towards regional and global peace and stability.

It is important that Pakistan works towards peace on its borders with improved diplomatic and economic ties with its immediate neighbours. Pakistan should follow the example of China and build working economic and trade relations with India. Afghanistan should be treated as a neighbour, not as a problem that should be resolved to Pakistan’s satisfaction. The emphasis should be on economic and trade relations, societal linkages and reconstruction of Afghanistan.

Pakistan’s role as a nation state also calls upon the policymakers to control all kinds of religious extremism, militancy and terrorism. There is no use getting bogged down in the narrative of how terrorism originally started and who is now sponsoring it. There are no good militants. All have to be dealt with effectively until they accept the primacy of Pakistan’s Constitution and law.

The PML-N and the PTI are viewed as friends of the Taliban. This raises doubt over whether they can control militancy, which will adversely affect the capacity of the Pakistan government to enjoy respect and confidence of the international community. Pakistan’s success at the international level is directly linked with its domestic capacity to function effectively as the supreme authority within its territory and remove the impression that its civilian and military authorities cultivate militant groups or give space to them to survive, with the hope that these groups might be useful in the future. It needs to be recognised that the time for pursuing foreign policy through non-state militant groups has passed.

The other alternative for Pakistan is to join hands with hard-line militant movements in order to pursue a transnational radical agenda. This can prove catastrophic, both in domestic and global contexts.

In the domestic context, the state of Pakistan will be at the mercy of extremist religious groups who would create denominational coalitions that would attempt to override their rival denominational groups. This would increase internal turmoil and make Pakistan unmanageable; some parts of the country will be lost to these groups.

Radical religious movements will either attempt to use the state apparatus to pursue their transnational radical agenda or use the Pakistani territory as a base camp for pursuing their transnational agenda by all possible means, including violence. In both cases, Pakistan will lose credibility in the domestic and global contexts.

Pakistan has no alternative to establishing itself as an efficacious nation state. This calls for building a viable economy that generates employment and improves the quality of life for the common people. This is linked with the capacity of the Pakistani state to cultivate positive relevance with the rest of the world. The major prerequisite for all this is a non-ambiguous and categorical approach to quell religious extremism and terrorism.

The federal government should own military-led efforts to control terrorism. If the federal government and the military want to succeed in countering terrorism, they need to push their military and economic development strategies to their logical conclusions.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by ramana »

X-Post
ramana wrote:TVASIA has a live speech by Narendra Modi at 6:00 pm Eastern Time in US.

Among other things he repeated the India is Kashmir to Kanyakumari and Attock to Cuttack. In other words the Ralph Peters map is not acceptable to Nationalist India.

So all the US plans to slice and dice TSP to Afghanistan are not acceptable to nationalist India.
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14222
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by svinayak »

ramana wrote:X-Post
ramana wrote:TVASIA has a live speech by Narendra Modi at 6:00 pm Eastern Time in US.

Among other things he repeated the India is Kashmir to Kanyakumari and Attock to Cuttack. In other words the Ralph Peters map is not acceptable to Nationalist India.

So all the US plans to slice and dice TSP to Afghanistan are not acceptable to nationalist India.
India has signed up for Akhand Israel.
This will give India to draw the border according to its needs
chanakyaa
BRFite
Posts: 1799
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 00:09
Location: Hiding in Karakoram

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by chanakyaa »

Pakistan Quake Kills 39 and Creates Island

http://abcnews.go.com/News/pakistan-qua ... d=20358248

Now that Bakistan has extra 200 ft Long Island can we expect some peace?
rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by rajanb »

^^^^^
Shouldn't we claim it as ours since it was born without purest of green ogres? :mrgreen:
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by ramana »

X-Post....
Lalmohan wrote:as pak goes further down the abyss, the only kause will be the kore one and they would rather rip out their own jaguar veins than do any nation building (two or otherwise) - i am afraid we are in for more of the same. also, diverting bad talibs towards the loc is better than having them fester in cantt. areas
Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by Agnimitra »

Pakistan as a brainwashed hostage of the Ashraf Qabila, after being torn away from its mother India, is being positioned as a pivot:

X-posting from US-PRC-India thread:

Maybe this is why Zaid Hamid dreams that the decisions of the world will be taken in Pakistan a few years from now:

Global Times (Chicom tabloid): Sino-Pak ties a testing ground for new global order

Middle Kingdom Bhadrakumar's commentary on this: China eyes Pakistan as regional partner
The thrust of the piece is on reorienting China-Pakistan strategic cooperation to cope with the changes in the global order characterized by the decline of the West and the surge of China, and China’s search for a new type of relationship with the US.

The GT piece makes the case for a new globalization system in which China and Pakistan will actively engage in “South-South cooperation” and strive to “unify” (rally) other countries that are today passive participants in the US-led international system. It argues that China-Pakistan cooperation, which was based on “balanced diplomacy” historically, should assume a broader sweep whereby both “should view the troubles of the other as their own problems.” While the core of the partnership should be economic cooperation, its “essential foundations” involve “mutual trust in politics and security and practical defense cooperation.”

The commentary has appeared just before Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to China and, equally, against the backdrop of the upswing in the US-Indian defence ties after his recent visit to Washington. To be sure, Beijing takes note that India is steadily being drawn into the US’ rebalancing strategy in Asia, which of course it sees as paramountly directed at containing China.

China feels the pressure from the US’s “pivot” to Asia and would look for ways to counter it by intensifying ties with friendly countries such as Pakistan. The Chinese-Russian “coordination”, for example, is assuming an orientation directed at the US’ strategies. East Asia, Central Asia and the Middle East are mentioned as the theatres where China would pursue such “South-South cooperation” strategy — with Africa and Latin America slated for the medium term.

Clearly, from what it appears, there is no scope for the US and China to cooperate in “moderating” the Pakistani policies, as American pundits fancy. The commentary promises Beijing’s support for Pakistan in its efforts to deal with “interference” from the US. Pakistani prime minister Nawaz Sharif is due to visit the US later this month.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by Philip »

China is in a process of integrating Pak into its order of battle.What (fortunately for us) prevents a faster integration is the Islamist nature of the Paki beast,which China also suffers from with the Uighars.However,on military matters,joint strategy,the two should be considered as a two-faced beast.As a poster said,the scheme is to cause exhaustion of the IA on the LOC/borders on both fronts.Our resources are limited.The latest VAYU has a very worrying feature on operational expenses of the IAF,comparisons for diff. aircraft in service and types worldwide.The nature of our future acquisitions will impinge dramatically upon the def. budget and the IAF is being forced to cut down on its operations/flying time as a result.As the economy further retreats,the paisa is really pinching.

With the US retreating from Afghanistan as one predicted a decade ago,with its tail between its legs,leaving only a small contingent of drones to pick off ungodly leadership,the Pakis will have surplus jihadis to send over and create mayhem in the Valley.Unless we devise a pro-active response,where we take the initiative,we will always be on the backfoot,allowing the Pakis to dictate the turn of events.As many analysts have said for a long time now,Pak behaves only when it is hurt .It must be made to suffer for its perfidy.The "Sherrif" of Pak has a track record of speaking "with a forked tongue".His peace initiatives are merely lip service.Gen.Bandicoot is on record that the Sherrif knew about the Kargil gambit,but pretended to know nothing when it ended up into a disaster.The last few decades has seen the Paki state turn into a hydra-headed terrorist monster,where numerous jihadi groups become the storm troopers for the military.The downside on this huge push towards fanatical Islamism has been the spawning of ultra-extremists who have the most blinkered view of what the Paki state should be,an instrument of the sharia,which goes against the grain of the corrupt and lascivious lifestyle of the crore commanders and the vast majority of the Paki establishment,who have been corrupted by the west's financial largesse.Here is how the ungodly are generating their own funds!

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/o ... ror-groups

Eid animal slaughter funds Pakistan terror groups
Hides from 6m animals sacrificed during Eid sold by front organisations for militant groups
Jon Boone in Islamabad
theguardian.com, Tuesday 15 October 2013

Eid animal slaughter in Pakistan
Men lead a recently purchased camel for Eid on the outskirts of Karachi. Photograph: Athar Hussain/Reuters

Huge numbers of goats, cows and even camels will be slaughtered in Pakistani on Wednesday homes to mark the Islamic holy day of Eid al-Adha.

The sacrificial offering of around 6m animals will allow families to fulfil a religious duty, guarantee some much appreciated meat handouts to the poor and provide nearly half of the annual requirement of the country's leather industry.

It will also generate an extraordinary cash windfall for some of Pakistan's most dangerous militant groups.

Thinly disguised front organisations have been gearing up to compete against each other and legitimate charities to collect as many animal skins as possible, which can then be sold on for cash.

"For us it is second only to Ramadan for our income," says an official from the Falah-e-Insaniyat Foundation (FIF
).

FIF is the charitable wing of Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD), itself the reincarnation of one of south Asia's most dangerous militant groups, the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), a banned organisation dedicated to fighting jihad against India.

JuD has successfully fought off legal bans although many believe it remains deeply involved in militancy.

The US government has offered $10m (£6m) for information leading to the arrest of Hafiz Saeed, the group's leader accused by some US officials of masterminding and overseeing the 2008 Mumbai terrorist attacks.

Saeed moves around the country freely. On Monday, he held a press conference outside a mosque in an affluent district of Islamabad.

Surrounded by piles of food, toys and other goods that he said would be given to victims of last month's earthquake in Baluchistan, he appealed for people to give their animal hides to JuD.

"Whatever funds we get from hides of animals we will use in Baluchistan to rebuild houses and help the people," he said to a bank of almost 20 television cameras.

The organisation hopes to collect 100,000 hides from around the country this year. A cow hide can fetch up to $50.

Also available to buy are JuD livestock which the organisation provides and slaughters on behalf of individuals or groups who want to pool resources to share the cost.

Such initiatives have helped the organisation take market share from other charities, including the Edhi Foundation, a much-respected social welfare group.

"It's hard to complete because they have more manpower from all their religious seminaries," said Mohammad Rashid from the Edhi Foundation in Islamabad. "They send all their students out to the streets, to volunteer."

Because JuD is not officially a banned organisation nothing will or can be done to stop it collecting hides.

There are fears that very little will be done to stop illegal groups from collecting hides either, particularly as many of them operate under false names.

Officials say around half of the 24 groups that applied for the right to set up street stalls to collect hides in Islamabad were rejected after they were investigated and found to be front organisations.

In recent weeks newspapers have carried government advert warning people not to give hides to illegal groups. However, a thorough crackdown is unlikely.

Muhammad Rizwan, the senior superintendent of police in Islamabad, said the issue was not as critical to public safety as preventing suicide bombers from getting into mosques or other large gatherings that will occur across the country in the coming days.

"Our focus has to be on security because we have 685 mosques in the city alone and many huge gatherings. All our resources will be focused onto that."

While most people will give their hides to local mosques or respectable charities, some deliberately give to militants.

"Definitely why shouldn't I give to jihadi organisations," said Syed Sabir Hussain, a small business owner from Rawalpindi. "What is wrong if they are fighting for Allah and Muslims?"
PS:In the age of real time NCW warfare,it is hilarious how Hafeez Sayeed with a supposed US bounty on his head time and time again makes long winded speeches of hatred against India,etc.,from various Paki cities and mosques.The US is also paying lip service in exterminating him.They well know where he is and where he will be preaching his hate sermons.The hard fact is that they have used him in the past ,along with their partners the ISI for their nefarious purposes ,just as they used Osama BL,and still need him for terror acts against India and Afghanistan.Sending him to meet his "72" in the age of drone strikes is child's play for the US,the Q remains why haven't they given him his boarding pass thus far?
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by ramana »

Tufail Ahmed in New Ind Express:

Islamism of Iqbal
Question Islamism of iconic poetBy Tufail Ahmad
Published: 09th November 2013 06:00 AM
Last Updated: 09th November 2013 02:53 AM

Muhammad Iqbal (1877-1938), Pakistan’s national poet whose birthday on November 9 is celebrated by Islamist organisations and Urdu litterateurs across South Asia, :mrgreen: is known for promulgating the idea of Pakistan, engendering Islamism among Muslim youth, lauding socialism which he did not follow and ridiculing democracy under which he thought people are counted and not weighed. Iqbal has been the subject of numerous doctorates and academic books, but his poetry is best known for radicalising Urdu-speaking Muslim youth. His couplets are on the lips of the followers of Jamaat-e-Islami in Pakistan, India and elsewhere.

On December 29, 1930, addressing the 25th session of All India Muslim League at Allahabad, Iqbal dismissed Indian nationalism as “false” and demanded a separate state for Muslims comprising northwestern provinces, now Pakistan. The Islamist thinker defined Islam as “an ethical ideal plus a certain kind of polity” which he explained as “a social structure regulated by a legal system and animated” by Islam. As India has emerged into a vibrant republic today as conceived by Gandhi, Nehru and Ambedkar, the malfunctioning state of Pakistan grew out of Iqbal’s vision. In his speech at Allahabad, Iqbal was clearly sowing the seeds of sharia rule, notwithstanding his attempt to convince the Hindus otherwise. :mrgreen:

In a bid to justify the Islamic basis of the Muslim state he was proposing, Iqbal devoted his speech to disparaging the territorial conception of Europe’s nation-states, lamented that the outlook of the younger generation of Muslims was coloured by territorial boundaries of their countries, and defined himself as “a man who is not despaired of Islam as a living force for freeing the outlook of man from its geographical limitations”. In this thinking, Iqbal is a front-runner to the Taliban and Al-Qaeda ideologues of today. In jihadi videos, the Taliban and Al-Qaeda fighters quote Iqbal to demand a global Islamic caliphate by rejecting the geographical boundaries of Afghanistan, Pakistan and other Muslim states. The jihadi magazine Azan recently quoted a couplet in which Iqbal dismisses Muslim states as idols because their boundaries are territorial: “The country/state is the biggest among these new idols; its clothing is the shroud of religion.”

In Pakistan, Iqbal is revered as the country’s ideological founder. To strengthen anti-Semitism, Pakistani columnists cite Iqbal for his anti-Jewish statements and couplets like: “the veins and life of the English (people) are in the clutches of Jews”. To justify Pakistan’s controversial blasphemy laws, writers note that Iqbal, in his book Zarb-e-Kaleem, praised Ghazi Alimuddin who killed Rajpal for blasphemy in Lahore and Ghazi Abdul Qayyum who killed Nathu Ram in Karachi, both victims being Hindus. One Urdu columnist celebrates suicide bombings by quoting Iqbal: “This martyrdom, as if it’s treading in the path of love; People think it’s easy to become a Muslim!” In his book Bal-e-Jibril, Iqbal opposed the separation of religion from the state: “Whether it be the pomp of monarchy or democracy’s show; if religion is separated from politics, what results is Genghis’s tyranny.”

Pakistan’s veteran editor Majeed Nizami gives Iqbal’s famous couplet on how Islamic conquerors rode horses into the oceans of darkness an atomic meaning: “our horses are our nuclear weapons”. Iqbal’s poetry is action-oriented, rousing Muslims to action. Iqbal transformed Nietzsche’s idea of superman into the ideal of mard-e-momin, or pure Muslim. In The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam, Iqbal’s opening words are: “The Quran is a book which emphasises deed rather than ideas.” A columnist says: “Iqbal is the Quran amongst poets and a poet of the Quran.” :roll: Iqbal’s poetry derives Koranic authority and radicalises youth. In a Persian couplet, he says: “Muslims are ill-bred and dressed in coarse clothes/and whose activities have put Gabriel under tumult; Having come to demolish the mark of other communities/as if this community has become a burden on the world.”

Mohammad Shoaib Adil, editor of Lahore-based Nia Zamana, perhaps the only liberal magazine in Urdu language, says that Iqbal was out to conquer the world for Islam and through his poetry planted the seeds of global Islamism. Iqbal’s jangjuana shairi, war-transpiring poetry, has been taught through textbooks and media in Pakistan. Adil notes that clerics and liberals previously also debated Iqbal’s ideas about ijtihad (consensus and reasoning as sources of lawmaking), but any discussion on this aspect of his thought gave way to a jihadi narrative following the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan in the mid-1990s and after 9/11 even liberal writers stopped seeing any benefit in such arguments.

In India, where a vibrant democratic culture over the past six decades has created abundant free space for journalists, poets, writers, dramatists and others for expression of views, Iqbal’s poetry could have been examined critically, especially for the ideas that are drawing Muslim youth to radical Islam. However, Urdu litterateurs in India have focused on the literary merit of his poetry and the depth of his thought as if these were neutral in meaning, thereby reproducing volumes of research that are celebratory in tone and sympathetic to Islamists.

As Pakistan slides into an anarchic form of Islamism, a democratic criticism of Iqbal’s ideas is needed. First, the departments of Urdu and politics in Indian universities should collaborate on joint research to study the political impact of Iqbal’s ideas on Muslim youth. This is needed because Urdu students lack the skills of a social scientist. Second, most Muslim scholars will continue to nurse a sympathetic relationship with Iqbal, reproducing his work and reinforcing Islamism. It is essential that non-Muslim scholars, especially those based in think tanks that are not limited by academic boundaries, undertake independent research on Iqbal. Third, Iqbal’s poetry is celebrated by religious groups like Jamaat-e-Islami in India. There is a need to foster a public discourse on Iqbal’s ideology. This can be done by academic institutions, think tanks and journalists through electronic and social media, and such efforts should contrast Iqbal’s Islamism with the cosmopolitanism of Ghalib, Faiz and others.

Tufail Ahmad is director of South Asia Studies Project at the Middle East Media Research Institute, Washington DC. Email: [email protected]
So Iqbal is the patron saint of the jihadi culture emanating from South Asia!!!

Yet WKK is India celebrate his nonsense.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by ramana »

I don't get how she can be DG of Delhi Policy Group with Lt. Gen Raghavan when she accepts GN Fai's funds!

Renewing an India Pakistan Peace Process?
Renewing an India Pakistan Peace Process?
Radha Kumar

A workable strategy would be to act nationally and multilaterally against terrorism; negotiate bilaterally on Kashmir; and build trade under the radar


{Sounds nice but lets be realistic. Pakistan has shown no inclination to act against terrorism. Surprisingly MMS govt also has shown the same inclination. And worse people advising GOI are on terrorist payroll and still have the gall to preach to Indians! As for trade under the radar, why Pakistan has repeatedly refused to grant MFN status even though India has done that and Pakistan prefers to import Indian goods via third parties to preserve a modicum of its "H&D" in other words under the radar and under the table is how trade happens wrt to Pakistan while its citizens strut in Bollwyoowd and Delhi with benign help of MMS govt and its minions in and out of govt.}



Now that the heat over Pakistani Adviser Sartaj Aziz’s visit to Delhi has died down, it is time to evaluate whether it improved the prospects for a renewed India-Pakistan peace process, or set them back. If we go by the media coverage and the Bharatiya Janata Party’s outcry, there is no hope. Reading between the lines, however, the signs are ambiguous: indeed, they display positive attributes as well as negative ones.

High hopes

To briefly recap, India had high hopes when Nawaz Sharif won the elections in Pakistan. He had stated during the election campaign that peace with India was one of his top priorities. Unfortunately, despite imaginative confidence-building measures such as the offer to transmit electricity from Indian to Pakistani Punjab, Indian hopes receded, as did the promised normalisation of trade through reciprocating the most-favoured nation status, partly due to backlash against them in Pakistan.

{Only deluded dilli billis with WKKitis have this high hope. Sharif had lived up to his sobriquet of badmash when terrorist attacks on Indian soldiers were resumed under his watch}


The first 10 months of this year witnessed an escalation of hostility between India and Pakistan. In fact, the escalation began in the run-up to Pakistani elections, with Hafiz Saeed given a free hand to inflame sentiments, and the founding of the Difa-e-Pakistan alliance of extremists. At the same time, we saw a sharp rise in infiltration attempts across the Line of Control, which has continued and led to hundreds of ceasefire violations as well as a resurgence of terrorist attacks on security forces in Jammu and Kashmir, one of them from across the International Border. Whether supported by the Pakistani military or not, it was clear that the militant groups were pushing the envelope to see how far they could go with Pakistan’s new government.

{We are in the beginning of the 11th month. Instead of calling out the fact that the Pakis were escalating hostilities thorough out the year she writes as if there is still hope!}

These incidents led Prime Ministers Manmohan Singh and Mr. Sharif to agree in New York that the Indian and Pakistani Directors-General of Military Operations would meet to identify improved mechanisms to maintain the ceasefire and, by extension, prevent infiltration, which is a high priority for India.
{I guess its not a priority for Pakistan which has completed the elections there!}


An immediate media outcry that nothing could come from the DGMO talks led to their indefinite postponement and ultimately benefited militant groups, from whom even this weak spotlight was removed.

{isnt it true based on past experience that DGMo talks were futile. Maybe she should talk to her colleagues at DPG who were ex DGMO!}

External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid, and the Adviser, Mr. Aziz, have now again emphasised the importance of the DGMOs meeting. :mrgreen: Let us hope that this time around it will happen soon and the DGMOs will actually get a chance to fulfil the important mandate of the meeting, which is to stop violence across the LoC and the International Border.

{Again who will their meeting stop violence? And what mandate?}


The general assumption in India, and to some extent in Pakistan, is that a serious peace initiative can be made only after Indian elections in the spring-summer of 2014. Yet it is these intervening months that will be a make-or-break period for peace-making. In the first year of the Pakistan People’s Party government, its leaders were willing to take bold initiatives for peace with India but were deterred by the Mumbai attacks and stiff military opposition. :rotfl: For the rest of the PPP term, little happened by way of India-Pakistan peace-making, with a negative impact on Jammu and Kashmir, as the 2010 youth uprisings and deaths indicated. The events of this year could be seen as similar attempts by spoilers to disrupt peace initiatives; the danger is that we risk another four years of inaction.

{Dear who are the spoilers? There should be limit to bolivating}

Indications are that Pakistan is inching towards restarting the back channel on Kashmir that was initiated during Mr. Sharif’s second term in 1998. At a recent Pugwash conference in Islamabad, Mr. Aziz reportedly assured participants that his government would seriously consider the framework that was developed during the Lambah-Aziz discussions of 2004-06 and then put on the back-burner at President Pervez Musharraf’s request.

{ so it was Mushy that put it on back burner. Then why are you blaimg Indian elections for this?}

The framework offered maximum autonomy to all parts of the former princely state. The LoC would gradually become invisible through free Kashmiri trade and movement. All parts of the former princely state would be encouraged to undertake joint resource development, and there would be phased demilitarisation (beginning with non-state actors such as the militant groups). And India and Pakistan would together monitor the situation.

The PPP-led government that followed pleaded ignorance of the back channel and the framework that was developed there, largely because it had been misnamed “the Musharraf Formula” though it had emerged from an intra-Kashmiri dialogue. :rotfl: And it remained inactive for most of its tenure. If Mr. Sharif’s government picks up the discussion from where it left off, its gains will not have been lost and there could be tangible progress on the Kashmir front. In this context, Mr. Aziz’s meetings with the Hurriyat and allied groups on the sidelines of the ASEM summit in Delhi have come in for considerable media flak, but this could in fact contribute to restarting the back channel from where it had left off. True, the Pakistani embassy should have consulted the MEA before scheduling the meetings (I do not know whether it did or did not). More importantly, it should not have invited Asiya Andrabi of the Dukhtaran-e-Millat: she is avowedly against an India-Pakistan peace process, and has repeatedly spoken out against the Kashmir-focussed CBMs. Given that her family in Pakistan has also been allegedly involved in activities supporting terrorism, the invitation could only send mixed messages within Pakistan and Kashmir.

{PPP did not proceed for the TSPA did not agree to the open borders policy as it would negate their role. Even the Badmash envoy Aziz showed his perfidy as you note but you want India to repose trust in him. There is a limit to incredulity and gullibility.}


Role in peace-making

However, groups like the Mirwaiz-led Hurriyat and Yasin Malik’s JKLF have in the past supported both the India-Pakistan CBMs and the framework developed in the back channel. If they conveyed their desire for the framework to be the base document for a renewed Kashmir peace process, then the meetings with Mr. Aziz will have been useful. The argument made by the BJP and picked up by the media that these meetings should not have been allowed, is specious. In fact, the green light for such meetings was given during Prime Minister Vajpayee’s tenure, as part of a policy of helping the Hurriyat play a role in peace-making. The impact was large — the Hurriyat was able to push militant groups for an end to violence; indeed, militancy gradually lost legitimacy in Kashmir.

{So what. The circumstances were different then. It was not Hurriyat which is a US supported entity that stopped the militancy but the Indian troops and Kashmiri youth. No thanks to people like you who support the terrorists and take their money}


But for the Hurriyat to assume a role in the peace process, it should talk to representatives of the Government of India, which it continues to hesitate over, perhaps for fear of being shot (as was its last interlocutor, Fazl Haq Qureshi). And New Delhi needs to have the same access to dissidents in the Pakistan-held parts of the former princely state, including Gilgit-Baltistan, as Pakistani leaders have to dissidents in Jammu and Kashmir. :rotfl:

PPP strategy

Kashmir is only one piece of the puzzle that besets India-Pakistan relations. Counter-terrorism and trade are two other priorities to emerge over the 15-year effort at peace-making by Indian and Pakistani leaders. At the beginning of Mr. Sharif’s third term, it looked as if the three could be linked and would provide the ballast to sustain negotiations through the hard times that were inevitable. The PPP government’s strategy, after its first-year setbacks, was to build trade as a ballast and then progress to negotiations on what it considered “doables”, such as Siachen and Sir Creek. Trade did progress considerably, with new infrastructure being developed at Wagah (better on the Indian than the Pakistani side).

What the PPP government failed to see was that progress against terrorism has become the test of good faith in India, whether in the government or among the public. The stalled Mumbai trials are a constant reminder that Pakistan is unwilling to act against anti-India militancy; and the trebling of infiltration attempts this year lends credence to this belief. For our part, we fail to see that it is difficult to find judges or public prosecutors for the Mumbai trials, since a prosecutor was killed and judges regularly seek transfer out of fear. :rotfl: Pakistan today is in a far worse situation as far as militancy is concerned than it was 10 or even seven years ago. This does not mean India tolerates the violence; rather, we need to build our own defences. A workable strategy would be to take concerted action nationally and multilaterally against terrorism; negotiate bilaterally on Jammu and Kashmir; and build trade under the radar, if necessary, as happened during the PPP period.

{You want India to make agreements with such a state? Are you sane?}


But no strategy will succeed unless supported by the military in Pakistan and the Opposition in India.{Wow what an equal= equal!!!} Lacking access to the former, I cannot analyse the potential for change; but as far as the latter is concerned, the BJP’s approach appears to be: wait until we come to power and then we will allow progress. That is surely morally unacceptable: no party should hold a peace process hostage until its turn at power. :((

Indeed, Mr. Vajpayee’s peace initiatives gained traction because the Congress supported them (it had originally opposed them but decided, at Dr. Singh’s intervention, to support them in the national interest). The BJP’s position is also practically untenable: by mid-2014 Pakistan’s attention will be focussed on the new government in Afghanistan, where its stakes are much higher, and the space to achieve a feasible and result-oriented India-Pakistan peace process will be severely curtailed.

Finally, India’s electronic media do not appear to take their own influence seriously. Endlessly repetitive talk shows of naysayers pooh-poohing every peace initiative our government takes have created a deep public scepticism in peace-making. Given how many spoilers there are who want to prevent peace, public support is essential for any leadership to persevere. The media could play a critical role in anchoring the constituency for peace, instead of strengthening the spoiler lobby. I cannot think of a single talk show in 10 years that has discussed what a serious India-Pakistan peace process could consist of, issue by issue and action by action, taking the very real frailties of our country and Pakistan into account. How refreshing would that be!

(Radha Kumar is Director-General of the Delhi Policy Group. The views published here are her own.)
her deluded mind thinks but for BJP and the electronic media in India peace would have rained in Kashmir thanks to her type of thinkers.
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21234
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by Prem »

ramana wrote:I don't get how she can be DG of Delhi Policy Group with Lt. Gen Raghavan when she accepts GN Fai's funds!

Renewing an India Pakistan Peace Process?
Renewing an India Pakistan Peace Process?
Radha Kumar
But no strategy will succeed unless supported by the military in Pakistan and the Opposition in India.{Wow what an equal= equal!!!} Lacking access to the former, I cannot analyse the potential for change; but as far as the latter is concerned, the BJP’s approach appears to be: wait until we come to power and then we will allow progress. That is surely morally unacceptable: no party should hold a peace process hostage until its turn at power. :((
(Radha Kumar is Director-General of the Delhi Policy Group. The views published here are her own.) her deluded mind thinks but for BJP and the electronic media in India peace would have rained in Kashmir thanks to her type of thinkers.
After Stan Madhurissa stint,with Due respect, Raghwan sir have gone secular way . Complany of Fai's friend Radha Kumar is complementary only.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by ramana »

An Old Book Review in Kolkata Telegraph circa 2002

Divided for Itself
DIVIDED AGAINST ITSELF
Kaushik Roy


Emerging from the veil
Pakistan: Nationalism Without A Nation
Edited by Christophe Jaffrelot, Manohar, Rs 650


Is nationalism passe' Globalization and ethnic tussles throughout the world have brought into focus the question of the viability of nation states. The failure of nationalism in one of the poorest third world states is the theme of the volume under review. Fifiteen political scientists from Australia, India and Pakistan attempt to analyze why M.A. Jinnah’s vision of Pakistan as the land of all Muslims in south Asia came to naught.

Pakistan had based itself on Islam. However, infighting between the Shias and Sunnis proved the failure of religion to provide an uniform platform for nation-building. Though Shias constituted only 20 per cent of the Pakistani population, says S.V.R. Nasr, Shia generals dominated the top levels of decision-making. In reaction, during the reign of Zia ul-Haq, the Sunnis attempted to overthrow the Shia dominance. These rivalries spilled over into society, resulting in communal clashes.

Despite a common religion, writes Christophe Jaffrelot, social and geographical factors created fissures within the Muslim ummah. Sindhis, Baluchis, Mohajirs and Punjabis are the disparate ethnic groups which constitute Pakistan. If a shared hatred of the Hindu “other” characterizes Pakistan today, a competitive nationalism among the various ethnic groups is no less a part of that reality.

The predominance of the Punjabis is a sore point within Pakistan. After the secession of East Pakistan in 1971, the Punjabis constituted 56 per cent of the total population of Pakistan. In fact, the predominnance of Punjabis was one of the principal causes for the emergence of Bengali nationalism in erstwhile East Pakistan. Ian Talbot argues that the seeds of Punjabi dominance can be traced back to the colonial times. The British recruited many Punjabi Muslims from west Punjab and in return, rewarded the “martial race” with land.

The canal colonies which developed under British patronage made Punjab richer than other provinces of British India. After the British departed, the Pakistan government persisted with the policy of granting land to pacify the powerful Punjabis. In 1981, 80 per cent of all tractors and 88 per cent of all tube wells in Pakistan were in Punjab
.

The confluence of military, land and economic power not only strengthened the position of the Punjabis within Pakistan, but it also weakened the country’s nascent moves towards democracy. This process of “Punjabization” was accelerated when the Punjabi dominated army moved into the centre-stage in Islamabad as well

Other ethnic communities looked askance at the Punjabi ascendancy. Post-1947, the Mohajirs were enthusiastic about Pakistani nationalism since they benefitted from the burgeoning government sector. In 1961, the Urdu speaking Mohajirs, who comprised only 3.5 per cent of the population, occupied 21 per cent of posts in the civil services. But as a result of the rising Punjabi dominance and government cut backs due to economic reforms, claims Yunus Samad, the Mohajirs’ share in government jobs declined. No wonder, the Mohajirs have taken to violent protests lately.

Eric Gellner and Eric Hobsbawm have studied nations and nationalism in Europe. This volume attempts to break fresh ground by focusing on a non-European context. On the one hand, international commerce and developments in telecommunications have made inter-state frontiers fluid. On the other hand, different ethnic groups are reasserting their identities in reaction to the anxieties of globalization. It may be too early to predict the end of the nation-state but the tussle between ethnicity and globalization may be the greatest challenge in this millennium.

KAUSHIK ROY
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by ramana »

Two x-posts....
wig wrote:Lt Gen Syed Ata Hasnain (retd) former General Officer Commanding of the Srinagar-based 15 Corps has authored an article on Gen R Sharif, PA. Lt Gen Hasnain(R) is a Fellow of the Royal College of Defence Studies, London
General Raheel Sharif, as a protégé of Gen Parvez Musharraf, has a military pedigree many soldiers would envy. As a fellow of the prestigious Royal College of Defence Studies, London, he is in the exalted company of his mentor.

Media reports ascribe to him the thinking behind Pakistan’s doctrinal aspects of countering India’s pro-active strategy. While being a great professional citation, this is hardly likely even if he is considered an expert at defensive, and not offensive, warfare because Pakistan’s reaction of moving some of its formations to strategically more viable locations was thought through well before General Sharif rose to the level of a Corps Commander (30 Corps, Gujranwala).

Hamid Hussain’s assessment that General Sharif “is probably not suited to lead an army engaged in a war” needs to be evaluated more comprehensively. Study of history belies the assumption that the body language of senior military leaders and their appearance can lead to definitive deductions about their military intellect, translation into ground execution and leadership skills under duress and stress.

Of Pakistan’s senior leadership it can authoritatively be said that it is outstandingly wily and innovative at ‘conflict initiation’ but astonishingly unprofessional at taking the intent and aim to its military conclusion as part of ‘conflict termination’. This has been borne out in the 1965 Indo-Pak conflict, the actions in East Pakistan in 1971, in the operational content of Exercise Zarb-e-Momin in 1990, the Kargil misadventure in 1999 and in the recent exchanges on the LoC in Poonch, Mendhar and Keran.

None of these events led to any positive gains for Pakistan. In fact, the only decision which led to a possibly positive outcome was President Musharraf’s mutual initiative with the India to bring about ceasefire on the LoC on November 26, 2003, a decision which had far-reaching implications for both armies. Will General Sharif show similar cerebral capability and ‘soft’ approach towards the LoC to enable the task at hand on the more difficult western and internal security fronts, which are wrenching Pakistan apart? In fact, the most important question is how General Sharif will view the Jammu & Kashmir dynamics.

Will it be bravado at the LoC to display an offensive personality in charge? The negative spinoff of any such machismo will be an immediate effect on Nawaz Sharif’s declared intent of treading the peace path with India. Secondly, Pakistan’s current penchant with filling the Valley and Jammu region with infiltrated terrorists to retain options in calibrating the proxy war may well tempt General Sharif to project an offensive character. A reversal of policy is least likely especially when there is a change of command.

With Pakistan’s supposed perception that nothing major is likely on the diplomatic front over the next six months the situation points towards Mr Sharif giving his new army chief time and space to settle, even at the cost of a few flare-ups on the LoC. Although Mr Sharif has had negative experience with his chiefs, it is unlikely he will sully the internal military reputation of the new chief by placing unreasonable controls on him. We are therefore unlikely to see any major change in the policy on Jammu and Kashmir; only time and our response at the LoC will dictate which way the situation will head.

The Indian establishment needs to ensure that traditional assumptions of winter being a period of stability on the LoC are put at rest. The Pakistan defence establishment has been known for its innovations in conflict initiation. Whatever the personality of General Sharif, the dynamics of 2014 will force him to be aggressive on Kashmir. He may be forced by the hardliners to aid and abet the current Kashmir policy.

Some would expect that a personal loss in the form of his elder brother in a battle with the Indian Army in 1971 may have created in General Sharif a latent antipathy against India and this would be an opportunity for revenge. His credentials do not appear to suggest that. General Sharif is likely to think through any initiative.

The label of being less offensive possibly appears due to his track record of appointments and being an Infantryman. Flamboyant commanders are presumed to be black uniformed (Armoured Corps or Special Forces) with a record of commanding units and formations aggressively on the LoC, which General Sharif lacks. Possibly, PM Nawaz Sharif was advised on this and he deliberately chose to have a stable conformist. Infantrymen may not carry flamboyance, but it needs to be remembered that aggression comes naturally to them. On the Indian side the majority of iconic military leaders, Cariappa, Manekshaw and Aurora were all Infantrymen.

Predicting anything about Pakistan is fraught with danger, most of all the panning of personality of its military leaders. However, on balance, General Sharif’s tenure needs to lend stability in the approaching difficult and challenging years of the security scenario in the sub-continent. His politico-military compulsions of keeping J&K on the simmer (not boil) have to be assessed. He is unlikely to kowtow with radical elements beyond current levels knowing that tactical gains will not translate into strategic victory. Lastly, the Indian establishment needs to carefully evaluate whether General Sharif is the man to trust. In short, it is a situation where there are shades and shades of grey in which a black and white mind would only spell paralysis.
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2013/20131201/edit.htm#1

and
SSridhar wrote:In Pakistani Army, no Chief can afford to be 'pragmatic' with respect to India, even if he wishes to be so, and yet carry along his corps commanders with him. We have to remember that the Pakistani Army has transitioned from being a 'colonial Army' to a 'national Army' to a 'transnational Army' (courtesy, Farzana Shaikh). The 'Iman, Tawqah, Jihad-fi-Sabilillah' is no idle talk as the Generals truly believe in the motto, just like any other citizen of their country. Such an expansion in the role of the Pakistani Army, and hence the nation-state itself, was probably needed to explain away the loss of over half of the nation in 1971 and to take solace in wider role that Pakistan was expected to play henceforth on the world stage.

Unlike what the article fervently hopes that the new General may not "kowtow with radical elements beyond current levels" is flawed for two reasons. The first and foremost is that by no stretch of our tolerance and dignity is the current level of violence by radical elements against India acceptable to us. This is truly shameful that we have come to accept the existing situation of jihad and terrorism from across the border and would be happier to see it not escalate and even assume that such a non-escalation is a positive turn of events in relationship with Pakistan. A touchstone of the General's approach towards us would be to wait and watch how he treats the LeT and Hafeez Sayeed. The linkages among the various terrorist tanzeems and the Pakistani Army are so complex and interwoven that it is simply impossible to cut the relationship. As the denouement in Afghan approaches, this relationship will only grow stronger. Pakistan has not forsaken its twin doctrines of strategic depth in Afghanistan and of inflicting a thousand cuts to bleed India to death. The thousand cuts cannot be dealt by the Pakistani Army and it needs the jihadi terrorists. That's why it is doing everything to further its doctrines as evidenced by its protection of the Kandahari Shura, the Haqqani group, the holding back of Baradar, its insistence of a primary role in Afghan political games to foist Islamabad-pasand rulers in Kabul and more than all these demanding the total exclusion of India from Afghanistan.

The second is that if the General does not 'kowtow' he will be wajib-ul-qitl the next moment. As the principal staff officer of two Generals, he knows exactly what happened. He would not have been selected to that post if he had not been part of the usual loop. The fallacy of expecting a better turn of events from the new General stems from what the above article mistakenly states, namely, "Nawaz Sharif’s declared intent of treading the peace path with India". The rule of the civilian leaders caused the greatest damage for India in terms of terror. These civilian leaders maintained a very close rapport with some of the most dangerous terror tanzeems. The accommodation between Ms. Bhutto and the Sipah-e-Saheba-Pakistan (SSP) in c.1993 or between Nawaz Sharif’s PML-N and SSP in c. 2008 and later in c. 2010 as well as the defiant budgetary support his government in the Punjab has been giving to JuD are cases in point.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by ramana »

Also we shouldn't forget that Badmash promoted Mushy above six other senior officers just as he has promoted the new Gen over two other senior officers.

In other words TSP civilans still pick and choose their military leaders, leading to the overthrow of seniority principle.

Mushy gave us Kargil.
Who knows what the new badmash will give us to distract his hordes.

All commentators emopahsise that internal problems will get more attention from the new Army chief.
But in TSP they do the opposite of conventional wisdom.
And with India in transition in 2014 and sleepy joes in charge it could be Kargil surprise redux.

The new guy will need a quick cheap win against India to establish his authority.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by ramana »

Role of Western Think tanks in promoting the TSP Military

http://lubpak.com/archives/273955
....
The US think tanks sit at the crossroads of the academia, politics, business, media and government and their associates frequently switch careers between these realms. They are the brokerages of research to support and push positions that ultimately may become governmental policies. With a massive growth in their numbers and clout over the last several decades the US think tanks are of interest to anyone who will be affected by the US policies. While overlapping closely and at times working with the academia the think tanks are not exactly the ‘universities without classes’ that some of them claim to be. Most think tanks have tax exemption/benefits under the US tax code but are not mandated to disclose their donors publicly. While all donations over $5,000 are reported to the government (IRS Form 990) many think tanks also voluntarily make their donors’ lists public. However, unlike the academic research the disclosures are neither full nor forthcoming in many cases and as Ken Silverstein of The Nation, USA pointed out in his May 2013 report on secret donors of the think tanks “it’s not always easy to see what sort of benefits money can buy.”

But it is the tune played by the piper not the payer that should be of interest. The objectivity and impact of the narrative coming out of the US think tanks is what matters the most, especially as the US drawdown in Afghanistan with consequences for that whole region approaches. Consider, for example, Anatol Lieven’s claim in his 2011 book Pakistan: a hard country that “One of the most striking things about Pakistan’s military dictatorships is in fact how mild they have been… only one Prime Minister (Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto) and a tiny handful of politicians have ever been executed in Pakistan … Few senior politicians have been tortured.” The research on which the book, dedicated to the Indian, Bangladeshi and Pakistani civil and military services is based, was underwritten in part by the think tanks New America Foundation and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Unless Pol Pot is a benchmark and one is totally ignorant of the contemporary history of Pakistan one might not make such disingenuous and callous claim. But Lieven has been in and out of Pakistan since 1988, when he had described General Ziaul Haq as “less than vindictive” in that brutal dictator’s obituary. No marks for guessing that Lieven remained mum when the Pakistan Army’s Green Book named Ayesha Siddiqa and the South Asia Free Media Association as Indian agents in its very first chapter on psychological warfare. The same chapter incidentally also proposes to co-opt media people and ‘independent think tank groups’ to support a psychological warfare division it recommends establishing under the defense ministry.

Some signatories of Lieven’s letter have consistently made a case for giving the Taliban a predominant role in what they called the Afghan endgame. They had projected the Taliban as a legitimate Pashtun nationalist entity while castigating the Afghan National Army as unrepresentative of Afghanistan’s ethnic makeup and called for truncating its size. The premise they sold in the US goes like this: Pakistan holds the key to the Afghanistan issue but Pakistan is too big and armed with nukes to be confronted and, therefore, its whims should be accommodated. This line was not terribly different from what the Pakistanis military establishment had been pushing but coming from the scholars it did find buyers in the US including some of senior wonks who fell for it hook, line and sinker. It would have been prudent to ask how and why the majority of Pakistani scholars — handful of notable exceptions notwithstanding — coming to the US conform to the Pakistani party line on Afghanistan. The problem is that ‘Pakistan can and will solve the Afghanistan imbroglio’ theory was an utter disaster for the region in the 1990s and culminated with the 9/11 tragedy for the US. It is safe to predict that this erroneous thesis will backfire again within the next few years. The Doha debacle is merely a start.

No one should doubt the integrity of the awesome work that most think tanks do. But opacity and stonewalling are as detrimental to a free and honest intellectual debate as any unsubstantiated insinuation. More not less transparency in the research and policy work is needed. The US, Pakistani and Afghan citizens have a lot at stake in the narratives coming out of the think tanks and must know the processes through which they arrive at their policy recommendations.

....
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by ramana »

More about the Badmash Jr version of the TSPA Green Book
kish wrote:I don't know, whether it is the usual chest thumping which ever gorilla takes over the COAS position do or is there a real terrorist attack threat.

I get a feeling that there is enough hints about impending terrorist attack(Godforbid). Earlier today, Bald sharif talked about "Kashmir & 4th War with India". Now COAS doctrine says about "disproportionate response in future wars".

“Army’s mother document” says growing Indian military power “disturbs strategic equilibrium of the region”
Pakistan’s official Army Doctrine calls on the country to “invoke disproportionate responses” in future wars with India, a copy of the document obtained by TheHindu has revealed. “The causes of conflict with the potential to escalate to the use of violence,” the classified internal document states, “emanate from the unresolved issue of Kashmir, the violation of treaty arrangements on sharing of natural resources, and the organised and deliberate support by external powers to militant organisations.”

The December, 2011, Doctrine does not name any country as a threat, but Pakistan has accused India of seeking to block its access to Indus waters, and backing terrorism. The Doctrine describes itself as the “army’s mother document” and “the fountainhead for all subordinate doctrines.”

Indian military sources told TheHindu the study was commissioned in the summer of 2008, soon after former chief of army staff General Pervez Kayani took office. It evolved through intensive discussions of the Kargil war of 1999 and the near-war that followed the December, 2011, terrorist attack on Parliament House

Georgetown University scholar Dr. C. Christine, author of a forthcoming book, Fighting to the End, says the Doctrine confirms what scholars have long known. “It tells us several interesting things,” she says, “among them that the Pakistan army sees Indian military modernisation as a threat, but that they also think nuclear weapons will insulate them from the consequences of pursuing high-risk strategies, like backing jihadist clients.”

Future wars, the Doctrine states, “will be characterised by high-intensity, high-tempo operations under a relatively transparent battle-space environment.” This, it states, is because of the “incremental increase in asymmetry of conventional forces and [the] nuclear overhang” — evident references to the programme of rapid modernisation India put into place after the 2001-2002 crisis, and both countries’ efforts to expand their nuclear weapons capabilities.

In the view of the Doctrine’s authors, de-facto parity between the two countries induced “through a combination of conventional and nuclear deterrence, has obviated the [likelihood of] conventional war.”

However, the Doctrine argues, “a disparity at the conventional plane continues to grow disproportionately, which too disturbs the strategic equilibrium of the region.” This, it states, “depletes peaceful diplomacy and dialogue, replacing it with coercion on the upper planes and violence across the lower-ends of the spectrum.”

“What worries Pakistan’s army,” says the former Indian Army vice-chief, Arvinder Lamba, “is their inability to organise offensive or defensive responses to our growing rapid mobilisation capacity. Their challenge is to deter us from striking by threatening nuclear weapons use in the face of the least provocation.

“India’s government and military must seek perceptual clarity on exactly what we intend to do in the face of such threats,” he said.

The Doctrine states that Pakistan will use nuclear weapons “only as a last resort, given its scale and scope of destruction.” Nuclear parity between India and Pakistan, it argues, “does not accrue any substantial military advantage to either side, other than maintaining the status quo.”

“In a nuclear deterrent environment,” it adds, “war is unlikely to create decisive military or political advantage.” However, it argues that “integration and synergy between conventional and nuclear forces, maintaining both at an appropriate level… [will avoid] an open-ended arms race.”

It does not state what the red lines compelling nuclear weapons use might be, but says future strategic “force development centres around developing and maintaining credible minimum deterrence, based on a [land, sea and air] triad, including an assured second-strike capability [to an Indian nuclear first-strike].”

“Lots of this thinking has been operationalised in Pakistan’s military,” says Rana Banerjee, a New Delhi-based expert on the Pakistan army, and former Research and Analysis Wing official. “Basically, this document signals they intend to react to even limited Indian military operations with disproportionate force, and hope fear of escalation deters New Delhi from reacting to events like 26/11.”

So they are forgetting their four/3.5 fathers and relying on mother document!

To me what was quoted so far is a copy of the Indian DND with Paki redlines.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by ramana »

X-Post....
sanjaykumar wrote:It may be that India Pakistan dynamics are in fact only superficially secondary to Hindu Muslim history and differences.

The paradigm followed by Pakistan is the tribal affiliation exclusionary model. This is the very same as all primitive societies- from the Amazonian jungle tribes to present day Germany. It is a deliberate and calibrated protocol for state building. The problem for Pakistan is not that India chose the pluralist/inclusivity model for state building (note not nation building), but that India has so convincingly outclassed Pakistan in everything (cricket, the quality of jet fighters, an absurd metric of nationhood no doubt; higher education emigrant success etc) that pakistan's model is in danger of collapse unless another existential threat is found or manufactured.

Fortunately, Pakistan possess an endless supply of grievances that outrage the Sunni majority. Unless Pakistan discards its nation building approach it will remain mired in poverty, ignorance, religious violence, superstition. Deliciously, discarding the model will be the first step to dissolution of this criminal enterprise and the entrenched privileges of those who directly sponsor and benefit from a society built on hate.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by ramana »

Book Review in Pioneer.

Most appropriate thread....

Chronicler of troubled times
Sunday, 15 December 2013 | Ved Marwah
12345 1
The author, who has handled some of the toughest assignments as an IPS officer, does not hesitate in calling a spade a spade while narrating the tragic incidents in Punjab during the ‘Khalistani movement' or Delhi during the anti-Sikh pogrom, writes Ved Marwah

Time Present and Time Past

Author: Kripal Dhillon

Publisher: Penguin, Rs 399

The author of this book, Kripal Dhillon, is a multi-faceted personality: An academic, a sports lover and a gentleman police officer who has handled some of the toughest assignments during his illustrious career in the Indian Police Service. An author of many books, he has written extensively on police and internal security issues. In each one of them, he has displayed high quality of scholarship. A true professional with a high sense of integrity, a gentleman police officer as many call him, he can be hard-hitting when need be. He does not hesitate in calling a spade a spade while narrating the tragic incidents in Punjab during the ‘Khalistani movement’ when he headed the Punjab Police as the Director General of Police.

He earned the admiration of both his seniors and subordinates when he refused to go along with his political boss to support his devious personal agenda. His insider’s account of what went wrong during that difficult period, which was made more difficult by the machinations of the wily politicians pursuing their own personal agendas, makes fascinating reading. He has some harsh things to say about the complicity of the Congress leaders in the anti-Sikh riots after the assassination of Indira Gandhi and the inaction of the police against the rioters, “with Congress leaders directing the rampaging mobs to target Sikh colonies with the help of electoral rolls, not unlike the Nazis going after the Jews half-a-century earlier”.

A true leader of the force, Dhillon is generous in his praise of his subordinates, but mild in his criticism — like when his intelligence IGP, MC Trikha, let him down and started reporting directly to Governor Arjun Singh. The bitter memories of how he was humiliated and given the marching orders to report back to Madhya Pradesh without even being allowed to avail of the ‘joining time’, which he was entitled to, still hurt him, but that has not changed his positive attitude to the many ups and downs in his life. There is no malice even when he makes some critical remarks against some of them — like MK Rasgotra who was his senior in Government College, Ludhiana but refused to recognise him when he had accompanied the King of Nepal for a shikar visit in his district in Madhya Pradesh. He describes this incident with some humour.

The memoirs are spread over a vast canvas and narrate events of enormous significance. Dhillon goes back to the year of his birth which, he writes, “coincided with a period of heightened political activity when the Indian freedom struggle was peaking fast”. The author recalls that even a visit by a lowly constable “not to speak of the thanedar or the station house officer, was enough to send shivers down the spine of village elders... such was the fear and terror of the police in colonial India”. Since the village only had a primary school, Dhillon, then a young boy of nine, had to leave the place in 1938 to join his parents in Montgomery — the present day Sahiwal of Pakistan — where he spent several years till the completion of his school education. The Montgomery of those years was “a sparsely populated town by present day standards, well-laid-out and clean, its roads and streets sprinkled with water every evening by municipal lorries... Several parks and gardens lent an air of elegance to the city”.

But even in those years there were latent, but unmistakable, inter-communal tensions which occasionally surfaced in the form of “biases and misperceptions of many kinds” between Hindus and Muslims. “A most hateful bias,” Dhillon recollects, “was not to partake of cooked food at Muslim households, even when they belonged to close friends... It must be said to the credit of our Muslim friends that they continued to send uncooked food to their non-Muslim friends’ houses on Eid. Such odious biases against them must have contributed in a major way to prompt Punjabi Muslims to press for Partition in 1947.” The firsthand account of the savagery that accompanied Independence has been written in a fair and unbiased style.

The chapters on Dhillon’s selection for the Indian Police Service, the training phase at the academy in Mount Abu, the postings to various districts replete with encounters with bandits interspersed with thrilling tiger hunts, the assignment at the National Academy of Administration in the idyllic hill station of Mussoorie, are well-written and holds the interest of the reader.

Most of his problems during his service career were due to his refusal to bend to the illegal orders of his seniors. His reputation as a straight-forward officer reached even Prime Minister Indira Gandhi when he called on her before taking over as the DGP of Punjab. He describes with some amusement how she told him that he was known to be too “sharif”. His describes how after the anti-dacoity operations, cases for gallantry medals were cooked up by the subordinates to please their seniors. There was much amusement when he declined to be a part of this widely prevailing racket to earn a gallantry medal.

Widespread violation of human rights in Punjab and many other places in India by the police is another serious problem that Dhillon faced during his stint in Punjab and Madhya Pradesh. Here again, these horrible acts could not have been committed without the tacit approval, if not direct orders, from their seniors and the political bosses. The sad part is that these violations of human rights have been increasing — and not coming down — since the colonial period. The dysfunctional criminal justice system is one reason, pursuit of political agendas is another, but in most cases the fault lies with unprofessional and untrained police officers who have no patience and lack the skills for investigations. They resort to shortcut methods to show quick results to earn the appreciation of their seniors.

While the most frustrating period of Dhillon’s career was his posting to Punjab after the Army’s bungled Blue Star Operation, the most enjoyable and satisfying period in his service career was his tenure in the LBS Academy in Mussoorie. He has titled this chapter as ‘Among the Crème de la Crème’. He made full use of the facilities of the training institute to enjoy his favourite sport, riding, and his academic interests. Even after retirement from the IPS, he has continued with his scholarly activities. He started career as a lecturer and ended it as Vice-Chancellor of a university.

Writing a book when you are reaching mid-80s is no easy task, but Dhillon has accomplished this task with a professional touch. It is an “exceptionally well-written book” that reads like a “Russian novel”, as the two commentators of the book have said. The book should be of great interest to the serving police officers as well as to all those interested in internal security issues. It will be of equal interest to a lay-reader who is interested in those historical events which the author witnessed or handled as a police officer that have shaped the future of our country.

The reviewer, a retired IPS officer, is a former Governor of Manipur, Mizoram and Jharkhand

This not partaking food is an ancient and world wide custom.

Herdotus writes in his Histories about how Egyptians do not partake of any Greek food or custom as their way of showing identity. He has a whole paragraph on that.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan : A new way of looking

Post by ramana »

Original post by Lilo...
Highlighting by me....
Sectarian killings soar in Pakistan, raising fears of regional spillover

A surge in sectarian killings is raising new fears about Pakistan’s stability, as violence against Shiites and other minorities spreads to major cities and increasingly targets the country’s professional class.

Although Pakistan has struggled for decades with bouts of sectarian violence, the death toll rose dramatically last year and the country is experiencing a gruesome start to 2014.

Masked gunmen have been stalking Shiite doctors, lawyers and college professors. On Jan. 6, a suicide bomber tried to enter a school filled with several hundred students in a Shiite-dominated area in the northwest but was stopped by a ninth-grader, who is being hailed as a national hero after he died when the bomb went off in the ensuing scuffle. Other religious minorities, including Sufi Muslims, are facing lethal assaults.

The turmoil occurs at a critical moment. U.S. leaders are hoping that Pakistan can help maintain regional stability this year as most NATO troops withdraw from neighboring Afghanistan. But observers say any sectarian tension in Pakistan could easily spill over into Afghanistan, where security remains perilous and where religious and ethnic rivalries simmer, too.

“Nothing is going to get better, and it’s probably going to get worse,” said Sheikh Waqas Akram, a former member of Parliament from the eastern province of Punjab, where sectarian tensions have been on the rise.

There were 687 sectarian killings in the country last year, a 22 percent increase over 2012, according to the Pakistan Institute for Peace Studies. Although the deaths represented just a small portion of the toll of violence and terrorism in Pakistan — which claimed 4,725 lives last year — sectarian unrest is spreading throughout the country and becoming routine in heavily populated areas, the group concluded.

About three-fourths of Pakistanis are Sunni Muslims, while Shiites make up 15 to 20 percent of the population. Despite attacks over the years by Sunni militants, Pakistan has largely avoided the sectarian strife that has plunged Iraq and Syria into turmoil.

But analysts and some Pakistani political leaders are increasingly questioning whether Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif can keep order in the nuclear-armed country of 180 million people.

“We are on a very dangerous trend where sectarian violence is increasing, and it is starting to take the shape of structural violence,” said Muhammad Amir Rana, director of the Pakistan Institute for Peace Studies. “We are now seeing sectarian tensions triggered not only by terrorism incidents, but average clashes within the sectarian communities.”

Pakistan’s largest city, Karachi, was rattled this month when six men were found executed near a Sufi shrine. All of the victims’ throats had been slashed, and at least two of the men had been beheaded. A note was found next to their bodies warning others not to visit the shrine. The Pakistani Taliban took credit for the attack.

A few days later, in the northwestern city of Mardan, two men were fatally shot as they slept in a Sufi shrine. Sufi Muslims practice a mystical form of Islam and have been targeted for years by Islamist extremists.

Meanwhile, Shiite professionals have increasingly been targets of assassination attempts. Among the victims last year were a prominent poet in Karachi, a well-
respected doctor in the eastern city of Lahore and a university leader in the eastern city of Gujrat. Extremists are apparently trying to intimidate educated Shiites into leaving the country — a “brain drain by force,” said Salman Zaidi, deputy director of the Jinnah Institute, an Islamabad-based think tank.

The attacks on Shiites have continued in the new year. On Jan. 5, a 59-year-old Shiite doctor was fatally shot as he traveled home from his hospital in Multan in Punjab province. Two days later, a Shiite bank branch manager was fatally shot in the northwestern city of Peshawar, according to Pakistani news media reports.

“The attacks are getting more and more brazen,” Zaidi said. “There is a very real sense that the state will not be able to protect the Shia community, and it’s not just the Shias.”

Pervaiz Rashid, Pakistan’s information minister, disputed such conclusions, saying the government is cracking down on “sectarian outfits” and recently launched raids against militants in Karachi.

“No one will be allowed to destabilize Pakistan,” Rashid said in an interview. :((

For much of Pakistan’s 66-year-old history, tension between Shiite and Sunni communities was rare; the country’s founder, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, stressed tolerance. But the government permitted the formation of Sunni militant groups in the 1980s as backstops against Shiite- dominated Iran and majority-Hindu India. :rotfl:

Pakistani officials said sectarian violence intensified in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States, when the Taliban regime was ousted in Afghanistan and its fighters crossed into Pakistan.

As the border became less stable, hundreds of thousands of people sought refuge in Karachi, Lahore and other Pakistani cities. The influx has meant that hard-line Shiites and Sunnis compete for space in heavily populated areas.

“There was no issue with Sunnis and Shiites in our district before 2007,” said Gulab Hussain Tori, a Shiite leader in Peshawar. “We were like brothers, but, unfortunately, the situation changed since 9/11 and the arrival of militants.”

According to the South Asia Terrorism Portal, which monitors violence in the region, Pakistan’s death toll from sectarian violence last year was the highest since the organization began tracking the statistic in 1989, when 18 people were killed. That number has grown to more than 500 for each of the past two years.

Pakistani leaders and observers say an especially troubling development occurred in mid-November, when Sunnis and Shiites clashed in Rawalpindi, a garrison city adjacent to Islamabad.

The fighting broke out as Shiites participating in a religious holiday procession marched past a mosque where a hard-line Sunni cleric was delivering a Friday sermon. A cloth market and nearly 100 shops were set on fire. Police said 10 people were killed, although residents said at least twice that number died.

Knox Thames, director of policy and research at the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, said Western officials and humanitarian groups are still awaiting clear signals that Sharif will be able “to push back against the rising tide of religious extremism.”{Waiting for Godot?}

In a video released Tuesday, a Pakistani Taliban commander blamed Shiites for the unrest in Rawalpindi and called on Sunnis to “rise and kill the Shias, kill their officers and target their businesses.”

“I think it could definitely spiral out of control,” Thames said. “What is needed is just basic law enforcement, arresting people who kill others and incite violence, and that is not happening in any consistent way.”

Although much of the bloodshed can be traced to Sunni militant groups, Thames and other analysts said there is growing concern that the Shiite minority is also starting to organize militant groups.

On Jan. 2, two high-ranking officials of Ahl-i-Sunnat Wal ­Jamaat, a Sunni-dominated political group, were fatally shot in Islamabad by masked men on motorcycles. There was no assertion of responsibility, but at least a dozen other members of the group have been assassinated over the past year, according to the South Asia Terrorism Portal.
From WaPo rag
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/sec ... story.html
--------------------------
Nothing new. TSP is becoming part of Middle East and closer to their Arabic raiders.

They want to extripate the Shias and become a Sunni/Wahabandi state. The plan as always there since 1947:expel the Hindus, then Ahmediyas, kill the Sufis and Shias. Z.A. Bhutto and Zia's Islamiszation has given more impetus to this big idea of Wahabadis. :mrgreen:
Only blinkered scholars fail to see this.

Sectarian spillover could be there in Afghanistan but there sectarian is also different ethnicities(Hazaras and some Pashtun tribes). So not the same.
Post Reply