Sunni Terrorist Fragments of Unstable Pakistan - 21 Apr 2014

partha · Post by **partha** » 29 May 2014 08:26

The good Haqqani is surely enjoying hosting all the anti GHQ discussions in US

jash_p · Post by **jash_p** » 29 May 2014 09:03

^So, is it Fair(pun intended) to conclude when she was talking a couple of years back about the several Indian consulates in Afghanistan which were creating trouble in Balochistan, she was probably quite chummy with the ISI and her current reversal of views is a result of 'back stabbing' ?

looks like good Haqqani have taught to unfair very well about Kabila theory of Paki army.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 May 2014 09:13

SSridhar wrote:^So, is it Fair(pun intended) to conclude when she was talking a couple of years back about the several Indian consulates in Afghanistan which were creating trouble in Balochistan, she was probably quite chummy with the ISI and her current reversal of views is a result of 'back stabbing' ?

To be "Fair" she has a slide (seen at 19 minutes) where she has quoted a paper as being authored by Fair and Ganguly that had claimed that Pakistani claims on Kashmir were legitimate - but she says that this is wrong. So she is openly going back on what she said earlier.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 May 2014 09:18

Nandu wrote:This talk by Christine Fair on her new book happened today.

Some zingers.
* Pakistan has no claim on Kashmir.
* "Solve Kashmir for peace" is bullshit.
* Pakistan's constitution is apartheid.

This is a great video. Christine Fair deserves credit for taking blinkers off and being truthful. I will probably buy this book.

At 27 minutes: "The Pakistan army are "international insurgents""

Pakistan is a "Greedy state"

This video would be a great great addition to the first post of Packee/STF-UP threads.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 29 May 2014 10:06

She advocated giving Pakistan a nuke deal 4 years back

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2 ... _nuke_deal

At the same time, the deal should address Pakistan's chief concerns. Pakistan fears that the United States -- perhaps in consort with India and Israel -- seeks to dismantle its nuclear program. Such a deal would formally recognize Pakistan's nuclear status and reward it for the considerable progress it has made to enhance its arsenal's security since 2002.

Washington wants Islamabad to give up what it sees as the only tools in its arsenal to secure its interests at home and abroad: jihadi terrorism under the security of its nuclear umbrella....But the United States is going to have to offer something in exchange: recognition and strategic support. Such a deal could create the conditions of trust whereby other initiatives, such as a limited security guarantee -- negotiated with India's explicit input -- would be welcomed.

Wonder what the Pakis did to piss her off. Though I think the explanation might be quite mundane. She senses where the wind is blowing and amplifies it. During the time when everyone was touting "Solve Cashmere to Solve Afghanistan", "Pakistan itself victim of terrorism and has list $1 trillion due to war on terror" and "Nuke deal necessary for strategic stability in the subcontinent" she was in that bandwagon. Now that it is clear that US is going to get out of Afghanistan with tail between its legs and has been thoroughly outwitted by Pakistan, a round of stock taking is in order. Carlotta Gall's book already came out, the summary of which is "ZOMG!!! Osama Bin Laden hid in Pakistan for 7 years, surely someone in Pakistan knew he was there!!!" this trickle is likely to turn into a torrent as numerous studies, analyses etc are likely to be conducted as to why Afghan war was a failure. It doesnt take an IQ of 200 to figure out that Pakistan is the reason. Ms Fair is simply cashing in into the trend by getting into it early.

If for some reason in the next 5 years US wants Pakistan again, say to whack someone in the Middle east, Ms Fair would start writing articles "Pakistan army is tied down to the east because of belligerent Indian posture" type nonsense.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 May 2014 10:23

Folks - that is a darned good video. She even says that they used to depute a good looking Punjabi officer because they knew her weakness for Punjabis.

partha · Post by **partha** » 29 May 2014 10:43

Yeah, it is a good video. Talking about Indian military journals, she says "they are like ours" essentially doing an India == US. That should hurt the RAPE H&D.

However considering the history of her flip flops, I'll not be surprised a few years down the line she again changes tune to "solve cashmere to fix pakistan" or something like that. I agree with Anujanji here. But let's enjoy while it lasts.

There is indeed a sudden influx of analyses exposing Pakistan coming from Amir Khan journos and think tanks. Fair herself recently wrote a lengthy article "Who is killing Pakistan's Shias and why?" which starts from pre 1947 days. I saw one more article about Shia genocide by a different author. It is as if everyone was waiting for the beginning of US withdrawal from Afghanistan

anmol · Post by **anmol** » 29 May 2014 10:52

**deleted as Nandu Ji already posted the video.**

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 29 May 2014 11:08

SSridhar wrote:^So, is it Fair(pun intended) to conclude when she was talking a couple of years back about the several Indian consulates in Afghanistan which were creating trouble in Balochistan, she was probably quite chummy with the ISI and her current reversal of views is a result of 'back stabbing' ?

shiv wrote:To be "Fair" she has a slide (seen at 19 minutes) where she has quoted a paper as being authored by Fair and Ganguly that had claimed that Pakistani claims on Kashmir were legitimate - but she says that this is wrong. So she is openly going back on what she said earlier.

Anujan wrote:She advocated giving Pakistan a nuke deal 4 years back

The last 'big work' from her, that I know of, was her acclaimed research on how the Pakistani Army is indeed more liberal than the rest of the country, how everyone was wrong in claiming that the Pakistani Army was getting more Islamized or radicalized etc. That was by end of c. 2011. After that seminal work, she has been going steadily anti-Pakistani Army. The mystery remains as to what happened since then. Normally, 'back stabbing' is done by the likes of Amritrajs of the US to Pakistani Presidents. In this case?

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 29 May 2014 11:25

I think khan was deliberately keeping on hold the negative views on Pakistan emanating from its think tanks as they needed GUBO services from the whore. Now that the dependency is reducing and they have nothing much left in Afghanistan under the mercy of pakis these are slowly coming out. This is also a deliberate move from khan so that everything starts to look fair and balanced again.

anmol · Post by **anmol** » 29 May 2014 12:10

SSridhar wrote:The mystery remains as to what happened since then. Normally, 'back stabbing' is done by the likes of Amritrajs of the US to Pakistani Presidents. In this case?

Her recent tweets(and replies) that are tagged with hashtag "YesAllWomen" are probably a clue.
https://twitter.com/CChristineFair/with_replies

And:

I find the treatment that I received from your organization and the ISI, which you represent in your present capacity, to be worthy only of the worst countries and appallingly gendered. Frankly, I can't understand why your organization(s) think(s) that bullying me will silence me in expressing my outrage against your country's numerous crimes. Being PNG'ed is like being pregnant: you can't get more pregnant.

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 29 May 2014 12:21

Some dude from ISI groped her?

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 29 May 2014 12:33

Dilbu wrote:Some dude from ISI groped her?

... may be ISI afsars try to act macho alpha despos and think that foreign women will fall for "macho alpha despos 'just like' in Amrika" not unlike roadside gamblers with sleight of hands ruffians. What we see is tamasha paki ka as said by CCFair.

arun · Post by **arun** » 29 May 2014 12:52

Re: The video of the talk at the Hudson Institute by C Christine Fair.

The Black Knight scene from Monty Python and the Holy Grail which is mentioned in her slide when describing the strangely warped notion of what the Uniformed Jiadi’s of the Army of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan mean by victory is linked below. Check out from 1.56 :

Monty Python And The Holy Grail- The Black Knight

anmol · Post by **anmol** » 29 May 2014 13:16

CCFair: "They will always give me handsome ISI protocol officers, because they know my weakness for punjabis. But they will never let me meet a major."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=G3DIOjTmX0M#t=3817

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 May 2014 13:36

Watch from here for 4 minutes..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... X0M#t=3549

Raja Ram · Post by **Raja Ram** » 29 May 2014 14:07

General Disclaimer : I have no "Chaiwala" or "Panwala" connections to the corridors of power. What is produced below is a product of conjecture and imagination of mine based on observed signals and chatter overheard. Noise to signal ratio is high.

So here goes:

The invitation was an initiation from NaMo himself by a phone call. NoAwaz agreed to come first up. But this was resisted very heavily in parkland. With some deft maneuvering his team managed to build a consensus for the trip. It had to do some heavy lifting and get a go ahead from USG and China as well. Both powers wanted the talks to start again and they did not want pakis to screw up by not turning up. Very quickly both Beijing and Washington, realized despite their best efforts, that they could not even fathom what was to be told by the new Indian PM to be. They tried to send some messages to him and nothing was acknowledged from the Indian side.

The PA was not with this and they activated their network to strike hard and strike quick against the new Indian PM by sanctioning an attack on the Consulate in Herat. Some signals were picked up and delivered to Afghan and New Delhi authorities about the impending attack and several precautions were in place. The idea was to come up with a dramatic take over of Consulate staff as NaMo was being sworn in. It would also render the visit by NoAwaz impossible.

Tactical planning was low as usual on strategic understanding. They ISI never thought that plans against India that become known to western powers will be revealed. One of the more independent thinking powers wanted to make a statement to new leader that they can be depended upon to do the right thing. It was only after the botched attempt that the sole power tried to leak about the western help and ISI hand through their stooges in Indian media. But the mandarins in Delhi were already clued in. Still they persisted with the line that they are still figuring who was behind the attack and made the paki PM come to Delhi.

Apparently, what can be surmised now is that during the meeting between NoAwaz and Modi the following points were made to him

1. India knows he has no authority to pursue any deal or peace with India and yet it was willing to give him an opportunity to try and get that authority. Despite his recounting of his yearning for peace and settling for a strong India and strong pakistan and how he was betrayed last time, he was told very clearly that he has no credibility with regard to his intentions. It is just that India wants to a stable region.

2. No territory give away expectations can be entertained by Pakistan. It is at his peril if he starts promising along these lines to his people to get the authority. If he does that there will be no talks on any matter.

3. A clear and precise list of to dos have been given in terms of camps to be closed, organizations that should be wound up and people delivered to India. Compliance to this list is what will dictate if there are going to be any dialogue.

4. Any act of terror, by state, non state, aliens or anyone from the territory controlled by the Pakis will be held against them and a disproportionate and forceful response will be made. Any reaction by Pakistanis to resist or react to that action will not stop India from escalation.

5. If the Pakis want to do a bit of song and dance about bhaichara and seek to improve trade and other contacts, they will happen only if there is demonstrated movements on the points above.

Apparently NoAwaz tried to get something positive like a public announcement of resumption of dialogue at political levels for him to help get support and deliver on the above. It was pointed out that India cannot oblige on this beyond a point and there is no question of public announcement or Joint Statement. Pakistani leaders should solve their problems by themselves and India will not move just based on promises of good behavior or assurance. In fact, it was made clear that Pakistan should be conscious of the direction it is heading and if they do not get to make the right choices the consequences of the same will be theirs alone. India is not in the business of stabilizing Pakistan.

NaMo did not make promises, made clear expectations he had from NoAwaz and also gave him an assessment that he does not have the mandate to engage in talks. If Pakistan was able to deliver on the expectations and NoAwaz is able to build the consensus to strike a peace deal with India, India will respond accordingly. Nothing more nor nothing less was said.

As usual a ramble only, take it for what it is worth

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 29 May 2014 14:58

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 29 May 2014 15:06

Ms. C.Fair's exposition is brilliant. I have added the video to the first post. I will post the complete summary and possible annotation later.

Peregrine · Post by **Peregrine** » 29 May 2014 15:43

Crapistan's PAF is Crap!

Interview: ‘US drones are better than PAF jets’

THE US drones were better weapons to use against militants as compared to Pakistan Air Force jets, believes Rustam Shah Mohmand, a Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf-appointed member of the government committee to negotiate with the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).

“Drones are more precise in targeting militants than the jets the air force is using, which cause heavy collateral damage,” he told Dawn. “The government should have formed a strategy in collaboration with the US to carry out strikes using drones.”

Cheers

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 29 May 2014 17:22

From NightWatch for the Night of May 28, 2014

Pakistan: The Pakistani Taliban movement - the TTP -- fragmented today. The Mehsud tribal faction - which formed the original core of the movement - announced it has left the larger organization to form its own group, known as the Pakistani Taliban of South Waziristan.

A spokesman said the break is over TTP tactics that the Mehsuds consider un-Islamic, including bombings in public places, extortion and kidnappings.

Comment: Infighting has increased since the death by drone attack of Hakimullah Mehsud last year. There are numerous reasons for the infighting. Only a few of them are known in the open source domain.

Some Pakistani analysts say tactics are not a primary reason for the split, but rather a cover story to make the Mehsuds look motivated by Islamic purity. That is nonsense because Mehsud tribal fighters have committed all the crimes they now say they abjure.

Another reason is a disagreement over whether to engage in peace talks with the government. For the first time since its founding in 2007, the TTP has engaged in peace talks with the Nawaz Sharif government in Islamabad. The talks have gone nowhere, but the Mehsuds opposed the decision to hold them. Money-making opportunities were as important as principle in this dispute. The TTP kept most of the Pakistani government's incentive money and peace interferes with fund-raising.

The decision to hold peace talks correlates to the election of the first non-Mehsud tribesman, Fazlullah, as the TTP leader. This has injected a tribal undercurrent into the infighting. The Mehsuds won't follow Fazlullah who is from the Swat Valley.

Another important factor is the competition between the Afghan and Pakistani intelligence services. Fazlullah bases his operations in Afghanistan and is known to receive protection and support from Afghan intelligence. Pakistani intelligence supports the Afghan Taliban whom the Mehsuds protect and support. Control of cross border smuggling routes is a key component in this arrangement.

The fact that the Mehsuds receive support from Pakistani intelligence does not dissuade them from attacking targets in Pakistan.

The web of linkages, temporary alliances and payoffs is vastly more complex than this summary suggests. Tribal leadership issues, access to wealth, land disputes and control of smuggling are always important considerations influencing tribal alliances.

Some analysts suggest that the fragmentation of the Pakistani Taliban might offer opportunities to neutralize one or other faction. With so many outside influences and sources of funds and resources, that is an unrealistic judgment.

The one constant in the past year of infighting has been the attacks. The splits within the Pakistani Taliban movement have had no positive impact on the security situation. Now that there are two movements, their competition will produce more attacks.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 29 May 2014 18:02

SSridhar wrote:A spokesman said the break is over TTP tactics that the Mehsuds consider un-Islamic, including bombings in public places, extortion and kidnappings.
-
-
Some Pakistani analysts say tactics are not a primary reason for the split, but rather a cover story to make the Mehsuds look motivated by Islamic purity. That is nonsense because Mehsud tribal fighters have committed all the crimes they now say they abjure.
-
-
The fact that the Mehsuds receive support from Pakistani intelligence does not dissuade them from attacking targets in Pakistan.

Pot, say hello to kettle.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 29 May 2014 18:07

How the mighty have fallen. Non-bailable arrest warrants issued against Gilani, Amin Faheem

An anti-corruption court in Karachi on Thursday issued non-bailable arrest warrants for former prime minister Yousuf Raza Gilani

in a case relating to financial irregularities in the Trade Development Authority of Pakistan (TDAP)

First of all, why would you name a front agency - t'dap? That was a dead giveaway.

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 29 May 2014 18:07

I look forward to the day when this very same Mehsuds will have to turn against their mentors in ISI in true paki fashion.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 29 May 2014 18:14

Dilbu, I doubt the NightWatch theory that somehow the Mehsuds are getting money from ISI. Some renegade Mehsuds might be taking money from the ISI. The ISI cannot buy loyalty even from those who are taking money now. The main body of the Mehsuds cannot forget the killing of Nek Mohammed or Hakeemullah Mehsud by the CIA drones with the connivance of the ISI and the bloody attacks on South Waziristan.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 29 May 2014 18:14

A further blow to baki HS&D. Mountain climbing faces sharp decline in Pakistan

The worst has come true for the Alpine Club, which has conceded that Pakistan is not a popular destination for mountain climbers this summer

“Security and safety is the biggest deterrent for foreign climbers. Deaths of climbers at Nanga Parbat base camp, last year, are one of the major reasons why foreign mountaineers are staying away from Pakistan”

It is not just the climbers who are staying away this season. Trekking expeditions have also lessened, especially after the government made it mandatory for all groups to be accompanied with "liaison officers" last year.

Next year, try promoting downhill skiing. That may work for domestic tourists.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 29 May 2014 18:22

I saw that Fair video from the point where DocJi suggests we do. My take guys, and sorry to be simplistic. Fair is like a cute talkative teen age daughter to the big daddys, the CIA, Pentagon etc, who are proud of their daughter but won't take her big talk seriously. I found it interesting that nobody in the audience, not even Seema Sirohi, asked Fair & Haqqani what we all know about: Indian containment. Far herself mentioned that Iranians were very cooperative, and US could easily have got access to Afghanistan through Iran, but yet US chose TSP and the Uneven type frauds still mention access to Afghanistan as the main reason for TSP getting billions.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 May 2014 18:36

shiv wrote:
SSridhar wrote:^So, is it Fair(pun intended) to conclude when she was talking a couple of years back about the several Indian consulates in Afghanistan which were creating trouble in Balochistan, she was probably quite chummy with the ISI and her current reversal of views is a result of 'back stabbing' ?
To be "Fair" she has a slide (seen at 19 minutes) where she has quoted a paper as being authored by Fair and Ganguly that had claimed that Pakistani claims on Kashmir were legitimate - but she says that this is wrong. So she is openly going back on what she said earlier.

However Sumit Ganguly true to his guru Uneven Cohen's upadesa has never repudiated this. He still sticks to the program.

Nothing worse than a deracinated Indian elite in foreign hands.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 May 2014 18:36

Dilbu wrote:Some dude from ISI groped her?

Dilbu, They are a nation of gropers. Even their PM was groping in public!

gandharva · Post by **gandharva** » 29 May 2014 19:03

Noah's Arc for Pakistan

gandharva · Post by **gandharva** » 29 May 2014 19:04

Dilbu wrote:Some dude from ISI groped her?

More like case of accidental wrong ***e with some one in GHQ Pindi.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 May 2014 19:07

Interesting mind set. The guy draws an Arab Dhow as a Paki Noah's ark. And along with the animals he shows exodus of all those he considers unIslamic!!!

So even while using comedy and satire he exposes his Sunni mindset.
He truly beleives in aparthied.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 May 2014 19:31

CRamS wrote:I found it interesting that nobody in the audience, not even Seema Sirohi, asked Fair & Haqqani what we all know about: Indian containment. Far herself mentioned that Iranians were very cooperative, and US could easily have got access to Afghanistan through Iran, but yet US chose TSP and the Uneven type frauds still mention access to Afghanistan as the main reason for TSP getting billions.

Watch a few minutes from here. More reasons that should warm the cockles of your heart
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... X0M#t=2750

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 May 2014 19:36

ramana wrote: However Sumit Ganguly true to his guru Uneven Cohen's upadesa has never repudiated this. He still sticks to the program.
Nothing worse than a deracinated Indian elite in foreign hands.

Cohen has now been relegated to the background and Fair gets all the publicity.

But I am glad. Indians in positions of responsibility need to see this - whether Amrikis watch or not. Indian opinions have been a deep black hole of trusting stupidity. Someone please link on Teetar/Facebook etc

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 29 May 2014 20:02

This is a summary [with some annotation] of Ms. C. Fair's talk at the Hudson Institute while introducing her new book, "Fighting to the End: Pakistan Army's Way to War". The video has been posted earlier here. Ms. Fair claims to have written the book by analyzing the Green Books (published since the 1970s), studying the military journals and extensive field study.

Pakistani military journals are not like normal military journals that one sees in the US or India. They do not discuss battles, military issues etc.
A reading of these journals indicates that Pakistan claims to be the only source of resistance to the rise of India and its hegemony. It has launched an asymmetric warfare against India since 1947 and though this has only brought it increasingly diminishing returns, it is persisting with its revisionism. It has been decisively defeated in 1971 and even in 1965 India could have decisively defeated it. Yet, it is not revising its policy.
Most people see Tehrik-e-Taliban (TTP) as a Pashtun problem, but its backbone lies in Punjab with the Punjabi jihadi terrorist groups of HuJI (Harkat-ul-Jihadi-Islami), JeM (Jaish-e-Muhammad), HuA (Harkat-ul-Ansar) and HuM (Harkat-ul-Mujahideen)
The conventional wisdom about Pakistan has been that it is a 'security-seeking state'. It would discard its Islamist proxies and the concept of 'strategic depth' if Kashmir is solved to its 'satisfaction'. Since c. 2008, another thesis was also floated that if Kashmir issue is resolved, the Afghanistan problem would also disappear. These are false.
There is no legitimacy to Pakistan's claims on Kashmir because the Maharajah acceded to India through an Instrument [of Accession]. Pakistan's claim on Kashmir is ideological and this does not square with a 'security-seeking' Pakistan because within Pakistani defence literature, Kashmir was never claimed as a buffer-state between itself and India, except for a recent Kayani article. The US has mistakenly treated Pakistan for six decades as a 'security-seeking' state and tried to buttress their military so that they felt more secure against India etc. This has failed because fundamentally Pakistan is *NOT* a security-seeking state; it is an ideological and 'greedy' state. Pakistan's goals vis-a-vis India are primarily, not exclusively, ideological. So, appeasement strategies, such as those by the US, are dangerous. 'Greedy states' are revisionist in nature and appeasement only encourages more greediness and 'further appeasement'. Glasser, U of Chicago, defines a 'greedy state' as one which is fundamentally dis-satisfied with status-quo and desirous of additional territory even when it is not required for its security. This definition describes Pakistan accurately for its desgns on India (Kashmir) and Afghanistan. Its 'strategic depth' concept is not a later-day invention attributed to Gen. Zia or Gen. Aslam Beg. Pakistan inherited this from the British.
Pakistan's revisionism dictates that even a rising and dominating India is in itself a defeat for Pakistan, even if here were to be no military defeat. The primary tool to defeat India is through an ever-increasing jihadi terrorism on it under a nuclear umbrella and a set of alliances with nations. Pakistan has a unique way to define 'victory' and 'defeat'. An example is its take on the humiliating 1971 defeat. Pakistani military journals do not describe that as a defeat because they had survived to fight another day. A Pakistani COAS told me, in the light of the Kargil defeat, "For us, doing nothing against India is in itself a defeat because that would tantamount to accepting Indian hegemony". The idea within the Pakistani military is that even if there was a very low probability of winning, Pakistan *must be seen trying* against India. While India would want to defeat the Pakistani military in an engagement, Pakistan simply wants to survive a fight. Anybody who opposes the military has to pay a heavy price. Within Pakistan itself, the Pakistani Army has not only threatened violence against political dispensations through coercion, but also has actually committed violence against anyone impeding them.
Partition really looms large in Pakistani defence litereature. There is a heart-burn that the division of India was unfair in 1947 not only because of the 'moth-eaten' Pakistan that resulted ultimately but also because India got most of the infrastructure and institutions. Those parts which became part of India had experienced more democratic traditions and experience in running institutions etc. However, even here, East Pakistan had many of these but the elites of West Pakistan chose to treat the East Pakistanis as second-class citizens. The Pakistani military also claims that, apart from these, it also got the 'restive portions' of India, namely the NWFP. It was thus not only an 'unfair' Partition but also an 'unfinished' Partition, because of Kashmir, Hyderabad and Junagadh. The Pakistani military also claims that India is implacably opposed to Pakistan, to its very existence as exemplified by the 1971 war. Its problems with Afghanistan, its perceived fear of India, its alliances with the US, and increasing proximity between India and the USSR on the one hand and that between Afghanistan & USSR on the other, all wrapped into a dogged pursuit of 'strategic depth'. Though some authors, these days, are talking in terms of Pakistan going up its 'strategic depth', it is nonsense because there are different forms of pursuing the same. This was the same approach of the British too. It only changes forms.
Is the past a prologue? Jihad is an instrment that was started by Pakistan in c. 1947, not as usually believed by many
in c. 1990. The evolution of this 'jihad doctrine' is very evident in Pakistani military literature. While the Americans were training the Pakistani Army in the 1950s in counter insurgency [against a Communist invasion], the PA was secretively reverse engineering this into 'how to start an insurgency'. This slowly transformed into 'jihad' [as local situation within Pakistan also became conducive with Mawdudi et al]. By the turn of the 1970s, Pakistani military writers were already talking about what happens when, not if, Pakistan gets nuclear weapons. ZAB, as early as 1964, understood the need for nuclear weapons. Though ZAB went to Ayub with this request, he shrugged it off but said Pakistan could buy one off-the-shelf if needed. It was in the 1970s, when ZAB came to power, that the writers began saying that Kashmir should be re-opened after Pakistan acquired nuclear capability. So, Pakistan developed the concept of asymmetrical warfare as early as the 1970s, not 1990s.
What are the 'endogenous game changers' for a better Pakistan? Democratic transition could be one as many think. But, recent democratic changes offer only a limited optimism as the Army keeps important portfolios. The Pakistani Army knows how to get its bidding done without directly intervening. Unless the civilians have a complete control over the Army and unless the civilians show a different strategic culture and appreciation and handling of threat perceptions, which are significantly different from what the Army has been doing hitherto, democratic transition is not going to change matters. The 'Ideology of Pakistan' started with Gen. Ayub Khan when he re-aligned the school curriculum in line with this ideology. He has devoted an entire chapter to the Ideology in his book, "Friends, not Masters". The Pakistani Army diffused this idea by inculcating young minds. Some people talk of the Pakistani civil society as a game changer. The Pakistani civil society has a lot of uncivil elements. The small decent civil society members are no match to the uncivil elements at large in the society, as the followers of Jama'at-ud-Dawah on the Twitter prove. The present civil society is more conservative than their parents. So, the civil society cannot be an impetus for change. Others talk of the 'youth bulge'. This is a non-starter. Economics can be a game-changer too, but IMF is going to pay-off Pakistan each time.
The PA has been recruiting officers from more and more areas of Pakistan as part of their 'nation-building' goal, and these recruits do not share the views of the Punjabis. Punjabis in the Punjab are much more supportive of 'militarized jihad' than Punjabis elsewhere outside the Punjab. Non-Punjabis living in the Punjab think in the same way as the Punjabis. Ethnicity matters less than where you are born in Pakistan [or, more correctly, where you live]. If the PA continues to recruit from other parts of Pakistan because of its national goals, they are not going to share the 'core values' of the PA.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 May 2014 20:23

Good work and thanks for taking the trouble Sridhar.

Supratik · Post by **Supratik** » 29 May 2014 20:30

@Raja Ram

I think your analysis is close to the truth.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 May 2014 20:33

SSridhar, Thanks. Most of her statemetns confirm BRF mind view about Pakistan.

She needs to understand the kabila concept of Paksitan, where to be seen as the camp overlords, the PA has to be seen as striving to do something against the non-camp folk or they face overthrow. Again about point nine "endogenous game changers' the biggest is the camp guards ahve to return to barracks with the realization that "raza" or raid is over and they need to allow their people to settle down and have a civilized life.

As N^3 used to say Pakjab is the problem. Any one living there gets grand delusions.

Ian Talbott in his book' India and Pakistan' written in 1960, quotes Sikander Hayat saying Pakjab is the sword arm of the BIA and hence they have the primacy in the new state of Pakistan. This grand delusion was fed by the British with their plan to Punjabifiy political Isalm in the late 1890s. Wilfrid Scawen Blunt "Future of Islam".

Having said all that, the WKK nostalgia for Pakjab is most unhelpful and props the Kabila.
Any one with illusions about Pakjab should see the movie "Bhaag Milka Singh!" and see the organised massacres.

Pakis coveting Kashmir is Reconquista of Dar-ul-Islam.

Gus · Post by **Gus** » 29 May 2014 20:36

ramana wrote:Interesting mind set. The guy draws an Arab Dhow as a Paki Noah's ark. And along with the animals he shows exodus of all those he considers unIslamic!!!

So even while using comedy and satire he exposes his Sunni mindset.
He truly beleives in aparthied.

i think he is saying that 'these people need to be saved...from sunni islam's wrath'

saip · Post by **saip** » 29 May 2014 22:33

And it took all this while for her to realize this? Anyone in BRF could have enlightened her decades ago. Some catastrophic event must have taken place to make her do this 180 degree turn.