Sunni Terrorist Fragments of Unstable Pakistan-Sept 05, 2015

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 27 Oct 2015 01:26

I don't get it. Why were his people going out of their looking for trouble? I am sure BSF chief laughed on his face when Pakistani whined that they have suffered "very heavy" damage. If they can't take the heat they should get out of the kitchen. Stupid and entitled set these RAPE are.

Kashi · Post by **Kashi** » 27 Oct 2015 05:25

vayu tuvan wrote:I don't get it. Why were his people going out of their looking for trouble? I am sure BSF chief laughed on his face when Pakistani whined that they have suffered "very heavy" damage. If they can't take the heat they should get out of the kitchen. Stupid and entitled set these RAPE are.

I suspect it's a combination of many factors- false bravado, ego, extreme pressure from the higher ups to up the ante and so forth.

The higher ups call them and ask them to start firing. Border abduls reply, "Janaab, this is not like before. Now they don't have to ask Delhi for permission to fire back (a permission that would never arrive on time). They hit back hard. You assured us last time that ye baniye kya ladenge."

The Higher ups snap, "So you are afraid of a little fire? Have you forgotten that a true mard-e-momin is equal to 10 and more kaafir Hindu baniyas? Are you telling me that you can't stand up to those SDREs? Are you a momin or not? Maybe you are a Qadiani and perhaps an investigation into your family background is in order."

Border abduls, marta kya na karta, "AoA..."

and so it begins.

Gus · Post by **Gus** » 27 Oct 2015 06:51

we should really stop thinking of pakis as rational people with rational thoughts of cause and effect, consequences, thinking through something etc.

they cannot go beyond the first impulse of 'see kaffir, shoot kaffir'..

remember their ship babur trying to ram godavari and then they complained that gadavari damaged babur..

Kashi · Post by **Kashi** » 27 Oct 2015 07:08

Gus wrote:they cannot go beyond the first impulse of 'see kaffir, shoot kaffir'.

But when the kaafir shoots back with vengeance and ferocity, the atrophied part of their brain that senses danger, would have warned them of the consequences. Still they continue to do so.Why?

Because if they survived to lob shells another day, that itself is victory for them and that the kafirs have lost.

Those who "lost" are servicing the hoors and those who "won" wish to join them as soon as possible.

partha · Post by **partha** » 27 Oct 2015 12:09

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... -pakistan/

US to Nawaz Sharif: GPS ties Gurdaspur strike to Pakistan.

I guess that was the reason why Pakistan was rewarded with F16s?

’Pakistani diplomats initially insisted that the Gurdaspur strike had nothing to do with their country. But when the US insisted that the technical data was irrefutable, they argued that there was no official complicity in facilitating it,’ said a Washington-based diplomat.

The United States, however, is yet to respond to Indian requests for more details on the Garmin-made GPS sets, specifically related to where the equipment was sold and when, sources said.

India-US strategic partnership.

The United States’ intelligence community is worried that Indian strikes could escalate into a war, leading Pakistan to use its tactical nuclear weapons against advancing Indian armoured formations, and to counter-strikes. It’s a prospect that the United States has become increasingly concerned with amidst a diplomatic deadlock between New Delhi and Islamabad.

I wonder how Modi govt would have responded had that train been blown up in Gurdaspur.

Peregrine · Post by **Peregrine** » 27 Oct 2015 14:01

yvijay wrote:x-post
Pakistan Rangers DG calls BSF chief, urges end to firing
The top commander of Pakistan's border guarding force on Monday called up the BSF chief to urge Indian troops to stop their retaliatory firing over escalated ceasefire violations by the neighbouring country following which both sides agreed to halt the exchanges.

Sources said that Rangers Director General Maj. Gen. Umar Farooq Burki told the BSF chief that they have suffered "very heavy" damage because of the BSF response and urged the border guarding force to stop its firing.

The Border Security Force (BSF) DG told his counterpart that there would be no retaliation if Pakistan does not initiate the firing, they added.

vvijay Ji :

This really takes the Cake, Biscuits and Jalebis!
Cheers

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 27 Oct 2015 14:34

Gus wrote:we should really stop thinking of pakis as rational people with rational thoughts of cause and effect, consequences, thinking through something etc.

they cannot go beyond the first impulse of 'see kaffir, shoot kaffir'..

remember their ship babur trying to ram godavari and then they complained that gadavari damaged babur..

dumb fckery taken to extremes

yelling allah u akbar and trying to overtake an indian ship.

Rajdeep · Post by **Rajdeep** » 27 Oct 2015 14:37

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 27 Oct 2015 15:58

Christine Fair at CLAWS

http://www.claws.in/images/events/pdf/1 ... 5_July.pdf

Bhurishrava · Post by **Bhurishrava** » 27 Oct 2015 16:02

http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 725_1.html

7 Pakistani soldiers killed in cross-border firing from Afghanistan: ISPR

Earlier on Sunday, at least four soldiers of the Pakistan Army were killed and four others were injured as militant groups fired rockets from across the Pakistan-Afghanistan border in Khyber Agency.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 27 Oct 2015 16:56

what is happening to the momeen? kufr from the east and more pious from the west all attacking them 24/7?

rsingh · Post by **rsingh** » 27 Oct 2015 17:54

^^^
Haar traf se pitai ho rahi hei yyyyyyyaaaaaaa Aaaaaaalllllaaaaahhhhhh........ab kya hoga Bakistan ka?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 27 Oct 2015 17:56

Hafiz Saaed's security enhanced in Pakistan after 'threat alert' - PTI

The Ajit Doval fear !!

Pakistan's Punjab province government has enhanced the security of Mumbai attack mastermind Hafiz Saeed following a home department alert that a "foreign intelligence agency" may make an attempt on JuD chief's life.

"We have enhanced the security of Hafiz Saeed in accordance with the directive of the home department," an official of the Punjab government told PTI today.

He said more policemen have been deployed at his residence in Jauhar Town and JuD headquarters Chauburji, Lahore, in the wake of the threat.

Senior Superintendent Police Athar Ismail said the police had "sensitised" the people who are engaged in the personal security of Saeed.

According to the letter issued by the Punjab home department, a "foreign intelligence agency" has made plans to attack 'high-value targets' like Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and JuD chief Saeed to create chaos on a wide-scale.

The United States has already put USD 10 million bounty on the head of Saeed.

The United Nations declared Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD) a terrorist organisation and also individually designated Saeed as a terrorist in December 2008.

Saeed, who orchestrated the November, 2008, Mumbai terror attack in which 166 people were killed, roams around freely in Pakistan despite being a designated terrorist and has made many anti-India remarks and speeches.

Pakistan has said that there is no case against Saeed and that he is free to move in the country as a Pakistani national.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 27 Oct 2015 17:57

rsingh wrote:^^^
Haar traf se pitai ho rahi hei yyyyyyyaaaaaaa Aaaaaaalllllaaaaahhhhhh........ab kya hoga Bakistan ka?

I have always believed that Allah Ta'ala had always been quite unkind to Pakistan.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 27 Oct 2015 19:10

They might themselves be preparing to take out Hafeez Saeed...

arun · Post by **arun** » 27 Oct 2015 21:12

X Posted from the “India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II” thread.

Our former Foreign Secretary Kanwal Sibal views US reaction to visit of PM of Islamic Republic of Pakistan there as bad news for India.

“Sharif's US visit is bad news for India” :

……………………………. Whereas in 2013, during Nawaz Sharif’s Washington visit, Obama supported a “sustained dialogue process” for “resolving all outstanding territorial and other disputes through peaceful means”, Kashmir was not specifically mentioned. This time, to satisfy Nawaz Sharif who has been determined to internationalise the Kashmir issue, it was.

By calling Kashmir a “dispute”, the US is preferring the Pakistani term. To top this, the joint statement calls for an “uninterrupted dialogue in support of peaceful resolution of all outstanding disputes”, rejecting implicitly the Indian line that dialogue and terror cannot go together.

Most unfortunately, the US has implicitly given credence to Pakistan’s outlandish charges against India for supporting terrorism in its territory by emphasising the importance of “working together to address mutual concerns of India and Pakistan regarding terrorism”. This equates India and Pakistan on the terrorism issue. ……………………………….

Read more: Clicky

Falijee · Post by **Falijee** » 27 Oct 2015 21:13

CPEC facing teething problems

And A Multitude Of Related "Headaches" Like Potty Training, Learning To Walk, Child Care/Baby Sitting etc etc

Now that the initial euphoria of ‘higher than the Himalayas and deeper than the deepest sea’ is over, the $45bn China-Pakistan Economic Corridor is beginning to hit the ground realities.As is expected of such a major initiative, some teething problems are coming to light, requiring a lot of legal and procedural clarifications and adjustments. Most of these seem to be exposing the general lack of preparedness and casual handling of projects that has become the hallmark of our bureaucratic culture.

If Fauj, and Ganja and his cronies can "skim" loan proceeds/ grants right of the top, then what is wrong with the babus asking for little chai pani ( code words for casual handling of projects....)

While dealing with external players, such lethargy and poor project handling can have exponential costs. Pakistan has been paying substantial commitment charges without utilising loans from development lenders every year and this has to be taken care of on an urgent basis.
Following the 6,600MW Gadani Power Park debacle arising out of a half-baked plan, the two sides seem to have learnt the lesson to take up ‘early harvest’ projects that are ready to take off immediately and could be expected to deliver results before the PML-N goes into the next polls with a success story on having reduced the power shortfall.

So it is all about showbaazi and to impress - the usual paki way

Meanwhile, a mega coal-based project previously being pushed for Sahiwal is reported to have faced financing problems because of the infrastructure required for transporting coal. It has now been replaced, at least on paper, with two smaller coal power projects at Thar and Hub to compensate for Sahiwal’s lost capacity.
Pakistan has recently been struggling to convince Chinese authorities to accept around a 10pc cost overrun for the $1.5bn Lahore Orange Line Metro Train even though the project has yet to take off.

In other words, the Chini- blothers are not easily "buying" this cost overrun BS

The Chinese Exim Bank was insisting on a loan agreement of $1.48bn to be signed with the Punjab government as originally discussed, but Pakistani authorities want this to be increased by another $147m to meet contingencies that arise during the project’s implementation.

Allah only knows where the contingency money, if approved will end up in whose pockets

On top of these, the Chinese have sought tax exemptions on insurance and financing on almost all CPEC projects.
At the heart of the problem is the IMF’s condition under which the government has withdrawn the powers of the taxation authorities to grant exemptions through statutory regulatory orders.
At present, no tax exemption is permissible on insurance premiums paid to non-resident companies because only a low rate of 5pc is applicable, while all CPEC projects are mostly covered by the state-owned Chinese firm Sinosure. The Chinese authorities want the insurance premiums paid to Sinosure to be exempted from the income tax.

So the Pakis are caught once again between a rock and a hard place ; promised something to the Chini blothers which they cant deliver according to IMF loan conditions

Meanwhile, the power sector authorities are also pushing for speedy notifications to give legal cover to the fiscal incentives announced for the transmission projects.

So, according the above mentioned "teething" analogy, it will be at least 20-25 years, before the child grows up, and if ( a big if ) becomes educated , and finds a job to stand on its own two feet.

Falijee · Post by **Falijee** » 27 Oct 2015 21:51

Afghan chief executive casts doubt on Pakistan’s role in peace process

ISLAMABAD:
Afghanistan Chief Executive Dr Abdullah Abdullah has said he has suspicions over Pakistan’s role in the peace process after PM Nawaz Sharif’s ‘refusal’ to act against Afghan Taliban.
He was commenting on the premier’s remarks that Pakistan could not bring Taliban to the negotiating table “and be asked to kill them at the same time.”
“We heard Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif clearly on fight and peace talks with Taliban. If Pakistan cannot fight insurgency, we cannot trust they would not support insurgents,” he said while addressing Afghan Council of Ministers on Tuesday. “We are not sure they will encourage the Taliban to peace.”

Abdullah’s remarks indicate the two-headed National Unity Government is in no mood to end the deadlock in the negotiations with the Taliban that Pakistan had brokered in early July.
Afghanistan’s revelation of Mullah Omar’s death derailed the first ever direct talks with the Taliban in 14 years.
“Trust-building is the key in relations with Pakistan but the recent comments and no intention of fighting terrorism in Pakistan does not take us anywhere,” Abdullah said.

And "trust building" definitely excludes information withholding, like the suppression of Mullah Omar's earlier death in a Karachi hospital .

A senior Pakistani diplomat had earlier made it clear that Pakistan could not fight “others’ war on own soil,” in a reference to Kabul’s repeated demands for action against the Afghan Taliban.

As the Afghan government remained unwilling to talk to Taliban, the group’s chief on Tuesday urged their military commanders to continue their “victorious operations.”
“The enemy is nervous, its ranks [are] disjointed and [it] has lost all morale and belief in itself. Mujahideen should utilise these moments to deliver heavy blows to the enemy to achieve further victories in the fields and wrestle free our country from the menace of occupation and corruption,” Mullah Akhtar Masnoor said in his address.

Pakistan wants its own proxy Government in Kabul;it remains to be seen how much pressure Uncle is willing to put on Pak in view of this stale mate

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 27 Oct 2015 22:05

rsingh wrote:^^^
Haar traf se pitai ho rahi hei yyyyyyyaaaaaaa Aaaaaaalllllaaaaahhhhhh........ab kya hoga Bakistan ka?

Harr Taraf ab Yahi Afsane Hai:Pak Ke Antim Din Aane wale hai
Hindustan orrrrr Afghanistan :Dono Mill Kar Khaane wale Hai
Look who is saying this: Man whose words were always true , not even god could refuse

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RGxxi_AZQ0

Falijee · Post by **Falijee** » 27 Oct 2015 22:15

Rajan To Be Used By Doval To Hunt Down Dawood
India's national security adviser devised a plan to secure the arrest of a fugitive Mumbai gangster in Indonesia as part of a strategy to hunt down India's most-wanted man, Dawood Ibrahim,

India's national security adviser devised a plan to secure the arrest of a fugitive Mumbai gangster Indonesia as part of a strategy to hunt down India's most-wanted man, Dawood Ibrahim, police and home ministry sources told Reuters.
Superspy Ajit Doval, who is reputed to have handled Rajendra Nikalje - also known as Chhota Rajan - as a security asset in the past, wants to bring him in from the cold to help target Ibrahim who is reportedly living in Pakistan.

Carrot and stick approach ?

"The government is committed to bringing back Dawood and we will deploy every strategy to deport him," Kiren Rijiju, junior home minister, told reporters on Tuesday after Rajan was held a day earlier on the Indonesian resort island of Bali.
Doval, 70, a decorated former police and intelligence officer with a track record of daring counterinsurgency missions, has exceptional influence in Prime Minister Narendra Modi's inner circle.
He has claimed effective control over foreign policy towards India's neighbours, sources say, sidelining a diplomatic establishment that has been left to manage ties with strategic partners such as the United States.

Recent Paki reactions show that his changed policies are having an effect

With the division of labour comes a cloak-and-dagger approach and a fixation with settling scores that could have regional security implications. India hanged one of the Mumbai bombers in July, 22 years after the attacks.
Officials in India's home ministry and Central Bureau of Investigation, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Doval had played a key role in orchestrating the arrest of Rajan.

So ISI working overtime now to protect its "asset"

India and the United States accuse Dawood of financing Islamist militant groups, including al Qaeda and Lashkar-e-Taiba. The U.S. Treasury has frozen his assets, and accuses him of drug running to Europe. Indian authorities say they have shared evidence of Ibrahim's whereabouts with Pakistan, which rejects suggestions that he is living there.

It remains to be seen whether the newly appointed Paki NSA and Dovalji, will meet face to face, sometime in the future,or some excuse will be found ( as in S.Aziz case ) to avoid a meet

Doval was involved along with two of Rajan's men in a botched operation in 2005 to assassinate Ibrahim at his daughter's wedding in Dubai, former home secretary R.K. Singh told a television channel in August.
Doval has previously denied the incident and said he was watching television at his home. He did not respond to requests for comment on this story.
Ibrahim's gang allegedly wounded Rajan in an assassination attempt at a Bangkok hotel in 2000. After being treated at a hospital, Rajan escaped using a rope made of bedsheets.

So, there is a lot of scope for trading "insider information" to pursue a common foe.

M.N. Singh, Mumbai's joint commissioner of police at the time of the 1993 blasts, agreed that Rajan's arrest was a coup for India.
"But I am not sure if an old, ailing and retired gangster would be our best bet to drag Dawood Ibrahim out of Pakistan," he said.

Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but even the psychological boost of such a coup cannot be denied

nirav · Post by **nirav** » 27 Oct 2015 22:21

nirav wrote:^ Some abduls, eechandee insulated and all, by the 1 Cr offer want Pak to reject the money.

1 Cr rejected.

Paki eechandee preserved.

Falijee · Post by **Falijee** » 27 Oct 2015 22:34

Chhota Rajan 'betrayed by cook': After gangster's arrest in Bali, his aides lift the lid on the fall of Dawood's nemesis

Gus · Post by **Gus** » 27 Oct 2015 22:35

err..it is their policy not to take money from govts. says so in the articles

and here too

http://edhi.org/major-features-of-edhi-foundation

he is running all his social welfare driven activities without getting funding from any government or donor agency. It is a fact that Edhi isn’t entertaining even he refuses the concept of support from others. The only donations are entertained from the individuals and few leading businessmen.

i am all for crapping on pakis, but don't have to be stupid about it..

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 27 Oct 2015 22:59

Earthquake cracks glaciers in Hunza valley: officials
Paki Digging, Construction Activities are causing Natural disaster, Environmental Problems: Paki presence disturb the natural ecology of region

HUNZA: A powerful earthquake that struck Pakistan and Afghanistan on Monday has not only led to the destruction of built structures or landslides but also caused two glaciers in Karakorum to smash into pieces while leaving many others in cracks in Hunza valley.
Officials have warned that if more glaciers break into pieces, they could lead to a flood-like situation in the valley.The Disaster Management Authority Gilgit-Baltistan said the cracks in the glaciers can become dangerous in case of more aftershocks in the area.The quake aftershocks could cause these glaciers to melt and the water they release may result in the formation of more lakes in the area, according to United Nations Development Program (UNDP).

Falijee · Post by **Falijee** » 27 Oct 2015 23:58

Chhota Rajan arrest planned by NSA Ajit Doval in attempt to get info on Dawood

Chhota Rajan’s ‘surrender’ in Indonesia was facilitated by Indian agencies last Wednesday.
Rajendra Sadashiv Nikalje aka Chhota Rajan was travelling as Kumar Mohan from Sydney when he was ‘officially’ arrested at Bali airport on Sunday.
Chhota Rajan in a file photo. Ibnlive

Chhota Rajan in a file photo. Ibnlive
Coinciding with his surrender (officially detained last Wednesday), the crime branch of Mumbai raided all residential and commercial properties of Khushi developers (Chhota Rajan’s construction company) and his politician brother Deepak Nikhalje’s flats in Mumbai.
Ajit Kumar Doval, the 70-year-old National Security Advisor, is believed to be the brains behind the mission. Just a few days before Rajan’s arrest, Doval is reported to have spoken to a few people claiming to be in Indonesia.

With the surrender/arrest of Chhota Rajan, who is unwell and struggling to escape from his rival gangs, the current regime is hoping to get crucial evidence on global terrorist Dawood and his activities.

Agencies are working overtime to throw concrete evidence of the presence of Dawood in Pakistan under the ISI protection.

Doval — The Super Spy

· Ajit Kumar Doval, the former head of the Indian Intelligence Bureau (IB) has been trailing Chhota Rajan and his henchmen to get leaks on D gang’s activities for years.
· A media story brought him into limelight in 2008 when the IB reportedly planned to target Dawood Ibrahim at his daughter’s wedding with Javed Miandad’s son in Hyatt hotel, Dubai.
· Media reports had pointed out then that Doval worked out a plan for the IB to send Vicky Malhotra, a sharp shooter from Rajan gang, to target Dawood in Dubai.
· Unaware that the IB was collaborating with Rajan, Mumbai police under the leadership of Meera Borwankar had surprised the IB team by laying a trap for Vicky Malhotra and Farid Tanasha.
· Doval had to abandon the plan as the then DCP, Dhananjay Kamalakar of the Mumbai crime branch accompanied with his men, arrested the two shooters just as they about to leave for the airport.
· Even US cables quoted by WikiLeaks mention this incident.

Doval had also been a media star during his role as a negotiator at Kandahar, where Indian Airlines flight IC-814 was hijacked with 160 passengers.

Chhota Rajan’s human intelligence has been far superior to Dawood’s.

So, the security around the Chief Of LET must have increased 4000% in light of this operation

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 28 Oct 2015 00:14

http://arynews.tv/en/fwo-clears-27-land ... m-highway/

PESHAWAR: Frontier Works Organization has cleared 27 out of 45 landslides triggered by earthquake at Karakoram Highway and it is continuing efforts to clear the remaining areas.

And a few hours later:
http://tribune.com.pk/story/979802/228- ... -pakistan/

After hectic efforts, the Karakoram Highway has been opened for all types of traffic, the ISPR has said.

The FWO and army engineers cleared all 45 slides which were created due to earthquake, the statement added.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 28 Oct 2015 00:36

Words, words, words...

And is our number one enemy internal or external? Has the army’s security doctrine changed in the recent years?

It is not one or the other. Our external threats are limited to India, who we consider an enemy state, and who will always undertake activity to undermine our stability just as we would, given a similar opportunity.

Insurgency and militancy must be dealt with at our earliest, but it is a situational feature and not a permanent one. We cannot remove India from the map, and so the threat from India is a permanent feature. This threat needs a response in the form of deterrence.

When I was in the field, I had evidence of Indian support to militancy in FATA and Balochistan. They fund and resource militancy in a big way. I fail to understand the international indifference to the numerous Indian consulates along Pakistan’s Western border in Afghanistan. Surely they are not in the business of processing visas.

Thus, Pakistan’s external and internal threats both gravitate towards India.

So are we going after all the militant organizations, including those fighting against India and Afghanistan?

It is only the state’s prerogative to declare war or project an aggressive or friendly posture towards any other country. This right does not belong to any individual or community, or ‘non-state actors’. If one does not agree with a government’s stance, in a democracy it can be voted out of power.

If we try and find justifications for such individuals or groups, or afford platforms for their apologists, we will not become a strong state. As such, there is no room for such Jihadists in a modern state.
- See more at: http://www.thefridaytimes.com/tft/there ... n0agv.dpuf

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 28 Oct 2015 05:20

Neither carrot nor stick: Husain Haqqani
http://m.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/let ... 792987.ece

dsreedhar · Post by **dsreedhar** » 28 Oct 2015 06:32

Pakistan growing bolder due to Cina's support. The moment there are any hints of China crumbling and faltering pak will run for the bushes.
India need to wrest POK from Pak at all costs at an opportune time. Tibet going to China has become a big strategic problem for India.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Oct 2015 07:27

A_Gupta wrote: - See more at: http://www.thefridaytimes.com/tft/there ... n0agv.dpuf

[/quote]
Somebody, somewhere had linked the transcript of a talk given by CFair to an Indian army group along with Gen Ata Hasnain. This article reflects Paki army thnking exactly as Fair describes it. Damn! Where's that article?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Oct 2015 07:45

OK here it is - CFair at CLAWS I apologize for the formatting
http://www.claws.in/images/events/pdf/1 ... 5_July.pdf

Dr C Christine Fair, Assistant Professor, George Town University, USA

I started writing the book in 2011 but I have been studying Pakistan
since 1991. I began stumbling upon some of the questions in this book
in 2000 when I was working with the Rand Corporation working on a
Kargil project. What struck me is that, when one lo oks at what
Pakistan does and how Pakistan does it: it continues to fight the same
war with the same set of assumptions and the same outcome. In other
words it doesn’t seem capable of having a learning process. It seems to
persist in its revisionism even though the likely hood of it ever
attaining, even modestly, any of its goals is actually becoming less
probable not more probable. Not only that t he tools that it has
developed which I call ‘ Jihad under a nuclear umbrella ’ are actually
now harming the state itself. The Pakistani ’s l ove to howl that they
have a terror problem and I say yes it is a problem and it is your
problem. T here would be no Tehrike - Taliban Pakistan (TTP) if the
Pakistani’s had not nurtured a menagerie of Deobandi militant groups.
Some of whom have turned against the state following the events of
9/11. I am not a political scientist, but I work with a lot of
political scientists and have spoken to a lot of political scientist
while working on this project. Political science literature is
actually pretty straight forward: it simply poses a question. We expect
states to get rid of policies that don’t work and especially when those
policies imperil the state. Pakistan’s revisionism is really quite a
puzzle,

2 there are very few states where the revisionism has persisted over
such a durational time and with such pernicious outputs. T his was
essentially my research question, since I am not a political scientist;
my evidentiary basis with which I approach this puzzle was r eally
textual. I am trained as South Asian lan guages and civilization
person. I have collection s of Pakistan defence publications since
2000, or maybe a little bit before that. T his work really draws from a
set of military publications in which Pakistanis discuss amongst
themselves things that are relevant to themselves. These books and
documents like the green book/ Pakistan Army journal – these aren’t
books that are meant for me and they are not meant for you. And I think
they are a more honest source of information and data about what this
institution thinks than for example interviews. Some of my colleagues
overly rely o n interviews. Now interviews are very problematic, I have
been going to Pakistan since 1991 although obviously I can’t go back as
I got blacklisted. I found interviews with them to be of dubious
quality as essentially they use this as an opportunity to spread
propaganda and they will say things that they want yo u to believe. And
of course the more times you go to Pakistan you become much more to
decipher this. I actually found my interviews with the Pakistani
military personnel to be not very useful because of the deception they
were actively waging. By the ti me someone from the Pakistani army
interacts with someone like me, and this is even truer for a defence
counterpart or even a state department counterpart. They have so
thoroughly been vetted by the ISI and they know their brief. You will
find very little variation from person to person because they know what
they are supposed to say. The only time you will ever get a glimpse of
an unscripted point of view is when you happen to catch a major who
hasn’t gone through the rigorous ISI camp and he happens to sa y
something that disagrees with the official point of view. Or in one
case when I was in South Waziristan in 2010, on our way back to
Islamabad, because they knew I spoke Urdu they let me listen to the
conversations of the pilot. And when we crossed the In dus they said –
“ Mashallah Indus khad gaya ” (thank god we crossed the Indus).
Afterwards I asked them about what they meant and they said: it used to
be that we went to that side of the country the Pashtuns were known for
their civility, hospitality and now we are afraid to go . It would be
in moments like that, that I would catch them off guard and here things
like that. For the most part, my evidence is really drawing from their
publications. What I take on in the book is this conventional wisdom
and I focus upon the United States. Because I would argue that the U
nited S tates along with India, China, Saudi Arabia are probably the
most important influencers in terms of what Pakistan does, and are the
most i mportant countries in terms of incentivising what Pakistan does
and how it does it and using what resources. My book is mainly focusing
on American audience, which is the most important audience for me to
influence. The conventional wisdom in the United States is that
Pakistan is a security seeking state. So in other words it’s inherently
an insecure state, which by the way I agree with. I agree it is an
inherently insecure state but the American approach to managing
Pakistan is that there is something in our toolbox that can make
Pakistan a secure place. And that once it is a secure state it will be
less reliant on Jihadist and it will be less compelled to pursue
strategic depth in Afghanistan. It will be at peace with its neighbours
and then itself.

3 T his gives rise to this perennial, every new a dministration re -
fixation upon Kashmir. You saw it with the Obama Administration – they
wanted to appoint a special representative to Afghanistan, Pakistan and
India. This idea was followed by the appointments o f Richard Holbrooke
and Grossmann as special representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan.
They talk ed about the ‘grand bargain’ whereby the United States should
persuade India and Pakistan to resolve the Kashmir issue and that is
how you solve Afghanistan. I object to this very strenuously: (a) This
argument implies that Pakistan has defensible stakes in Ka shmir and I
don’t think they do. If you look at the history, I don’t know why we
are entertaining this? (b) I don’t believe that it would actually fix
anything. Because as I argue in the book , Pakistan’s issues in India
are not about Kashmir. It’s about resisting India’s rise and it’s about
resisting what it sees as Indian hegemony . Interestingly enough, the
Pakistanis talk about Indian hegemony much before any Indian strategist
eve r thought of India as a hegemon y . Pakistan i’s started talking
about this as early as 1971. T he problem with viewing Pakistan as a
security seeking state is that it motivates the US to engage in
policies of appeasement - whe ther it is political appeasement or
military appeasement by providing large weapon systems like the F16s
and so forth. Instead I argue that Pakistan is an ideological state.
And this is drawn from the work of Charlie Glaser, who may not have
thought of Pakistan in t hese terms, but he describes an ideological
greedy state as one that is - fundamentally dissatisfied by the status
quo , desiring additional territory even when it is not required for
security. Purely greedy states pursue revisionism to increase prestige,
s pread ideology and propagate their religious world view. Greedy
states use completion as the only and primary means to achieve these
non security goals. When I finished this study it became very difficult
for me to see Pakistan in any other way other than this. This seemed to

describe its behaviour. In Pakistan military journals, when they speak
about Kashmir they don’t talk about it in terms of security; they could
have made it ab out issues of water security or the terrain being more
defensible on certain divisions of the territory.. . yet they did not.
The only exception to this was when Kiani came a few years ago to
Washington and he was really carrying b ack what people in Washing ton
were saying about the importance of the Indus water and water as a
future source of conflict. This did not come out indigenously from
Pakistan; he was basically carrying back what people in Washington were
saying. The implications of this are importa nt because as Charlie
Glaser argues, if you treat ideological state like a security seeking
state with policy appeasement you actually incentivise that state to
continue this behaviour. That conclusion will sound very familiar to
you in India when thinking about Pakistan . Some of the key findings:
The Pakistan army arrogates to itself to not only the logical task of
protecting Pakistan’s army but also what it calls Pakistan’s ideology.
What probably may surprise you is that while ma ny people think it was
Zia who did this but in fact it was Ayub Khan. Ayub khan in 1954 wrote
a piece in foreign affairs called the I deology of Pakistan and right
on the top he writ es about the two nation theory. In his auto
biography he has an entire chapter dedicated t o the ideology of
Pakistan.

4 Ayub Khan also set up a commission that was responsible for aligning
Pakistan’s curriculum with the ideology of Pakistan. So all that we
hear about Pakistan’s history beginning in the 7 th century with the
arrival of Islam to A sia, that did not begi n with Zia but with Ayub
Khan. T his is important because when the army takes over the country
directly they put army officers in charge of ministries such as
education. Making sure that their ideology and strategic culture
diffuses to the rest of Pakistan such that in the event when a civilian
government came into power their view of seeing the world would not be
that different from the way in which the army sees the world. Thus I
don’t think civilian g overnment is the panacea that we are all looking
for. It is a necessary and sufficient condition but the real necessary
condition is Pakistan’s forgoing the two nation theory. The two nation
theory is nothing but disaster and more disaster for Pakistanis
themselves. This is playing out throu gh the sectarian violence that we
are seeing. Today it’s not just enough to be Muslim you have to be a
specific kind of Muslim . And right now the Deobandi ’ s are really
winning that as they are the ones that have the guns and the suicide
vests. The army literature makes a very clear case about the ter ms for
peace with India is: India has to accept Pakistan as an equal and they
have to accept the two nation t heory. So this is obviously a very hard
set of pills to swallow because the two nation theory makes no sense
rationally and certainly doesn’t make sense with India’s own history.
The other reason why they claim to this so ferociously is that it
legitimis es th eir plaintiff to Kashmir. There is nothing else that
legitimises their claim to Kashmir. If they say the accession to India
is illegitimate then they have to also accept that Baluchistan is also
illegitimate. E very argument that they use to say the ac cession of
Kashmir has enormous implications for them domestically. I f they let
go of the two nation theory they are essentially letting go of Kashmir
and vice - versa . So their demand for Kashmir and their pursuit for
the two nation theory are mutually reinforcing. The other thing that I
thought was really interesting is that they don’t define defeat in
terms of loss of territory, loss of life or the value of the ter ritory
lost... their definition of defeat is acquiesc ing completely. T his
was explained to me by a former Army chief when I was in Pakistan in
2000 talking to them about – why in the world would you want the Kargil
operation? Even a fourteen year old who p lays dungeons and dragons
could have gained out Kargil and the consequences that would eventually
evolve from it. The army chief said – “ if we do nothing that is to
acquiesce to Indian hegemony. Therefore we always have to do something.
We would rather tak e a calculated risk than do nothing. Because to do
nothing is to genuinely be defeated ” . After hearing this out, it
occurred to me that Pakistan is more like an international insurgent –
it fights its conventional conflicts unconventionally. Yet it fights
its unconventional conflicts conventionally. Using F16s in Waziristan
and using non state s actors against India. This means that for
Pakistan it doesn’t have to decisively defeat India . I t sees itself
constantly being able to frustrate India’s ability to exert its will
when and where it wants which it believes is India’s intention . Even
duri ng the 71 war, when everyone would agree they l ost Pakistani’s
frame it very differently. They say – yes we lost in a sense but we
were defeated by a much bigger army. And we haven’t been truly defeated
because we are the only country in the region that ca n

5 challenge India. W e are not a Ban gladesh, we are not a Sri Lanka,
and we are the only country that can frustrate India’s rise. I gave the
title “ Fighting to the E nd ” because Pakistan will fight to the end
and because it doesn’t see defeat as most of us see defeat. I am not
saying they are irrational, in fact I say they are quite rational but
from their point of view the power differential will continue to rise.
So they are not saying they have to deliver decisive military defeat
but what they are saying is whenever you want to do something for them
to not be defeated is to simply frustrate you - w hether that is in
Bangladesh, Afghanistan or trying to fully integrate Kashmir. W hat are
some of the policy implications of this? I am going to speak what I
tell my American friends, and you can see why they think I am a
lunatic. But I think they are very clear indications, and I think for
India too. Their nuclear weapons are coercive instruments , but they
are also politically coercive instruments. W hen there is a conflict,
they use their nuclear weapons to coerce the Americans to sit on the
Indians. You saw this in 2008, you saw this in 2001 after the
parliament attack. T hey use their nuclear weapons, obviously w he ther
they h ave them or not is a different issue, but when they talk about
nuclear weapons they are a way to coerce us to intervene into the
conflict cycle. They al so coerce us from never leaving the country.
When I talk about Pakistan being a state that spon so rs te rrorism and
being declared as such the implications are really frightening for us
because it means that we have to stop supporting them. Americans will
say that we cannot do that because we will have no influence and we
have no visibility. W e have to take ourselves out of this coercion
group. And we can do that principally in two ways: one we say you are a
responsible nuclear power ( we know their signat ures from Iraq, Libya,
Iran ) so w e are going to treat you as responsible. If you use your w
eapons, we will respond as per our doctrine. In other words make a very
clear declaratory policy that removes United States from th eir
coercion cycle. Obviously as implications for India , it means that
when America is no longer there to provide crisis mana gement , India
will have to deal with them very directly and India will have to think
about how it will take it self out of their coercion circle. I am al so
a fan of cutting off the IMF, I don’t understand why the Am ericans
continue to support the IMF and w hy is it important? T he army is
completely insulated from the economic consequences of its behaviour as
long as there is a n IMF program. They can take the pie and eat all of
it. Because they know that the IMF and other donors will come in to
keep Pakistan on life support. B y constantly doing this we preclude
the demand among people for different set of policies and a differen t
set of priorities. Because they themselves never have to bear the full
consequences of the army’s decision making. On the political ( front )
, I think it’s very important that the Americans stop indulging
Pakistan’s position on Kashmir. I wrote a piece last summer making a
very clear argument that we should recognis e the LOC as the
international border. This has two advantages: - (a) It deprives
Pakistan of any legitimacy (b) It reduces India’s conflict in J&K to a
completely internal problem .

6 I think India would be more comfortable dealing with boundary issue
if it wasn’t constantly a subject of international discussion. In
conclusion, I will say we have to be very specifically punitive. We
have evidence of ISI complicity and terror attacks. We should be using
treasury designations , we should be using Interpol and when
appropriate selective targeting. Even though , it is very difficult for
us to operate in that environment . Given our equ ities in Afghanistan,
much of LeT ’s in f rastructure is not in Pakistan, I think there is
much more that we could be doing coercively. I am g oing to finish
here. Than

Avinash R · Post by **Avinash R** » 28 Oct 2015 09:05

Pervez Musharraf owns up to Pakistan's role in terrorism; calls Osama Bin Laden a 'hero'
http://www.dnaindia.com/world/report-pe ... ro-2139337

Wednesday, 28 October 2015 - 7:10am IST | Agency: dna webdesk

In a startling revelation, former Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf has reportedly admitted that it was Pakistan who trained Taliban, Osama Bin Laden, Haqqani Network and Hafiz Saeed. Mushrraf made these claims reportedly during an interview with Pakistani news channel Dunya TV.

He reportedly also added that whoever came from Jammu and Kashmir were treated as 'heroes'. He further said that Pakistan trained Lashkar for attacks in Kashmir and Taliban was trained to counter Soviet Union.

Musharraf also said that Osama bin Laden, Haqqani and Ayman al-Zawahiri were their heroes, reported India Today.

"We introduced 'religious militancy' to flush out Soviets. We brought Mujahideens from all all over the world. We trained Taliban, gave them weapon and sent them for war and they (militants) were our heroes. Osama bin Laden and Haqqani were our heroes," quotes India Today as him saying.

Musharraf also said that a Lashkar terrorist was given a heroic welcome, and Pakistan trained and supported them. He praised the militants to have fought well in Kashmir.

Towards the end of the interview, Musharraf reportedly said that the same terrorists who were once supported by Pakistan, have now become a threat to Pakistan itself.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Oct 2015 09:06

^^Let me compare and contrast what the Paki general says in Arun Gupta's link versus what CFair said to Indian Army officers at CLAWS

Links:
1. Paki General - http://www.thefridaytimes.com/tft/there ... n0agv.dpuf

2. CFair at CLAWS: http://www.claws.in/images/events/pdf/1 ... 5_July.pdf
______________________________________________________________

CFair wrote:Pakistan’s issues in India are not about Kashmir. It’s about resisting India’s rise and it’s about resisting what it sees as Indian hegemony

Paki General wrote:Our external threats are limited to India, who we consider an enemy state, and who will always undertake activity to undermine our stability just as we would, given a similar opportunity.

________________________________________________________________

CFair

CFair wrote:Their nuclear weapons are coercive instruments , but they
are also politically coercive instruments. When there is a conflict,
they use their nuclear weapons to coerce the Americans to sit on the
Indians. You saw this in 2008, you saw this in 2001 after the
parliament attack. They use their nuclear weapons, obviously whether
they have them or not is a different issue, but when they talk about
nuclear weapons they are a way to coerce us to intervene into the
conflict cycle. They also coerce us from never leaving the country.

Paki General wrote:We cannot remove India from the map, and so the threat from India is a permanent feature. This threat needs a response in the form of deterrence.

_______________________________________________________

CFair:

CFair wrote:In Pakistan military journals, when they speak
about Kashmir they don’t talk about it in terms of security; they could
have made it ab out issues of water security or the terrain being more
defensible on certain divisions of the territory.. . yet they did not.
The only exception to this was when Kiani came a few years ago to
Washington and he was really carrying b ack what people in Washing ton
were saying about the importance of the Indus water and water as a
future source of conflict. This did not come out indigenously from
Pakistan; he was basically carrying back what people in Washington were
saying.

Paki General wrote:When I was in the field, I had evidence of Indian support to militancy in FATA and Balochistan. They fund and resource militancy in a big way. I fail to understand the international indifference to the numerous Indian consulates along Pakistan’s Western border in Afghanistan. Surely they are not in the business of processing visas. Thus, Pakistan’s external and internal threats both gravitate towards India.

Paki General wrote:I have such evidence as Indian shell dressings and medicines, and even a captured Indian vehicle with Hanuman painted on the door. But the evidence we present is explained away as being taken away from kidnapped Indian road workers.

____________________________________________________________

CFair wrote:The army literature makes a very clear case about the ter ms for
peace with India is: India has to accept Pakistan as an equal and they
have to accept the two nation theory. So this is obviously a very hard
set of pills to swallow because the two nation theory makes no sense
rationally and certainly doesn’t make sense with India’s own history.
The other reason why they claim to this so ferociously is that it
legitimises their plaintiff to Kashmir. There is nothing else that
legitimises their claim to Kashmir. If they say the accession to India
is illegitimate then they have to also accept that Baluchistan is also
illegitimate. E very argument that they use to say the ac cession of
Kashmir has enormous implications for them domestically. I f they let
go of the two nation theory they are essentially letting go of Kashmir
and vice - versa . So their demand for Kashmir and their pursuit for
the two nation theory are mutually reinforcing. The other thing that I
thought was really interesting is that they don’t define defeat in
terms of loss of territory, loss of life or the value of the territory
lost... their definition of defeat is acquiescing completely. This
was explained to me by a former Army chief when I was in Pakistan in
2000 talking to them about – why in the world would you want the Kargil
operation? Even a fourteen year old who p lays dungeons and dragons
could have gained out Kargil and the consequences that would eventually
evolve from it. The army chief said – “ if we do nothing that is to
acquiesce to Indian hegemony. Therefore we always have to do something.
We would rather take a calculated risk than do nothing. Because to do
nothing is to genuinely be defeated ”

Paki General wrote:It is only the state’s prerogative to declare war or project an aggressive or friendly posture towards any other country. This right does not belong to any individual or community, or ‘non-state actors’. If one does not agree with a government’s stance, in a democracy it can be voted out of power. If we try and find justifications for such individuals or groups, or afford platforms for their apologists, we will not become a strong state.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 28 Oct 2015 09:45

Anujan wrote:Also the NSA fella might be a direct Army liaison to negotiate a nuke deal.

Sending signal to Modi and Doval onlee hahaha.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 28 Oct 2015 12:13

Kabul suspicious of Pak role in peace process - Daily Times

ISLAMABAD: Afghanistan Chief Executive Dr Abdullah Abdullah has said he has suspicions over Pakistan’s role in the peace process after Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s “refusal” to act against Afghan Taliban.

He was commenting on the premier’s remarks that Pakistan could not bring Taliban to the negotiating table “and be asked to kill them at the same time.” “We heard Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif clearly on fight and peace talks with Taliban. If Pakistan cannot fight insurgency, we cannot trust they would not support insurgents,” he said while addressing Afghan Council of Ministers on Tuesday. “We are not sure they will encourage the Taliban to peace.” Abdullah’s remarks indicate the two-headed National Unity government is in no mood to end the deadlock in the negotiations with the Taliban that Pakistan had brokered in early July.

Afghanistan’s revelation of Mullah Omar’s death derailed the first ever direct talks with the Taliban in 14 years. “Trust-building is the key in relations with Pakistan but the recent comments and no intention of fighting terrorism in Pakistan does not take us anywhere,” Abdullah said. “We ask them again to fight insurgency without any exceptions. Terrorists support nobody but their own ultimate goals that harm all of us,” the Afghan leader asserted. The chief executive added that terrorist groups should not be used as a “tool for achieving policy goals but there should be joint fight [against] these groups.” A senior Pakistani diplomat had earlier made it clear that Pakistan could not fight “others’ war on own soil,” {Pakistan has made its position crystal clear with this statement. There can be no more doubt after this, not that there was any doubt before but even dumb headed and wooden headed cannot have doubts anymore on where Pakistan's sympathies are} in a reference to Kabul’s repeated demands for action against the Afghan Taliban.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 28 Oct 2015 12:21

One more Paki Brigadier on the loose - DT

India will needlessly waste effort, national resources and perhaps jeopardise its territorial integrity trying to match or oppose China. Simultaneously, Pakistan is well on its way to becoming a strategic partner with China along its South Asian spur, which means it may not maintain an independent nuclear deterrence against possible Indian aggression. That will be taken care of by China, as a threat to Pakistan will be a threat to the strategic corridor, which would be unacceptable. All that Pakistan is required to do is work out the modalities of this promising and unique alliance with clarity, as the road to enduring peace and prosperity has been reached. It is for India to choose between peace and pointless confrontation.

That's it. As simple as that. Ignorance is always a bliss.

sum · Post by **sum** » 28 Oct 2015 12:57

That will be taken care of by China, as a threat to Pakistan will be a threat to the strategic corridor, which would be unacceptable. All that Pakistan is required to do is work out the modalities of this promising and unique alliance with clarity, as the road to enduring peace and prosperity has been reached.

Cant imagine any other nation and its people being so proud of having whored themselves out to another nation

PS: apologies to the professional whores who have more ethics than the TSP

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Oct 2015 13:28

SSridhar wrote:One more Paki Brigadier on the loose - DT
Pakistan is well on its way to becoming a strategic partner with China along its South Asian spur, which means it may not maintain an independent nuclear deterrence against possible Indian aggression. That will be taken care of by China
That's it. As simple as that. Ignorance is always a bliss.

What makes him write that?

It's a lie, but is he looking for a way out to explain nook-noodity?

sudhan · Post by **sudhan** » 28 Oct 2015 14:08

Hmm.. Interesting take, Shiv ji. Let me play along this line..

If pakis are indeed Nook-nanga, why don't they claim that they are unilaterally giving up nooks and put pressure on SDREs to follow suit? They have tried something similar (You small hearted indians!de-militarize siachen! For the sake of the world piss!) when they know they are clearly at a disadvantage.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 28 Oct 2015 14:18

sudhan wrote:Hmm.. Interesting take, Shiv ji. Let me play along this line..

If pakis are indeed Nook-nanga, why don't they claim that they are unilaterally giving up nooks and put pressure on SDREs to follow suit? They have tried something similar (You small hearted indians!de-militarize siachen! For the sake of the world piss!) when they know they are clearly at a disadvantage.

Can you imagine what would happen to the Faujis in Pakistan if they said that. The whole respect the get since 1998 is that they are custodians of Islamic Bomb.