Indian Response to Terrorism

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 05 Dec 2008 04:23

Are you really sure that this will work? The US has kept afloat many PM's by their power of carrot & stick. It has not worked. Infact the opposite has happened: the PA has used the civilian PM's to get goodies for the PA and buy diplomatic cover against India. In the game of wily ideas, PA & the TSPians are quite expert.

Indira Gandhi tried the same with Bhutto: He pleaded with her to not make IB=LOC because his position would be jeopardized. He also pleaded for territory & POW's. What did IG do? She tried to prop him by giving concessions, and he it finally turned out it was he who was using his weakness to defraud IG. Same has happened with Amerikaans. I don't see your idea working.

The fundamental reason it will not work is the following: the civilan frontman and the PA fundamentally aggree with each other on all issues. You prop one against the other only when they differ substantially. Not when they only pretend to be different to get concessions.

Surinder,

I am not talking about appeasing the PA's demands. I am talking about breaking the PA's power to decide who runs the country. That is the PA's greatest, and most important source of power.

It has been a very rare thing for the US to have any substantial impact on the question of who runs Pakistan. They have supported governments, but failed to launch the all out effort required to prevent their usurpation.

The PA usually just promises that it will improve cooperation in whatever area the US is worried about - intelligence cooperation agaisnt the Soviets, Soviets in Afghanistan, Pakistani troops in KSA during the Gulf war, and Somalia after it, arresting Arab jihadis, campaigns in FATA, etc.

The first time they had *decisive* impact was in forcing Musharraf to resign from the army, and then to cede the presidency. Even in this case, Kiyani played an equally big role in allowing this to happen.

Unless someone, *anyone* outside Pakistan can demonstrstate that the PA is no longer the chief factor in the power equation, the PA will reign supreme.

Narayanan's approach does something more interesting. It takes away the psychological halo of the top brass. By hitting them, the audacity fo India is juxtaposed against their their smallness and weakness. Their postion in the scheme of things is undermined profoundly, and their cost of hitting India made ubearable. And if they are succeded by even more radical colonels, that is just not another radical colonel: it is a scared radical colonel.

The cost will be high for India, but the advantage will be higher too.

Added later: In the society that TSP works in, an appearance of defeat & weakness is kiss of death. N's plan does that.

Pulverising GHQ may discredit the current PA leadership - they will be replaced by tougher types who will make themselves heroes for their defiance, just as OBL made himself a hero for facing the cruise missile attacks of 1998. This will be especially true if the results of the military confrontation that follows are inconclusive. The PA is still the biggest, strongest gang in Pakistan. That has to be changed.

Later; edited to include Surinder's quote, and to address his edits

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 05 Dec 2008 04:25

Ok Johaan made quick amends by editing his original post so that the doosra might be declared as no ball, while I was dancing down the track,, hmm some derek underwood work there.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 05 Dec 2008 04:28

Spinster,

The edit was expanding the last portion of the post - what it would take for Israel to defeat Hezb'allah. Nothing else

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 05 Dec 2008 04:37

Well, I guess so far most of the posts' reco come to the following broad areas :

Action choices:

(1) immediate military and/or covert strike on military targets inside Pakistan. The debate is about the nature of desired targets.

(2) no immediate military operation, but phased covert ops inside Pakistan leading to a decisive military op. The debate is about timing and level of preparation necessary.

Opinions about feasibility:

(1) Little or no preparation from the political leadership of GOI. The debate is about reasons behind such lack of preparation and hence the persistence of this state of GOI into the future or not.

(2) GOI is not unprepared, but is trying to balance too many factors at the same time and hence suffering from indecision.

(3) Success or failure of military ops itself within Pakistan, and whether GOI has the capability to face any collateral regional or international consequences.

I think all these differences of opinion are stemming from two fundamental sources :

(1) A lack of clarity about what the fundamental objectives about Pakistan as a nation-state should be from the Indian side - (there are hints here and there but still no consensus about concrete objectives). Most of us here I think broadly agree on dissolution of TSP. But what should it mean in concrete political administrative, strategic terms? Here I see a divergence of views. There are two major strategic outcomes to be considered - and each has very very serious consequences - (a) dismemberment of TSP and Balkanization into several smaller independent entities over which we may or may not have control or influence. The world's powers would jump into these states and flatter them up to gain access to the region and more importantly to checkmate India. Also I think there is a lack of understanding of the state of the society, its feudal backwardness, tribal internecine competition for supremacy, and over and above everything the ever present Islamic theologians and the culture of Islamic practice and belief that suits a certain social order quite well.
(b) incorporation of Pakistan whole as a collection of provinces of India - this may need some clever amendment of the constitution, and a new twist to the pseudo-federal structure. This has severe difficulties - instead of one separatist Kashmir we may have many separatist states. And similar social problems related to the factors mentioned in (a). But I would suggest thinking that at least within one national structure there will be a better chance at managing this without external interference. As should be obvious, each of objectives (a), (b) have associated and different concrete consequences in preparation, political tactic, international moves, military strategy.

(2) The second source of confusion : lack of clarity about the purpose of the existence of India as a nation. This leads to problems in our long term objectives about TSP too - for what we do to TSP has to be seen within the broader Asian, and global role for India in the future. The fundamental decision problems abdout the nature and drive behind the nation's consciousness, (if any) has a significant impact on our attitude to TSP, its successor, its people, its institutions, its ideology- which at least in one aspect has to make clear what India plans to do with Islam, feudalism, middle eastern cultural practices etc. For what we do to TSP will bring international, and greater "regional" consequences and mobilizations, and India has to plan for such consequences and decide what role it would like to play in this arena. I would suggest thinking about toying with the idea of rejecting applied Marxism, Islam, and other proselytizing versions of the revealed traditions as having anything to do with the nation.

All societal transitions usually start with single ideas - when that idea is shared by a group and generates dreams, the transition is underway. I see great hopelessness and pessimism. Why cannot we hope and dream for our future, why cannot we commit to that future - why don't we dare? I am not asking this out of daydreams - I have seen and shared in the hardships of our people, I am acutely aware of the reality of India, and I am no longer in my "blood-boiling" greenhorn age - and if I can still think this way, why not others!

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 05 Dec 2008 04:46

Johann,

The answer to your viewpoint is what you yourself wrote: "Unless someone, *anyone* outside Pakistan can demonstrstate that the PA is no longer the chief factor in the power equation, the PA will reign supreme."

But how do you change the power equation of the PA? If Indiia audaciously assaults the PA/ISI leadership & HQ's, that does the same.

Your approach is an attractive road for the US & West to follow, but it is not the road that makes sense for Indiia. The reason for that is the following: For the US & West, having the PA & a civilan front is an important differentiator. The attitude of the PA vs. civilians is different, and their utility is different, and the western sensitivity is different. Hence, for US/West it matters who is king & who is kingmaker. For India it hardly matters who is in power and who is the powermaker. The anti-Indian stance pervades the whole society. If the leaders are made by PA or by the public throught ballot, the result is still a rabidly anti-Indian leader. Hence who the King maker is in TSP is important for the West, but immaterial for India.

But in the land governed by bravado and bluster, it is important to demystify and humiliate appropriate segments of the society. PA & ISI is one such segment. Please note, there has not been any active Indo-TSP war since 1971. Why? Because the PA was thoroughtly disgraced. This single act has ensured a lasting peace on the conventional side.

Indo-pak conflict can be divided into two very different and distinct phases: The period from 1947-1971 was when Indiia faced PA. The period from 1972-now is a period when Indiia faces ISI & ISI+beards. 1971 was the game changer.

In the conventional sense, Indiia achieved an absence of conventional war post-1971, solely because of the psychological blow by the clear defeat of PA. As a commentator once said, an enemy must not simply be defeated, it must also *seen* to be defeated. Pakis could claim that 48, 65 were victories; but in 1971 such a claim was impossible. That humiliation of unconditional surrender ensured that PA never rose to threaten Indiia.

Note that the vacuum created by PA's humiliation in 1971 was filled by ISI+beards in its sub-conventional warfar against India. While PA is viewed as a pathetic looser in shitistan, ISI & ISI+Jihadee combo is widely considered a huge success. This bluster & megalomania must be broken. They must be seen to be utterly humiliated. We need an equivalent of 1971 with the ISI+beards.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Dec 2008 04:54

In every totalitarian state until the armed forces got disenchanted there was no possiblity of reforms. The RATs will not cede pwoer till they are defeated or the US and PRC withdraw the support they give them to pursue their nefarious activities.

The course of negotiating with them is a non starter. The RATs have to be defeated. Looks like Rice went cold in TSP while she was boiling in India. Must be their machsimo! The idiot Powell did the same and went an signed the MUNNA treaty with them after blowing hot in Delhi.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 05 Dec 2008 04:56

I like raw jobs that does final justice.. no courts, no news no nothing. everything taken care of. Its the best solution, and the onlee long term option. Everything else can be history.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 05 Dec 2008 05:02

Ten years ago during the reign of LKg and Akhand, I had said there is no plan for the end game by GOI.
There were huge debates, very spirited mavericks were ruling the roost here with ulta connections to GOI ( claim even now, with hands on bums experience!

)

Lot of experts said GOI know exactly what to do (may be they decided not doing anything in case of terror attacks is the right course).

We had marathon GOAT threads
We had Monkey in jar scenarios
We two scorpions in Jar with a big gorrila claping, laughing and once in while giving more venom to the black scorpion and watching white one trying to sting the balck one.

We then changed the model a little bit when the Gorilla himself landed in the bottle amidst the white and black scorpion.
The Black one started to go after Gorilla, the gorilla gave even more venom thinking the black will disable white and white will ask mediation. It did not work like that because the white gave up fighting and started taking stings and doging them hoping to quickly grow in size.....

So we had all kinds simulation stimulations , cold farts, cold starts, cold feet, cold sweat
and we still cold sweating...

and no end game paln for the black scorpion to be pulvarized even though now the gorilla says I am fine beat him up as I build him up, and we shook hand with gorilla wondering what to do next..

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 05 Dec 2008 05:04

Indians need to know and understand that we are on our own and there are no so called "friends" out there to solve the problems which are our own responibilties.All the actions, inactions, reaction need to stem from this realization.As long as we rely or think of relying on others we are weaklings and subject to attack. House cleaing to remove weak elements in nation building is as important as going to war.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 05 Dec 2008 05:13

The anti-Indian stance pervades the whole society. If the leaders are made by PA or by the public throught ballot, the result is still a rabidly anti-Indian leader. Hence who the King maker is in TSP is important for the West, but immaterial for India.

Surinder,

I listed Mahmud Abbas as an example for a specific reason. The Hashemites in Jordan fall more or less in to the same category.The most intense Anti-Israeli feelings pervade more or less the whole of these societies.

In both cases, they faced tremendous pressures to fight Israel. What is the difference between Abbas and Arafat?

Abbas can not survive as head of the Palestinian Authority and Fatah without a modus vivendi with Israel. He *needs* the Israelis to keep a check on the radical forces that would eject him from power.

Youre right that forces require public defeats in order to be diminished. The ISI's primary role right from the 1950s onwards has been to secure the PA's power *within* Pakistan -they were more prepared to rig elections in 1965 than to deliver Indian intentions and capabilities to Ayub Khan or deliver effective covert action.

Th *ultimate* defeat of the PA and ISI is within the context of of power in Pakistan. Bombing GHQ or ISI HQ is fine so long as it exploits wedges within the Pakistani government.

p.s. Kargil was a military operation, not insurgency or terrorism. The gap from 1971 had everything to do with the confidence that Ghauri/ding dong missile tests and the declared nuclear tests of 1998 provided.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 05 Dec 2008 05:27

I am talking about Terrorism in J&K to make it flash point so that Bill Clinton could preside over yet another Nobel peace prize.

And besides Kargil was an instigation Bill C administration as way to teach lesson to India for testing , which by the way were endorsed by our dearest well wisher and friend Dr. Tim SA analyst!

Oh by the way did you notice all was quiet till great messiah Obama opened his big mouth and Said Kashmir with out knowing where it is on global map

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 05 Dec 2008 05:38

Prem wrote:Indians need to know and understand that we are on our own and there are no so called "friends" out there to solve the problems which are our own responibilties.All the actions, inactions, reaction need to stem from this realization.As long as we rely or think of relying on others we are weaklings and subject to attack. House cleaing to remove weak elements in nation building is as important as going to war.

Thanks for this post. This needs to be repeated again and again.
Indians have to form groups and build relations with other countries and find solutions to the problems.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 05 Dec 2008 05:39

We have talked here that

USA has a plan
TSP has a plan
India has no plan

USA's plan - keep TSP troops on the Afghan border, otherwise sky falls down
TSP's plan - they want to get out of the tribal lands and are looking for an excuse

India's plan should be
o to keep TSP forces on the Afghan border pounding the Pushtuns, and earning their compound wrath in return
o keep them guessing about India's intentions, so that they are remain in two minds, on which border to deploy
o because even though they will keep on pounding the Pushtuns, they will not be doing it that well,
o thereby speeding up the process of takeover of FATA and NWFP by the Taliban
o until the first big city falls to the Taliban, namely Peshawar

I do think, that we can conduct military strikes on ISI headquarters, etc. without necessarily provoking a large scale redeployment of Pakistani troops to their eastern border with India.

One of the best ways to punish TSP, is to be a jubilant spectator, when Peshawar falls. That will be a huge slap on the H&D of Pakistani Army.

The confusion lately has already forced the Pakistani Army to declare Baitullah Mehsud and Mangal Bagh as patriots, meaning the Army is expecting a redeployment to the east, and is willing to lose the Pushtun lands for ever and wash their hands off their responsibility to the integrity of Pakistani nation. What the Pakistani Army is looking for is a safe exit from the ignominy of having lost the Pushtun lands. I think, it would be best if India does not provide Pakistan with this safe exit.

Pakistani Army should feel the humiliation of having to be seen retreating and seeing the flag of Talibanistan Emirate going up in Peshawar.

A concerted Indian pressure on the Pakistani Army should come only after the Pushtuns have kicked their ar$es really badly. The spirits in the Pakistani Army would be really in the pits then, and they would be easier to target.

I also think, that the ISI+PA wanted to get out of the Afghan border relationship before Obama comes into White House, because he may use devices, which will make it all the more difficult to move Pakistani troops away from the border.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 05 Dec 2008 05:49

Shreeman:

India can't do jack-**** because ____________________________.

OK, posting under the UN White Flag, temporary Sanity Break:

India is not run by knee-jerk cowboys or jackass Generals or Sultans. Indian leaders don't wage war based on Gallup Polls. In the past 10 years, Pakistan has gone from being considered almost equal to India, to being the "Migraine of the World" (quote: Muddlin HalfBright). Every passing day sends Pakistan further down, and India further up.

And this does not mean that India stands by and forgets atrocities against its citizens. When India hits Pakistan, you will know.

OK, back to Pagal Kutta mode.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 05 Dec 2008 05:55

One of the best ways to punish TSP, is to be a jubilant spectator, when Peshawar falls. That will be a huge slap on the H&D of Pakistani Army.

to whom

Amerikhans or Taliban

TSP Army = RATS = ISI = Taliban = Alqaeda = Osama (Certified training offered at kompani HQ perosnell in field offices)

TSP Army = RATS (exposed in KArgil)

RATS = ISI = Taliban ( exposed in Konduz air lift and Bill C days on Unicol deals)

Taliban + ISI = Alqaeda ( exposed in 9-11 ops and current ops in Afghanistan)

RATS + ISI + Taliban = current fighting in Afghanistan Amerikhans

carrots sent from Amerikhans chewed along with the Amerikhans hands just google to find out (10 Billion plus)

Its all the same incarination. Falling Peshawar to any one in any WAR is no Pesh. kapish all drama to buy or co opt TSP to save Amerikhans ass being chewed at the expense of India. (which ID10T fell for cheap photo ops you know already)

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 05 Dec 2008 06:00

Summarizing my earlier post:

1. We should allow Peshawar to fall first to the Talibanistan Emirate.
2. We should allow Pakistani Army to lose massive face.
3. BLA should be reactivated and fight for independence.
4. Then we should force PA to confront Indian retaliation and build-up on the eastern border.

When the Jarnails are feeling in the pits and demoralized because of loss of Peshawar, and half of them have been co-opted by India, and the other half's credibility tarnished by corruption charges, then denuking TSP would be much easier.

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 05 Dec 2008 06:00

narayanan wrote:Shreeman:

India can't do jack-**** because ____________________________.

OK, posting under the UN White Flag, temporary Sanity Break:

India is not run by knee-jerk cowboys or jackass Generals or Sultans. Indian leaders don't wage war based on Gallup Polls. In the past 10 years, Pakistan has gone from being considered almost equal to India, to being the "Migraine of the World" (quote: Muddlin HalfBright). Every passing day sends Pakistan further down, and India further up.

And this does not mean that India stands by and forgets atrocities against its citizens. When India hits Pakistan, you will know.

OK, back to Pagal Kutta mode.

Lot of very smart and helpful things said, between you, and Rye. Still it doesn't fit in a few sentence non-aggressive factual answer one can give a stranger without being drawn into a longer chat/discussion on a subject they are wholly ignorant of. They simply bring up an older incident. Press/talking heads has repeated news of so many terrorist incidents in the past years during the three day crash course.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 05 Dec 2008 06:02

John Snow,

RATS is acronym for ??

I think some of the fighting between the Pakjabi Army and the TTP in Bajaur has been for real. There is also real intimidation of the Pakistani Police forces by the Taliban in NWFP. In my view, the ethnic differences in Pakistan are for real.

All these equality functions are for me an exaggeration.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 05 Dec 2008 06:13

Johann:

First off, unlike some of the newer rantors here, I have no doubt about the dichotomy between your view and the "present approach".

But let's get back to this discussion of how the PA would respond to a pointed slam against their HQ and infrastructure.

Pulverising GHQ may discredit the current PA leadership - they will be replaced by tougher types who will make themselves heroes for their defiance, just as OBL made himself a hero for facing the cruise missile attacks of 1998. This will be especially true if the results of the military confrontation that follows are inconclusive. The PA is still the biggest, strongest gang in Pakistan. That has to be changed.

True, if the attack is the end of the "punishment". But not if it is accompanied by what I describe as "Moral and Diplomatic and Humanitarian Support to the Freedom Movements".

Remember: my whole strategic objective in hitting the PA's leadership is NOT just a "demonstration" with its H&D reduction. It aims to:
1. Hit them in the pocketbook - meaning their real estate holdings etc. A one-day devaluation of their portfolios by 80%. With a promise of much more where that came from. This is the "blocking" to keep the Big Generals from taking any part in any new coup etc.

2. Sudden degradation of the mobility and command structure of the PA, impacting their ability to respond to uprisings.

The latter becomes effective only when coupled with the Moral and Diplomatic and Humanitarian Support.

If the job is dropped after the first strike, the "Defiant Ones" will come up, sure, but if the first Defiant Ones get the same treatment as today's "Al Qaeda No. 3" and is seen to have a short life expectancy, then the enthusiasm for Defiant Leadership gets damped real fast. And the Portfolio Reduction Operation should continue along with each of these subsequent decapitation strikes.

IOW, we want the PA's rapidly declining portfolio to dampen their enthusiasm to support any new generals, and instead side with the civilian leadership. The billionaires have to be screaming at the PA to stop angering the Indians.

The civilian leadership, on the other hand, can come out of it decently by making the smart move, and pointing to the smoking rubble as the end of a shameful era - a bunch of criminals who nearly brought the nation to nuclear annihilation. Temporarily.

As the Freedom movements gather steam, the emphasis in the RAPE will be on visas and airport protection for the exit flights.

There is a Phase 3 - how to bring the new UN members into line, but that takes US cooperation on a larger scale than Phase 1 and Phase 2.

The H&D implications are a bonus, and I agree with the assessment that this is the probable reaction of the Paki-in-the-mohalla. They don't support losers. The parallel to the Israel-Arab situation is not there, Johann, because the Pakis have no REAL cause for desperation, unlike the Palestinians. They have always had the option of living in peace with India, and they know that quite well.

Here is another of my firmly held views: The current Paki devotion to religious zeal and purity is PURELY because there is money to be made in that. Its a 100% business motivation. If the money and power are seen to be in the casually "secular" sector, then Pakis will switch overnight to becoming Modern, Secular, Whisky-Swilling TechnoPakis.

Note the reports from Mumbai. The terrorists in the restaurants, were sitting there, DRINKING BEER, then they finished their drinks and then brought out their AK-47s.

Western experts need to get out of the stupid notion that there is any REAL religious zeal behind the Pakis. The suicide nuts are just lobotomized.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 05 Dec 2008 06:19

RATS Rogue Army of Terrorists

People who have spent more than 10 years on BRF know all about, one the flowing wide bearded guru who does thapas these days can be found in Dandakaranya named N guru. He published volumes about the equalities, then there is ramana maharishi, Kgoan garu , Shiv guru et al samptha rishis and many more rishis spent time studying Islam & Pakiness and proved the above e qualities of the actors.

If they are exagageration its not your fault, for you have not done anyreading of these Rishis, yes you have grasped the paramnus in 123 threads

. But go back read more on google. Start with BCCI , ex CIA chiefs associated with it.

I cant go any more because I may be terminated with extreme prejudice, I was wished to die crossing streets in ann arbor by some jones of this world in this very same forum...

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 05 Dec 2008 06:23

Rajesh A>> read two posts above how sage N guru simplifies the things, even a "hard headed self styled expert of the motivated group" like Johaan has to agree to simple and fluid logic of sage N guru... just like the GEKO watcher be awre where you are perching...

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 05 Dec 2008 06:29

Sudden degradation in mobility often happens due to

o overuse of IED Mubaraks, and
o corrupt/idle technicians at air force bases, who are not Pakjabis.

John Snow,

Thanks for the RATS information. Answers from you, I see, have often a coating of some unidentifiable white powder.

samuel · Post by **samuel** » 05 Dec 2008 07:11

Any momentum we are seeing as of now is thanks to whatever Americans seem to be doing. Before the first "decapitation strike takes off," there will be a leak from one of the bhavans to the Americans who will warn the Pakistanis. After the strike is a partial success, the US is not only annoyed that we are messing their plans by removing the top order, they will open up supply chains for the Pakistani Army to sustain itself. By this time, we will be in a full blown war, which lasts approximately 20 days before a ceasefire.

I mean, if India really was that motivated, we would've reached Lahore and held it. If India becomes that motivated, this decapitation is too much drama. With such motivation, every terror strike will cause them to lose some more. Kargil strike, end up at Skardu. Terror strike in Poonch, Army moves to Muzzafarabad. Strike on Parliament, bye-bye Pindi. Hit Mumbai, Karachi is history.

To get to that point, that is, to get to the point where we are determined to, capable of, and guaranteed of success ( and I don't mean running out of gas on the way there), there is too much inhouse cleaning to do, first.

Unless of course, someone in power reading this thread is getting a surge of their own to get on with it.

S

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 05 Dec 2008 07:30

Every so often in the History of a nation
It has to remember WAR is expensive
but even more importantly it has to remind its citizens and leaders that
War is an instrument of peace, prosperty and dignity when attacked.

Spinster

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 05 Dec 2008 07:36

Rajesh A>> Read what Shiv guru is saying in war and Peace thread about Taliban & Rats

samuel · Post by **samuel** » 05 Dec 2008 07:49

Meanwhile, here comes murky Markey,
http://www.rediff.com///news/2008/dec/0 ... tunate.htm

Pak response to Mumbai attacks 'unfortunate'

Suman Guha Mozumder in New York | December 04, 2008 | 11:54 IST

"I think evidence is accumulating that is making very credible the claims that this group of ten attackers was trained and equipped and organised in Pakistan," Daniel Markey, senior fellow for India, Pakistan and South Asia at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, told rediff.com

Markey, who returned last month from a visit to Afghanistan at the invitation of top United States military commander General David McKiernan, said the big question now was to what extent the State of Pakistan was responsible for the attack on Mumbai, and what would be the most appropriate or constructive response to the situation.

"I think there is a growing consensus that the problem in Pakistan is the weakness of its leaders and its lack of capacity to control this militancy, which is different from the historical problem of their actively using the militants to pursue their goals. Now, the militants have outgrown their masters to some degree," Markey said.

"So the question is what kind of coercion you want to use against a relatively weak civilian leadership of Pakistan. That is a difficult balance we are stuck with right now."

Commenting on External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee's comments that all options including military retaliation were open in India's reaction to the terror attacks on Mumbai, Markey said he found war an unlikely scenario.

"I think that the comment is actually a diplomatic language that says 'we are very angry and we have never surrendered the right to use military force'." However, said the South Asia expert, his reading of comments made by the minister in his briefing to Indian diplomats across the world led him to believe that India does not consider a short-term military solution.

"That is very encouraging. I think for diplomatic reasons it was necessary to show a tough face and also a reasonable face, and that is what they are trying to do right now," he said.

Markey said Pakistan's statement that it would not extradite terrorists on the 20 most wanted list presented by India "narrows the opportunities for Pakistan to provide India with some evidence that it is cooperating, but the problem is with India's sending of those names."

"I believe those names have been taken every time there has been an attack on India. You might say these are the generals behind the militancy or the inspiration behind the militancy, but India has not been able to send tangible evidence to Pakistan as to how these individuals are linked. So it puts Pakistan in a very difficult situation."

Markey clarified that he was not defending Pakistan. "But politically, it puts them in a tough spot. I think Islamabad can, even without handing over these 20 people, do something to provide additional information to India on specifics ([EM>of those behind the attacks)," Markey said.

He said if India shares evidence obtained from the interrogation of the sole captured terrorist, and if Islamabad is then able to use that evidence to track back, through phone records and other means, and find the operational masterminds at the Pakistan end, that would be a good example of cooperation.

"I think that is a kind of thing that the US would like to see happen," he said, adding that if one follows that path, one avoids more difficult, more politically challenging tasks and gets at specific individuals that are involved in this terror attack.

"That may be an area where there is room to maneuver and where the Pakistani government may be willing to provide more, especially when US Admiral Mullen is over there and is pushing that angle," he said.

Markey said the Pakistan response to the Mumbai attacks has been "unfortunate. "At least from what I see, they were relatively uncoordinated, and not very diplomatically careful. And it has not been as effective in terms of demonstrating a good faith approach to India and to the US, as well as the international community," Markey said.

"It seems they were too defensive, which is unfortunate because I think ultimately the civilian leaders in Pakistan have actually found themselves very much the victims of similar groups, and that I think is very frustrating," he said.

Despite contemporary events, Markey said, he was hopeful that there was a future for the India-Pakistan peace process, because he has seen a lot of goodwill in the top leadership on both sides, and even within the Pakistani military.

"It may not be a total settlement of all outstanding issues, but normalisation of ties and composite dialogue and bringing a variety of interactions between the two countries have been there. It made me positive that the two countries would never get back to where they were in 2001-2002 in terms of bilateral relations," he said.

Markey hoped both sides could play effectively against their "more hawkish" public elements. In India, he said, a section of the public is upset with the government's inability to protect them, and therefore reasoned that what people seek is better security, not war with Pakistan.

He hoped that on the Pakistani side they are able to resist their "traditional temptation" to respond violently to Indian statements. "I look for positive opportunities that in the past couple of years had been forthcoming and encouraging."

The South Asia expert believed two factors come together to create a conducive climate for peace despite recent happenings. "Firstly, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh appears to genuinely want reconciliation with Pakistan as his legacy, and sometimes that is a very important thing to have that motivation at the top. And secondly, peace has actually been a popular electoral issue, and peace with Pakistan, a breakthrough, a roadmap or even a framework for working through these disagreements on Kashmir or Siachin or whatever may actually be one of the few potential winning issues that the Congress party could have," Markey said.

The danger of abandoning that path and, for electoral gains, adopting a hawkish posture is that the Congress will find itself playing the me-too game, Markey pointed out. "After all, he (Prime Minister Singh) can't be more hawkish than the Bharatiya Janata Party."

vdas · Post by **vdas** » 05 Dec 2008 08:32

Well IMHO..
all this jingoism will slowly get arrested the moment people realise that their money in bank will not get compounded in case there is a war.
So this so called weakness can be used to our benefit.

i think we should give some money to pakistan's politicians in the name of economic development and curbing terrorism ( this of course would go in their politician's swiss account ) at the same time give money to freedom fighters in pakistan waging a war against the hegemony of pakjabis not by picking arm but by non cooperation ( this will hurt whatever economy they have ) and here you dont leave any proofs since no guns are fired ... play the mind game .. let the hunter get hunted ..
( bring their society into chaos ... war with them will make them united )

Vikram Rathore · Post by **Vikram Rathore** » 05 Dec 2008 08:41

When I saw the title of this thread, the cynical side of me asked, `what response'? On the face of it, our government seems to be doing little other than pleading and pontificating....leaving a lot of us feeling infuriated and impotent. Then, to escape into a make believe world where things aren't so bad, I dove into a recent book that seems strangely pre-scient- a novel called Line of Control, in which terrorists of the friendly neighbourhood sort wreak havoc in urban areas (read some excerpts at the book's site at http://loc.homestead.com/Interactive.html including at attempt on the PM's life....that's where disconnect with reality happens- at least the pathetic reality we live with. The IAF strikes bases across the LOC, and while we spiral towards a war, at least we do something about it...will keep reading and enjoying a fictional world which I wish were closer to reality in terms of how we react to such a tragedy.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 05 Dec 2008 09:04

Here is another of my firmly held views: The current Paki devotion to religious zeal and purity is PURELY because there is money to be made in that. Its a 100% business motivation. If the money and power are seen to be in the casually "secular" sector, then Pakis will switch overnight to becoming Modern, Secular, Whisky-Swilling TechnoPakis.

Note the reports from Mumbai. The terrorists in the restaurants, were sitting there, DRINKING BEER, then they finished their drinks and then brought out their AK-47s.

Western experts need to get out of the stupid notion that there is any REAL religious zeal behind the Pakis.

Actually IMO, Pakistanis come in all shades of religious orthodoxy, from the bearded variety to the beer swilling variety. What unites them is a blood feud vis a vis India, a feeling of being cheated of what they believe was rightfully theirs, the land of India which should have reverted to them after the British left. The dispute over Kashmir and these attacks are only the symptoms, the disease is this pathological hatred of India. When there is such hatred, there is really not much one can do about it but destroy that nation completely leaving it bereft of a functioning government with Indian armed forces making periodic raids into what should then be called "the ungoverned badlands of what was known as Pakistan" to exterminate any efforts that the survivors may make towards reorganizing themselves.

That IMO is the only real and permanent solution to this menace. What will it take to achieve that? Even an overwhelming conventional superiority for India will result in a few retaliatory nukes from Pakistan landing on Indian soil. That is the price which may have to be paid to ultimately get rid of menace. And I would not count on any support from any other country in this effort.

The West is not in Pakistan's crosshairs. The West will respond only if its vital national security interests are impacted. Attacks on India do not impact those interests. Therefore the West will never do anything decisive vis a vis Pakistan. In the Middle East, the situation is different. The hatred against the US there is fuelled by unstinting US support for Israel against the Palestinians and Islamic perception that the US has "despoiled" holy Muslim lands by its presence in the Arabian peninsula. The Pakistanis have no such grievance against the US. The US's only interest is ensuring that the connection between Pakistani terrorism directed against India remains divorced from Arab terrorism directed against it. In that sense the UK may be a better partner for India to fight this menace because of the huge presence of Pakistani origin Muslims in the UK who are prone to radicalization and the UK's fear of the impact of that radicalization on its society.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 05 Dec 2008 09:18

The West will respond only if its vital national security interests are impacted.

mumbai is only a begin for a response, should the West consider this as a warning! now, we could say as they said, you guys ignored our warnings. told you so, that would make FBI, CIA look like well paid idiots.

There were Jews, Germans, Japanese, Australians, and who not but still it might not be their vital national security interests, but a dry run for future things to come. All it takes a LeT-IsI assimilation setup to happen in the very khan land is not totally fool proof, though since 911 everything appears rosy for the security folks.

Not just dirty nukes alone is the scare, the most deadlier ones like the pathogens could be easily produced in pakistan and it does not need any high tech invasion.. a sea launch that clings on to arriving boats and ships, is enough, and that explodes on command from pindi though garmin sat comm.

Its their wake up call! as well. Do they want to control a future variant of deadlier attacks to arrive or ensure such things never get started off in the very best way possible. American strikes are the best answer now to start with.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 05 Dec 2008 09:29

If Uncle wants Kangressi nephews and nieces to rule India he has to do somethingabout the Rat Land of Pakistan . Kangress loosing election will be big setback for EJs/ PSs and Jihadis as all of these are antagonistic forces and dont favour any nationalistc elements in India . Business community now must be very unhappy with current Goberment . Has dogs eaten more than they can digest because kitchen was left unguarded?

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 05 Dec 2008 09:37

Sai K,

IMO the West's interest in the Mumbai attacks is to explore the link between Pakistani terrorism and the larger Islamic terror networks because of the perception that westerners were targeted. Targetting the Jewish center is also a similar issue. Let's see where that line of enquiry leads to. I am not convinced that there is significant confluence of targetting as yet between the Pakistani terror networks and the larger Islamic networks in so far as Western targets are concerned. What could change that though is if some of the Arab networks decide to subcontract a job in the West to the Pakistanis. But that will mean a Pakistani network which does it on a freelance basis. In contrast all attacks on India are planned, directed and controlled by some section/faction within the Pakistani military establishment.

And in that lies the difference between the West in general and the US in particular on one hand and India on the other. For India it does not matter whether it is a military or a civilian government in power in Pakistan.... the hatred continues undiluted. The West thinks wrongly that distinctions such as having a strong civilian government that controls the military will make a difference. And that is also the reason why in the final analysis suggestions made here to drive a wedge between different regions of Pakistan or trying to drive a further wedge in the Sunni/Shia situation will not make a difference. Yes it would have only if the enemy was not India. But when the red flag of India is waved before the bull, all differences are forgotten to focus on this common enemy. And any faction whether it be the military or even a civilian government will do that to draw attention away from their own weakness. It was Zulfikar Ali Bhutto part of a civilian government who said the famous words," We will eat grass but develop nukes.....". Such are the civilian governments of Pakistan in so far as their attitude to India is concerned. And so it makes no difference to India who is in power in Pakistan. Endlessly discussing those internal Pakistani issues is IMO an exercise in mental masturbation.

Since 9/11 the US has become a much much harder target to get into for all sorts of people some of whom may not look anything like the bearded mullah of popular folklore. The gatekeepers are casting their net much wider to include all sorts of people who could be "turned" to give them the third degree before allowing entry. India by comparision is a much softer target.

PS
One of the great utilities of the Pakistani military establishment IMO to the US is that the ISI is the controlling module via which all terror attacks by Pakistani groups are planned and executed at least vis a vis India. What better way to ensure that those Pakistani groups do not get subverted by the the larger Islamic or Arab causes and start targetting the US? The destruction of the Pakistani military establishment via a large Indian attack will result in a free for all within the Pakistani terror apparatus with no central monitoring and no central pressure point that the US can bring to bear on the Pakistani terror machine.

Therefore IMO, India must do what accountants call a "zero base budget" on what it will take to destroy the Pakistan military establishment completely without being influenced by the "nuclear armed rivals" drumbeat propounded by various media. A zero base budget to really figure out Pakistani capabilities especially in the nuclear area and a detailed study of its impact on India in the event that India decides to act.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Dec 2008 09:53

All this analysis ignores the fact that the US allows the TSP to attack India periodically to releive the internal pressure due to Paki submission to US interests. This has been going on since the 13 Dec 2001 attack. This cannot be allowed without paying a price.

What is the idiot IK Gujral doing nowadays. I dont see any peeps outof him or Deva Gowda. Bineg former Pms dont ehy have to say something or they terror tied?

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 05 Dec 2008 10:06

ramana wrote:All this analysis ignores the fact that the US allows the TSP to attack India periodically to releive the internal pressure due to Paki submission to US interests. This has been going on since the 13 Dec 2001 attack. This cannot be allowed without paying a price.

And that is as I pointed out earlier because of the utility of the Pakistani military establishment in general and the ISI in particular as a centralized monitoring station where the US can ensure that no attacks are launched against it. Nothing will change that but the destruction of the entity and the only nation that has an overiding interest in doing that is India.

The whole idea of overt punitive military strikes by India into Pakistan is counterproductive. All that it will do is pull the disparate Pakistani factions together. Covert strikes with deniability are much better. And ofcourse the total destruction of the military machine is what would be ideal.

neelkamal · Post by **neelkamal** » 05 Dec 2008 10:07

News just now :
Bomb scare in Intercontinental Delhi hotel
bomb squad dispatched.

What the hell is the Congress govt doing ?? NOTHING.
Did you guys read the HIndu newspaper today ? Pathetic statement. All the "will take strong action" talks fizzled out. Now they have proof ISI is involved but they will not take any action it seems...

I feel so frustrated.

By the way, the terrorists had tortured the Israeli hostages, news said.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 05 Dec 2008 10:11

I agree, but the softness is largely imposed on us, by the geographic and demographic nature of our land. Very fortunate for the superKhans, they don't share an enemy on their borders like us. Reasons are plenty to say that after 911, everything is in order, and it is difficult for them to attack. We have to also say, that the probability of a spill into India vs. America, is at the order of 150M:1::1:1(Paki:India::Paki:USA). Hence, it is easier for America to handle the events, as there are lesser chances, and thus an automatic prevention.

But that does not mean a chance of 1, like 911 can not happen. There is always a possibility that any one can think what could originate from pakistan. What is happening in the war lord regions is the best.. and we need to keep a tight lid, by ensuring that the engagement happens by removing pakistan of nukes and WMD. No terrorist nation can have such WMD capability.. and America will wake up to kill it. They are only playing dirty tricks now, to pump in arms, and make them feel better to fight the talibans.

Another aspect is that pakis feeling the heat from both sides(superKhans and wazirKhans), have given a safe passage to taliban-pakjab to further into India., and thus mumbai attack. It is also a reminder for the superKhans, that where their money is spent, building arms against India, when the money is for killing the AQ network, but in the process acting like a Class A pimp, letting the fighting men cross ISI training into India, while rendering a picture that they have killed x-many terrorists, banned them.. see they are not ours or they are here.. Its all Kashmir and India.

The basic thing we expect America to do is stop supplying arms to pakistan, till they surrender all weapons of mass destruction, and the dreaded terrorist outfits. If pakistan can't be equated to NK, Iran or Iraq for WMD purposes, then we have to conclude that future is not safe for the west as well., cause these men who escape through the ISI filter have demonstrated very clear about their intention to strike western targets and westerners.

Of course, they hate us.. that is a given, but the West are not to feel safe, that paki anger is only against India.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 05 Dec 2008 10:26

SaiK wrote:I agree, but the softness is largely imposed on us, by the geographic and demographic nature of our land. Very fortunate for the superKhans, they don't share an enemy on their borders like us.

And that is why Sai K, I suggested that the only permanent answer is the total destruction of the country of Pakistan. How long and how effectively can one play a game of defence against an enemy who hates your guts, has no real intention of reaching a negotiated settlement and shares a common border which it is impossible to seal shut. Sooner or later terrorists get through whether by land, air or sea. And what if tomorrow they decide to bring a nuke, dirty or otherwise into India?

I dont think the US understands what a blood feud really is. Their rivalry with the USSR was based on an idealogy all of 30 years old when it started at the end of the second world war. This thing with Pakistan has its roots when the Mughals started ruling India and the Pakistanis foolishly and wrongly believe that they are the rightful heirs to the Mughals. The Pakistani's romanticized vision of the Arabs has added further fuel to this fantasy of theirs. So the Americans dont really understand the depths of the Pakistani hatred and delude themselves into believing that a peace dialogue will sort things out.

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 05 Dec 2008 10:41

Almost all the BRites are on the same length but I have a personal disagreement over one issue here. We have NOT carefully considered whether Pakistan threat to withdraw troops from FATA is genuine or bogus. I say & submit that Pakistan will never, never, never ever actually withdraw troops from FATA. It causes them following losses:-

1. Stoppage of Billions of dollars of US re-imbursement & arms aid for doing nothing. (In fact BRites in USA should claim that Pakistan has already withdrawn troops from FATA & call upon their Senators/Congressmen to stop re-imbursement.)

2. Gives space to RAW to act in Pakistan interior like liberation of mini-Pakistans

3. Gives space to US & Afghan intelligence agencies to take out Taliban/Al Keeda who are under protection of Pak Army.

4. Imposes cost on Pak Army budget for mobilizing on Indian border.

Hence Indian Army SHOULD mobilize on border and scr*w Pak economy. Though mobilization should be slow and methodical rather than mad rush to border like the last time. We should peak for action around First week of January, and coil to strike once every month for atleast 3-4 months keeping Pakis in tension about "To be or not to be". In fact, if possible some action in Siachin, Kargil, Sir Creek would not be a bad idea at all. We should publically deny in international media that we are going to take any action while preparing on ground to take action. This will protect Indian international business interests while keeping Pakistan on tender hooks.

US BRites if possible should bring a legal action against State of Pakistan in local US court for funding terrorism & killing of US citizens and ask for attachment of bi-lateral and multi-lateral aid. (I am not joking!)

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 05 Dec 2008 10:57

Johann wrote:Surinder,

I listed Mahmud Abbas as an example for a specific reason. The Hashemites in Jordan fall more or less in to the same category.The most intense Anti-Israeli feelings pervade more or less the whole of these societies.

In both cases, they faced tremendous pressures to fight Israel. What is the difference between Abbas and Arafat?

Abbas can not survive as head of the Palestinian Authority and Fatah without a modus vivendi with Israel. He *needs* the Israelis to keep a check on the radical forces that would eject him from power.

Johann,

The problem with using the Palestine-Israel issue is that while there are seducing similarities between it and the India-Pak situation, the reality is that these two situations are too divergent to serve as a useful analogy. Nature & cause of the conflict between Israel-vs-Arabs and India-vs-Pakistan is very very different. Pakistanis and Palestinians are of a very different mould and a very different national psyche. The raison-daitre of the existence of Palestine & Pakistan is profoundly different. The solution to the problem, hence, is also going to be different.

The pathological hatred for India, and an accompanying desire to hurt India, in the Pakistani psyche cannot be changed. The suicidal nature of this desire is such that Pakistan will essentially suck the oxygen out of its vitals to hurt India. Who is the king maker is immaterial insofar as India is concerned. Regardless of the king maker, the resulting King of TSP will see his/her popularity and staying power measured in direct relation to his/her ability to hurt India. That is the sole yardstick by which *EVERY* single ruler of Pakistan has been measured---whether ones who came by ballot or bayonet.

The initial wave of assault on India was direct & conventional. This model lasted till 1971. The resulting defeat caused the PA to loose face that it is yet to recover in Pakistan. This 1971 defeat caused the Pakistanis to look for alternate source of hurting India. They found the answer in religion-inspired Jihadis to wage terror on India, or as Aisha Siddiqui calles, sub-conventional warfare. This however was an unmitigated disaster for the West. The Jihadis world-view did not allow too great a distinction between India and West. So the destruction of PA's standing in Pakistan lead to the creation of the Jihadis and the collatoral damage to the West. If India now goes in to undermine the Jihadi model Pakistan, it will unleash more baser forces that will only make the West more insecure becase the newer Jihadis that will emerge will make even less of a distinction between West & India. This is the fundamental reason why the West is not eager for India to deliver a strong blow to Jihadis of Pakistan. This is also the reason why India *must* do it.

Pakistan is not a society based on valor, bravery or chivalry. It is a society that is based on coercion, power, and barbaric violence. He who can wield more of it is respected, but only as long he can wield these qualities. If anyone who is percieved to have lost the ability to display barbaric violence, or power of cercion, is promptly discarded. That is what happened to PA in 1971. That is what happened to *EVERY* ruler of TSP (including Musharraf). This is what India must do to the Jihadi-ISI nexus now. That is the best path for India.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Dec 2008 10:59

Surinder and Johann can you guys take it off line. I mean your hitabodha.