Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan - September 15, 2009

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 01 Oct 2009 06:51

Read the other day about rehman malik or that slimy packee foreign mantri mouthin off about why resumption of talks is the 'only option', how india-pak need to 'move beyond the Mumbai attacks' and the like.

Got moi wondering what's in it for TSP in this 'resumption of dialogue' fracas?

Its not as if the aid $$$ and arms-alms propping up TSP are conditional on the talks.

Or as if the attitude of anybody in TSP, west, PRC or KSA will change based on 'resumption of diallahogue'.

or as if hajaar trade $$$ will be impacted by the talks.

So why this drumbeat - subah shaam lagaataar - that 'dialog must resume as its the only option, esp after Mumbai' etc? Whats in it for them? More S-e-S like gifts they think they can trick out of us? Is that it?

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 01 Oct 2009 07:03

shiv wrote:The elephant in the room is the US.

Agreed Shivji. Actually not just US but the whole west has vested interest in keeping this disease alive with ONE objective (to unlease Paki terror while we manage our business). That is exactly why we need to be more creative in our thinking to convince them that this is a gone case and they will be responsible for all the consequences. While the admin (GOI) can appear neutral, we need to have some way to aggravate the situation towards making and convincing that Pakistan is not viable.

We need to also extend this to those people who continue and support Pakistan. For example, Japan, What is so much common between Japan and Pakistan that we cannot take their support away for good? Japan can talk economics so can we. They understand the language of business.

Same with some european countries that are also vulnerable to Paki terror. When those nations too suffer from Paki terror we need to bring pressure to make them unequivocal in their attitude towards Pakistan. One by one we need to start pulling out the rug under the Paki feet.

I am sure something is happening (at least that is what I believe) but more needs to happen in a sustained manner while maintaining neutrality at some level (pluasible deniability).

When Allah is giving opportunity we should make use of it.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 01 Oct 2009 07:12

Hari Seldon wrote:So why this drumbeat - subah shaam lagaataar - that 'dialog must resume as its the only option, esp after Mumbai' etc? Whats in it for them? More S-e-S like gifts they think they can trick out of us? Is that it?

Dialog means some people who want to make some investment decision can proceed with India (a regional stakeholder) signing off. When we say no dialog, there may be escalation without or little warning and those investors will loose their jhabbas. This is an economic measure kind of like desi sanctions.

IMO therein lies the rub.

arun · Post by **arun** » 01 Oct 2009 07:50

Robert Spencer of jihadwatch.com, writing at Front Page Mag, has a “piskological” insight about the nature of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan that has been previously known on BR:

Why More Aid to Pakistan Won’t Work – by Robert Spencer

............................. One fundamental assumption that all too many Pakistani officials hold is that when something goes wrong with society, it is because the people have faltered in their fidelity to Islam, and only renewed religious fervor can solve the problem and restore prosperity to the nation and health to the society. This assumption militates against the idea that any amount of American aid will significantly alter the situation in Pakistan, or lessen popular support for the Islamic jihad of the Taliban and allied groups. ..........................

Front Page Mag

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 01 Oct 2009 08:17

India is coming closer to the point where the annual increase in the Indian economy outweighs the entire Pakistani economy (e.g, if the Indian economy is 10 times the size of the Pakistani economy, and India grows at 10% per year, then India is just at this tipping point. India may be at 9.5 times growing at 8% per year.)

My belief is from that point on, Pakistan begins its slide into irrelevance as far as the world is concerned, because ultimately money talks.

Of course, Pakistan can theoretically untip the scales again - but that would require them to give up the jihad and concentrate on bania concerns.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 01 Oct 2009 08:23

A_Gupta wrote:

Wow - that's a name I am seeing after a long time - a name which would make me open a thread to see what has been said.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 01 Oct 2009 08:24

A_Gupta,

I used to think likewise but events in the past year have given pause.

Pak can 'untip the scales' not by raising their own game but by bringing us down and preventing our unhindered rise. In this it shares interests with other major powers (IMHO, P5 minus Russia).

The bania calculation of economic rise overriding other geopol concerns is also demonstratively unsound. As long as Pak has N-bums that threaten Dilli (so what if we could theoretically wipe off all of TSP after that, that's secondary if we lose our top 2 metros), no amount of Yindian economic weight will make Pak an ignorable entity.

Just my 2 realist assessments. How I wish I were an optimist instead (like moi was till last year).

But what is, is.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 01 Oct 2009 08:24

A Gupta Ji , Welcome back!!
Paki will keep cooking the books to preserve their imagined virginity but by 2020 they wont be more than 5-6% Indian economy . At that point Indian defence budget alone should be equal to the whole Paki Deko-no-money .Then ,Let 3 and half Masters of Bakiland waste 100-200 Billions a year to keep the facade going.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 01 Oct 2009 08:25

a name which would make me open a thread to see what has been said.

Please do so!

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 01 Oct 2009 08:46

Doubt if nukes alone would enable TSP to be anything more than a mosquito bite nuisance...just look at India versus PRC, we too have nukes but that hardly seem to figure in PRCs strategy/tactic which is getting more aggressive by the day...it is just global leverage which money buys, and more importantly silence of Unkil which too money buys..

Nandu · Post by **Nandu** » 01 Oct 2009 09:16

Suppiah wrote:Doubt if nukes alone would enable TSP to be anything more than a mosquito bite nuisance...just look at India versus PRC, we too have nukes but that hardly seem to figure in PRCs strategy/tactic which is getting more aggressive by the day...it is just global leverage which money buys, and more importantly silence of Unkil which too money buys..

We don't maintain a crazy posture where even looking cross-eyed at us is considered a "red-line".

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 01 Oct 2009 09:35

A View of Pakistan Spies ---- By David Ignatius
Wanted to post in full but refrained....interesting read, however nothing an average BRFite would'nt know.

At an operational level, the ISI is a close partner of the CIA. Officers of the two services work together nearly every night on joint operations against al-Qaeda in Pakistan's tribal areas, perhaps the most dangerous region in the world. Information from the ISI has helped the CIA plan its Predator drone attacks, which have killed 14 of the top 20 targets over the past several years.

But on the political level, there is mistrust on both sides. The United States worries that the ISI isn't sharing all it knows about Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan. The Pakistanis, meanwhile, view the United States as an unreliable ally that starts fights it doesn't know how to finish.

Sounded like a lifafa article.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 01 Oct 2009 10:01

The Kerry-Lugar Bill

But some lawmakers expressed scepticism that Pakistan would ever become a real partner. “Both governments – the Chinese and the Pakistanis – plot and manoeuvre against our interests all the time,” said Representative Dana Rohrbacher, a Republican.

“The threat of radical Islam is real, but it’s not going to be solved by us being irresponsible” with billions in taxpayer money, he said.

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 01 Oct 2009 10:14

India's economy already has an annual increment roughly equal to or exceeding the Paki one, give or take a few $$ depending on dynamic exchange rates. For example, between the last two fiscal years (07-08 and 08-09), our GDP grew approx $170-200 billion, more than the largest (inflated) figure for their GDP.

Avinash R · Post by **Avinash R** » 01 Oct 2009 15:59

More confirmation of the threat posed by loose nukes of pureland

Threat regarding Pak nukes falling into terrorists hands remains: IISS
Thu, Oct 1 12:50 PM
...
Addressing a gathering here, the IISS Director, Mark Fitz said that while Islamabad has assured the world that it has taken all measures to ensure the safety and security of the country's nuclear weapons, the extremist threat still looms large.

"There are threats that nuclear arsenal and literature on its formation might fall into the hands of terrorists," The News quoted Fitz, as saying.
...
http://in.news.yahoo.com/139/20091001/8 ... ing-i.html

Moderate enlightment in France; Full enlightment about the true nature of pureland is awaited

Doubts persist in West over Pak's willingness to fight terror: French Senator
Thu, Oct 1 03:15 PM
...
Chairman of the French Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Armed Forces, Josselin de Rohan said the presence of Al-Qaeda's top leadership in Pakistan undermines its efforts against the terror groups based on its soil.

"There are doubts in the West over Pakistan's willingness to fight terror and one reason for this is the supposed presence of Osama Bin Laden and other Al Qaeda leaders in safe havens in Pakistan," The Daily Times quoted Rohan, as saying.
...
http://in.news.yahoo.com/139/20091001/8 ... -s-wi.html

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 01 Oct 2009 17:31

K-L Bill getting their musharraf

The barrister also said the US had become Pakistan’s lord under this bill, as it severely curbed the country’s independence. He said Pakistan should reject any aid from the US and rely solely on its own resources.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 01 Oct 2009 18:02

US asks Pakistan to arrest the Quetta Shura

US once again accused that Osama Bin Laden is alive and Taliban leadership including Mullah Omar is present in Quetta, Geo News reported Thursday.

Talking to media, Deputy Chief of the Mission, US Embassy Gerald M. Feierstein alleged that Osama is present in Pakistan, adding the command system of Taliban is based in Quetta and they are launching their activities from the suburbs of the city.

He urged the government of Pakistan to arrest Taliban leadership. {AoA}

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 01 Oct 2009 18:13

Pakistan gives India transit-trade facility with Afghanistan

Pakistan has signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) to provide transit facilities to India for its trade with Afghanistan.

This was announced here on Wednesday by Commerce Minister Makhdoom Amin Fahim. He said formalities in this regard would be finalised, adding that national interests would be protected.

The minister told newsmen that the MoU was signed on a request from the Indian government to the effect that road and rail transit facilities should be provided for its trade with Afghanistan.

This is certainly a big news. Let's wait and watch how it develops.

archan · Post by **archan** » 01 Oct 2009 18:35

SSridhar wrote:US asks Pakistan to arrest the Quetta Shura
US once again accused that Osama Bin Laden is alive and Taliban leadership including Mullah Omar is present in Quetta, Geo News reported Thursday.

Talking to media, Deputy Chief of the Mission, US Embassy Gerald M. Feierstein alleged that Osama is present in Pakistan, adding the command system of Taliban is based in Quetta and they are launching their activities from the suburbs of the city.

He urged the government of Pakistan to arrest Taliban leadership. {AoA}

Now let us see how Pakistan asks for "actionable intelligence and proof" to act...

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 01 Oct 2009 19:09

^^
Here we go.
Provide details on Taliban, Pakistan tells U.S.

ISLAMABAD, Oct 1 (Reuters) - The United States should provide information about top militants in Pakistan, a government minister said on Thursday, as Washington stepped up pressure on Islamabad to go after Taliban leaders.

The United States, struggling to contain rising insurgent violence in Afghanistan, says top Islamist militants, including Afghan Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar, are in Pakistan.

U.S. ally Pakistan rejects that.

"They have given only apprehension that some of the Taliban like Mullah Omar and all that, they might be in Quetta," Interior Minister Rehman Malik told reporters.

The United States says an Afghan Taliban shura, or leadership council, headed by Omar is centred in the southwestern Pakistani city of Quetta.

"We categorically told them that they are not in Quetta, and if they have any real-time information, they should give it to us and we will take action," Malik said.

No one can blame them for double standards.

AnimeshP · Post by **AnimeshP** » 01 Oct 2009 19:12

Dilbu wrote:^^
Here we go.
Provide details on Taliban, Pakistan tells U.S.
"We categorically told them that they are not in Quetta, and if they have any real-time information, they should give it to us and we will take action," Malik said.

Of course not ... they are now in Karachi ...

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 01 Oct 2009 19:12

by Mr.Gupta
India is coming closer to the point where the annual increase in the Indian economy outweighs the entire Pakistani economy (e.g, if the Indian economy is 10 times the size of the Pakistani economy, and India grows at 10% per year, then India is just at this tipping point. India may be at 9.5 times growing at 8% per year.)

Economic Growth does not matter with Pakistan (only with USA and West)., as the economic growth that is not matched with increased military might will only attract the invaders just like in past.

So... if India is growing at 8% a year., my question to the experts here is that are we spending/procuring the military/defense equipment/infrastructure at the increased rate of 4% every year? if not then as Indians get wealthy they will attract more and more invaders from all over the middle east.

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 01 Oct 2009 19:13

US Cong passes bill to triple non-military aid to Pak

Washington, Oct 1 (PTI) The US Congress has passed a bill to triple non-military aid to Pakistan to a whopping USD 7.5 billion till 2014 amid India's warning that such funds have been diverted in the past to support hostile operations against it and need to be monitored.

The US House of Representatives gave a go ahead to the bill despite strong misgivings voiced by lawmakers who said that Pakistan was not doing enough to fight the enemies.

sanjeevpunj · Post by **sanjeevpunj** » 01 Oct 2009 20:17

Kashmiri girl kills Militant Commander. amazing bravery. She must have been a soldier in some past life.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8279929.stm

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 01 Oct 2009 20:37

Police identified the militant commander as Abu Osama, who they say was a member of the banned Lashkar-e-Taiba group and had been active in the Rajouri area for the past five years

But now poor Osama is abu-less. Human rights violation-

archan · Post by **archan** » 01 Oct 2009 20:46

But Ms Kauser wants more: "We cannot live here in this village. They should relocate us to a safer place in Rajouri town or elsewhere. The militants are not going to leave us after this embarrassment in which a top commander was killed."

She is right, the Government of India should waste no time in relocating the family to another place discreetly and immediately nominate the two siblings for the bravery honour awards to be given coming Republic Day.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 01 Oct 2009 21:41

This is my guess…

TSP will keep moving the sarkari-taliban from one place to another, like a cat moving its kittens, to hide them from the eyes of their national birds, the predator. In the process, sooner than later, it will bring some of these bearded TSPA commandus to one of its nook-facilities as they are the most secret locations. And the real tamasha starts then.

On the other hand: does TSPA really have nooks? N3’s article says NO. Then the west talks about sarkari-nukes, bad-nukes, loose-nukes etc.

AFAIK in TSP, if there exists a sarkari-version of something then there must exist a jihadi-version of the same. This applies to its Govt, downhill-skying-army, houries, ISI, Education, Tanks, missiles,. That logic automatically extends to nook-bums naa?

munna · Post by **munna** » 01 Oct 2009 23:51

NDTV reporting firing at international border in RS Pura sector. Very rare to have firing outside LOC something is afoot??? NDTV

vijayk · Post by **vijayk** » 01 Oct 2009 23:56

archan wrote:
But Ms Kauser wants more: "We cannot live here in this village. They should relocate us to a safer place in Rajouri town or elsewhere. The militants are not going to leave us after this embarrassment in which a top commander was killed."
She is right, the Government of India should waste no time in relocating the family to another place discreetly and immediately nominate the two siblings for the bravery honour awards to be given coming Republic Day.

M<edit> Singh and Sonia could care less for such people. Even if they halfheartedly do some thing, Burkha Dutt will stand in front of her hiding place and announce to the terrorist brother. Our moronic media then will celebrate her death by bashing how it is all the fault of Modi, BJP, and Hindoos...

sum · Post by **sum** » 01 Oct 2009 23:58

Maybe, the Pakis are smelling blood and are using even the IB to send their pigs across...

Expect "a very strong and bone chilling" verbal protest by the MEA tomorrow.

archan · Post by **archan** » 02 Oct 2009 00:44

vijayk wrote: Our moronic media then will celebrate her death by bashing how it is all the fault of Modi, BJP, and Hindoos...

sigh...yet another sherdil Hindu gets a ban from me. I must be some kind of a psuedo-sec.

Well that aside, let it be mentioned yet another time, derogatory language against h'able leaders/scientists etc. of India will not be tolerated on this forum.
Although use of derogatory language against any not-so-honorable person might also earn a hilal here, but that's a different issue.

A Sharma · Post by **A Sharma** » 02 Oct 2009 01:39

Pak Army at its best

Y. Kanan · Post by **Y. Kanan** » 02 Oct 2009 01:44

Satya_anveshi wrote:
shiv wrote:When those nations too suffer from Paki terror we need to bring pressure to make them unequivocal in their attitude towards Pakistan....I am sure something is happening...

Wrong.

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 02 Oct 2009 01:49

SSridhar wrote:No article, op-ed or editorial is considered complete without a reference to SDDRE kufr India.

A Document of Shame
Ayaz Amir (Pakistan Diary)

This bill implies—nay, explicitly states—that Pakistan has been a nuclear proliferator; and that parts of its territory are safe havens for terrorist networks. Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad are listed as such groups. Quetta and Muridke are listed as bases of terrorist operations.

Pakistan should be commended for this achievement. Instead it is being asked to blacken its face and be grateful for doing so. Have the geniuses who make up the government of Pakistan read this bill? Has the Foreign Office studied it?

Kerry-Lugar foresees 1.5 billion dollars a year to us, for five years. This is being hailed as a strategic partnership. Sounds more like the cheapest rent-a-nation contract in modern history.

This is less an assistance programme than a treaty of surrender. The Simla Accord signed after our defeat at the hands of India in 1971 did not reflect such depths of humiliation. Yet President Asif Ali Zardari and our man in Washington are hailing this exercise as a diplomatic triumph. If this is a triumph, the word disaster would have to be redefined.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 02 Oct 2009 02:48

Y. Kanan wrote:Wrong.

Oye..thoda explain to kar That was not a right/wrong Q&A.

a_kumar · Post by **a_kumar** » 02 Oct 2009 03:15

Satya_anveshi wrote:
Agreed Shivji. Actually not just US but the whole west has vested interest in keeping this disease alive with ONE objective (to unlease Paki terror while we manage our business). That is exactly why we need to be more creative in our thinking to convince them that this is a gone case and they will be responsible for all the consequences. While the admin (GOI) can appear neutral, we need to have some way to aggravate the situation towards making and convincing that Pakistan is not viable.

We need to also extend this to those people who continue and support Pakistan. For example, Japan, What is so much common between Japan and Pakistan that we cannot take their support away for good? Japan can talk economics so can we. They understand the language of business.

Same with some european countries that are also vulnerable to Paki terror. When those nations too suffer from Paki terror we need to bring pressure to make them unequivocal in their attitude towards Pakistan. One by one we need to start pulling out the rug under the Paki feet.

I am sure something is happening (at least that is what I believe) but more needs to happen in a sustained manner while maintaining neutrality at some level (pluasible deniability).

When Allah is giving opportunity we should make use of it.

I don't subscribe to the theory that only reason West got Pak's back is to needle India. It was definitely the theory 60 years back. Its more deep now.

As for convincing the West, if West intended to "see the light", light has always been there. What we see from everybody (including Japan for reasons I don't completely understand myself) is either condoning of Pakistan's antics no matter what or guarding its flank at other times (nukes from China.. sure; missiles to NK.. no problem; terrorism in India.. so what).

An alternate access to CAR (besides Iran/Russia) explains good part of it, but Japan doesn't fit that bill, so what gives?

India needs to figure out this "X-factor" and nibble away on it (Can be a good topic for a thesis!). Until then, no amount of dossiers or creative alternatives will convince the west. The only use dossiers will serve are to wipe the behinds.

There is a saying where I come from.. "You can get the attention of somebody who is asleep (by waking), you can get the attention of somebody who is awake, but you can never get attention of somebody who pretends to be asleep". Alternatives left to you go something like "increase room temperature", scream "fire" etc.

V_Raman · Post by **V_Raman** » 02 Oct 2009 05:02

i agree with a_kumar. the only way for india to appeal to USA is to address their concerns about CAR. give them a base in J&K and send indian troops into afghanistan. karzai will get re-elected and request for indian expanded indian assistance.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 02 Oct 2009 05:34

Turning Pakistan into a client state ---- Dr Muzaffar Iqbal

With the passage of the "Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act of 2009" in the US Congress on Wednesday, September 30, 2009, Pakistan has formally entered the status of a client state. The term client state, understood in its broad meaning, is synonymous with terms such as "satellite state", "puppet state", "neo-colony", and "vassal state". In the post-WWII era, this term was used for states ruled by dictators and supported by either the United States or the Soviet Union. During the Cold War era, these states included Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua up until 1979, Cuba up until 1959, and Chile under the regime of General Pinochet, South Vietnam, and Iran up until 1979. In its contemporary usage, a client state does not have to be a state ruled by a dictator, more often than not, it is a proxy democracy which is economically dependent on a more powerful nation. This economic dependence has now been formalized in the "Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act of 2009", which will be signed by President Obama in the near future. Once signed by him and formally accepted by the government of Pakistan, the government of the United States of America will "earn the right to monitor" Pakistan in a variety of ways under Sec 302 of the Act.

P'stan was GUBOing long before this act was passed.

The act binds Pakistan to America in realms of its national existence in a manner and to the extent that has never existed before. It is no more the people of Pakistan, but a few politicians and their chosen "experts" who would make policies for Pakistani nation for domestic as well as foreign affairs. It is the US Senate that has determined that "security-related assistance to the government of Pakistan should be geared primarily toward bolstering the counterinsurgency capabilities of the government to effectively defeat the Taliban-backed insurgency and deny popular support to Al Qaeda and other foreign terrorist organizations that are based in Pakistan."

Since when have "people" of Pakistan framed policies

Pakistani people now stand at real cross-road. If they take the road set by this Act, they can look forward to handing over their children to the Americans in the years to come, to make them what they want to make in their own image. This road to Washington will clearly turn the qibla of this nation and within one generation, all that has accumulated in the spiritual and intellectual realms through a millennium of slow and organic growth of a civilization, will be Americanized.

Now WTF is this dude talking about? Arabs? drivel.

Vivek_A · Post by **Vivek_A** » 02 Oct 2009 05:38

TFT is out and grand poohbah, speaking for the TSPA, is distressed at the GUBOing

No prizes for guessing what Pakistan will do

Ejaz Haider
Where course correction is needed, the US needs it the most, having created chaos in this region and also contemplating strong action against Iran without increasing the overall level of security for anyone or looking into its own policies that might conceivably be at the heart of the ressentiment that has caused some groups to acquire such appeal

he United States and Pakistan are like Martha and George in Albee’s Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf. They can’t even make love without insulting and abusing each other. The latest in their long and continuing walpurgisnacht is S.1707, the Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act 2009. (This article is based on S.1707 CPS, the version considered and passed by the US Senate.) Consider.

As the conditionalities stand, far from the expressed sentiments of partnership and its enhancement, the legislation is likely to become a document that will continue to sour relations between the two in times to come. This was predictable because rarely are two states so diverse in interests put together in one bed by the compulsions of realpolitik.

The US wants to help Pakistan, which is the stated purpose of the legislation, and yet cannot bring itself round to trust Pakistan even on the central premise of this partnership – i.e., fighting terrorism. Pakistan wants the money, is forced to play ball but precisely because its strategic interests in the region diverge, more than they converge, with the US, it keeps chaffing even as it tags along.

At the surface the issue is simple. If a state parts with money, it also has the right to put conditionalities on how that money is to be spent; more importantly, whether it thinks, through periodic assessment and monitoring, that the taker is not itching to fall out of line and release or withhold funds on that basis.

The taker has the option to either accept the conditionalities and take the money or tell the giver to lump it. So, why can’t Pakistan do either this or that? Ditto for the US.

Remember, we are not dealing with individuals here. States operate differently. The US is not shelling out money to Pakistan, notwithstanding all the references to democracy and the people of Pakistan and people-to-people contact and due process and civil society, capacity building and much else, because Washington wants to play Good Samaritan. In these hard times money is not easy to come by even in a multi-trillion dollar economy. The US is doing so, very reluctantly and very distrustfully, because it perceives its core interests to be involved in this region. And, it needs Pakistan.

This is why, even as the US talks of partnership and says all the nice things about “a long history of friendship and comity” between the two states, it has inserted conditionalities and limitations on certain assistance (see Secs. 102 (b); 203 a, b, c and sub-clauses of c). True, all conditionalities are also governed by waivers by the secretary of state under the direction of the US president. But that is where law and realpolitik intersect and that is an interesting area.

Realpolitik would likely dictate that the US not withhold the monies until circumstances keep the two actors in bed. This is where issues are determined by a rather simple formula. If the US needs Pakistan more than Pakistan needs the US, Pakistan could get away with much; conversely, the US would have the leverage to twist Pakistan’s arm. In reality, both actors continue to kiss and kick simultaneously.

How long the two states can remain in this tense relationship is anybody’s guess; no one can give a timeframe on that. The “until” is important because it manifests, as nothing does, the distrust between the two and the nature of relations, fraught as they are with distrust.

It is because of this that the legalese in the legislation becomes important. The argument that what the legislation says about nuclear-related activities, terrorist groups and, to some extent, civil-military relations is also the declared policy of the government of Pakistan and therefore there is no need to fret over it misses the legal point. It would have been different if the GoP had made an overt objection to these references while the legislation was being processed and considered. But it did not. Accepting money under the legislation without expressing any reservation over references contained in section 203 a, b, c and sub-clauses of c, means Pakistan accepts them as valid and is endorsing them at the level of the state. That is exactly where the shoe is going to pinch very badly when the two get off the bed and decide to have separate rooms. Why?

Because letting these references pass without any riders would open the state to legal problems in all these areas and that would come just at the juncture at which the configuration of geopolitics will undergo a change. Neither does it suffice to say that when that moment arises the US will close the tap like it previously did in the 1990s. This is not the 1990s and legal and semi-legal, even cooked up legalities can be used to underwrite action.

[Notice here that while the legislation makes references to rights, due process and independent judiciary, areas that need strengthening, it eschews the fact that going by the law would make it even more difficult for Pakistan to hand over people as was done during Musharraf’s tenure. This of course is an area that needs separate treatment.]

Similarly, to say that the bill has been watered down because the overt reference to India has been changed to “neighbouring countries” is even more simplistic. Now, in theory, even Afghanistan can have a say in determining whether or not Pakistan is complying with the conditionalities. Once again, the until factor comes in.

Moreover, because US troops are present in Afghanistan, the problem of the intersection of law and realpolitik acquires a different dimension – especially, because Afghanistan and related issues are already governed by an extensive and intensive legal regime which emanates from the UN and has multilateral status which the US could use in support of its domestic legislation.

The argument that this legislation is the best thing that has happened to Pakistan relies on two factors: it gets Pakistan badly needed money; and it helps Pakistan do, under pressure where necessary, what is good and important for Pakistan.

Both arguments eschew the complex dynamic of realpolitik that is being played out in this region by the states on the basis of their interests. Both start out with the premise that in all that is happening in the region and across the world Pakistan is the villain and is the only state that requires course correction. This is patently wrong.

All states in the region and outside need course correction, just as much as Pakistan does. Most have contributed to the original sin, a fact also acknowledged by the US secretary of state. Pakistan is already grappling with an internal threat which is being exacerbated by the less than satisfactory performance of the US and its allies in Afghanistan. Predictably, stories have started appearing in the US press (the Washington Post being in the lead) about the so-called Quetta Shura and the denial to some US visitors of Pakistani visas.

The fact is that the US is in a dilemma over how to solve a very wicked problem, as is obvious from the unclassified 66 pages of General Stanley McChrystal’s report (COMISAF Initial Assessment). It is easy to transfer responsibility and talk about what all Pakistan must do to save the US from its folly. This is surely a point where Pakistan would do well to present copies of David Halberstam’s The Best and the Brightest to the Obama administration. Sometimes, going back in time can be useful.

Where course correction is needed, the US needs it the most, having created chaos in this region and also contemplating strong action against Iran without increasing the overall level of security for anyone or looking into its own policies that might conceivably be at the heart of the ressentiment that has caused some groups to acquire such appeal.

As for what Pakistan should do now that it has lost the opportunity to debate the first draft of this legislation back in June, some say there are only two courses open to it. Tell the US that the wordings of the legislation, as it stands, are not acceptable to it and forego the monies; or, accept the monies it offers while swallowing the conditionalities and their ramifications.

Between quitting and maximum response there are options that can be utilised. But will we? No prizes for guessing the course Pakistan will take.

Ejaz Haider is op-ed editor of Daily Times, consulting editor of The Friday Times and host of Samaa TV's programme “Siyasiyat”. He can be reached at [email protected]

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 02 Oct 2009 05:39

Second Editorial: Transit trade facility to India DT edit

The commerce minister, Makhdoom Amin Fahim, said in Lahore Wednesday that “Pakistan has signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) to provide transit facilities to India for its trade with Afghanistan and that formalities in this regard would be finalised, keeping in mind the national interest”. The step was being undertaken after “a request from the Indian government to the effect that road and rail transit facilities should be provided for its trade with Afghanistan”.

Keeping in mind that India has also sent Pakistan another request for the facilitation of a train from Bangladesh to Pakistan through India, this is a good development. Islamabad should treat this “request” from an otherwise incommunicado New Delhi as an opening for the big dialogue between the two countries that is universally desired. The SAARC conferences have tabled detailed plans for opening trade routes across South Asia to fulfil its ultimate SAARC promise of an integrated regional market.

<SNIP>
In the context of the current Indo-Pak deadlock over restarting the “composite dialogue”, the MoU can be a good quid pro quo. It will show Pakistan’s confidence in not being unduly shaken by India’s presence in Afghanistan. It will also be a clever move by Pakistan to pre-empt the alternative Indian route to Afghanistan through Iran. And sitting astride a trade route is more empowering than a standing army