Can nuclear terrorism be prevented? Probably not.

[Rahul M]

Meanwhile a JDAM will ensure that not only India will retaliate, but will destroy pakistan punjab as the pakistanis know it.

are you sure ?
I suppose you are aware of the frog in boiling water example.

[Johann]

Meanwhile a JDAM will ensure that not only India will retaliate, but will destroy pakistan punjab as the pakistanis know it.

are you sure ?
I suppose you are aware of the frog in boiling water example.

- The GoI has never hesitated to publicly name Pakistan responsible for PA/ISI sponsored terrorist attacks.
- Stated GoI nuclear doctrine calls for 'massive' nuclear retaliation for any nuclear attack on Indian soil or Indian forces

The only gray area would be a dirty bomb - that's where they might half a chance of avoiding nuclear retaliation, since CBW attacks are not assured a nuclear response.

http://www.acronym.org.uk/docs/0301/doc06.htm

in the event of a major attack against India, or Indian forces anywhere, by biological or chemical weapons, India will retain the option of retaliating with nuclear weapons;

Still, it would be a hell of a risk for the Pakistanis to take, a kind of Russian roulette.

[Gagan]

Meanwhile a JDAM will ensure that not only India will retaliate, but will destroy pakistan punjab as the pakistanis know it.

are you sure ?

The problem with any GoI (and we've seen both the NDA and the UPA in action) is that massa might come into play and suggest that what you seek to achieve by nuking Pakistan in retaliation can be achieved by diplomacy by promising to de-nuke Pakistan.

There is a verrrrrry good chance GoI will fall into that trap again.

Just like in 26/11.
The ISI is involved for sure. But see how India pulls back the punches and has agreed to not implicate the ISI officers responsible letting pakistan off the hook once, and hoping on pakistan's goodwill that it will bring the "non-state actors" to justice. On the first anniversary of 26/11 pakistan has finally managed to indict the 7 accused. I am sure going by current speed after the 10th anniversary and 10 26/11s later pakistan will finally pass judgement that these guys were guilty, so they can appeal in a higher court. And 25 years later they won't be punishable because they would have died of old age.

Even if India retaliates with nukes, it will likely vaporize sargodha only (The pak fauj afsars will have been given sufficient time to evacuate with their families), leaving pindi, isloo, lawhore intact, because our netas don't want to go down in history as mass murderers.

Yes you are right Rahul saar, we can never be sure.

[shiv]

Meanwhile a JDAM will ensure that not only India will retaliate, but will destroy pakistan punjab as the pakistanis know it.

are you sure ?
I suppose you are aware of the frog in boiling water example.

I believe that a JDAM on India is risky for Pakistan because they will not be able to get away easily.

Thinking like a Paki, what would you want? You don't actually want to risk being eliminated, In fact you want to win, in the longer term. Having nukes is more scary than using nukes, because you have an uncertain power of great destruction. If you use that power, you have no cards left and especially if you are a small nuclear power you will be swallowed up by the big boys. Pakistanis and their jihadis are fighting against the biggest boys - and that is not just India - it is Unkil.

Pakis want unkil out of the way. If they nuke India, anything that India does in return will reduce unkils work - which is causing taqleef to Pakis and their jihadi brothers. Nuking India is high risk. Nuking the US is not possible and nuking a US asset is also very high risk.

The idea is to tire unkil out and still retain nukes at the end of it all. The big risk is that unkil and/or India are out to get those nukes. If the Pakistan army try to nuke anyone who attacks them - they will be finished. The best way to avoid getting finished and to retain some nukes even in case of attack is to spit away some nukes and hide them with the jihadis. Even better if they can be shipped overseas to a safe destination. KSA, Iran, Somalia.

Now we can imagine a possible split in the forces of jihad.

Let us call one faction the "Al Qaeda" for want of a better name
The other faction is the Pakistan army

The Al Qaeda has assets outside Pakistan as well as in Pakistan. The Pak army wants to rule within Pakistan. Both factions have Pakistanis working and leading. If there is a rift between these two and both have nukes, a nuclear bomb exploding in Pakistan is a possibility.

[Rahul M]

shiv ji, all that is hanging on one assumption, that the adversary is a rational player.
that assumption may not be always correct, especially if the pakistani state moves closer to the brink. the sentiment may become, "if we go down we will take them with us".
in fact that is why I said it's a race between which happens first.

as for the frog example, it may well be the case that as long as the pakis give GOI some plausible deniability to latch upon, they will escape the full response of the Indian arsenal. there's a small but non-zero possibility of that happening, IMHO.

[shiv]

shiv ji, all that is hanging on one assumption, that the adversary is a rational player.
that assumption may not be always correct, especially if the pakistani state moves closer to the brink. the sentiment may become, "if we go down we will take them with us".
in fact that is why I said it's a race between which happens first.

as for the frog example, it may well be the case that as long as the pakis give GOI some plausible deniability to latch upon, they will escape the full response of the Indian arsenal. there's a small but non-zero possibility of that happening, IMHO.

Rahul - IMO what you are saying is not wrong - but they are the "standard assumptions". In fact I started this thread off with the "standard assumptions" that are made about nuclear terrorism and am trying to point out that a whole new world opens out if you are willing to step outside the standard assumptions.

Whether Pakistan is tending to get irrational or not its opponents are rational so they realise (as you have done) that if Pakistan is pushed to the brink they may take the route "if we go down we will take them with us". So the rational players are avoiding pushing Pakistan to the brink. The dynamics of this unstable situation need to be looked at with the additional assumption that there are rational players in Pakistan who are looking to survive and win no matter what.

All stories of JDAMS have hitherto been boxed in by the same assumptions with no clear reason to say that only those assumptions are right. Some of them are plain wrong and based on a misreading of Pakistan.

[Rahul M]

So the rational players are avoiding pushing Pakistan to the brink.

I think TSP going to the brink(and falling into it) is a matter of time by its internal dynamics alone. nothing I've seen so far has indication of any other trajectory.

in that case ^^ policy is the wrong way to move forward since it assumes that the levers of pakistan are situated outside. the only way is to either kill the snake or defang it, whichever is easier.

The dynamics of this unstable situation need to be looked at with the additional assumption that there are rational players in Pakistan who are looking to survive and win no matter what.

who are the rational players in TSP and how much say do they have in the running of the country ?

[shiv]

who are the rational players in TSP and how much say do they have in the running of the country ?

Both the Pakistan army and their jihadi allies are rational players. They are looking for their own survival and the survival of their power and ideology. They are not planning on suicide anytime soon. Don't get fooled into thinking that they are irrational. That is precisely the impression that they want others to have.

They are looking to survive even if parts of the land "fall into the brink". In fact if parts of the land fall into the brink it is advantageous for them to use a nuke there to discourage meddling unkils and dhimmis. They will keep their land even after they nuke it.

[Pranav]

Pakistan (state and non state players being the same) has the means to assemble a
bomb, bring it to India and detonate it.

That's the fun of it. Pakistan will get punished if terrorist explodes a nuke in India. So if Pakis are going to nuke India they can do it directly. What is important is that a jihadi nuke can be reserved for all sorts of non Indian targets.

Shiv ji, the Pak Jihadis are like rabid dogs programmed to attack Yindoos. Yes, the Paks need punishing but the question one needs to address is what we do if some one other than the Paks provides them with nukes.

This is suggestive:

Is Headley an American agent who turned rogue?
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 273422.cms

Suspicions are getting stronger as Americans delay giving Indian investigators access to Headley. The hope here is that Indian agencies would get their turn to talk to the terrorist after charges -- indictment in the American lexicon -- are framed against him on Jauuary 1. There is also the possibility that Headley has promised to sing on the condition that he is not exposed to interrogators from India.

But during interactions on the issue, FBI has been unusually cagey about discussing Headley in detail --

The Headley arrest is a good gesture but there are so many double- and triple-games going on that it is difficult to have confidence in anybody's intentions.

[rajpa]

if they get a nuke or two, jihadis will blast rawalpindi and isloo - in that order - so that they get to wield power and become masters of the ummah...

by that time, unkil and others would have, should have woken up...

[Lalmohan]

shiv, we need a debate on rational/irrational. that is the crux of the matter with pakistan. jehovah's witnesses for example, used to believe that nuclear holocaust was god's way of cleaning up the earth and starting again. given the poor understanding of the nature of nuclear war, what does the religious nut case fringe really believe?

[SaiK]

so unless the religious nut case fringe does experience some irradiation, there is nothing stopping him!

[Lalmohan]

so, the $64Bn question is which of the jehadi groups are "irrational" and which are "rational"?
btw - i recall a newspaper interview with some pak-e-brigadoon who was espousing a line similar to the jehovah's witnesses... on this very forum no less

[shiv]

shiv, we need a debate on rational/irrational. that is the crux of the matter with pakistan. jehovah's witnesses for example, used to believe that nuclear holocaust was god's way of cleaning up the earth and starting again. given the poor understanding of the nature of nuclear war, what does the religious nut case fringe really believe?

This is a valid point.

The way I see i is as follows. First let me use Occam's razor. I mean it is better to stop differentiating between Pakistan army and Jihadi groups. At one central level, the Islamist Pakistan army and the Jihadi groups are one and the same and their long term aims are the same. I am assuming that they have joint control over nuclear weapons. For the moment I am not going into the "mechanism" of how this may be possible.

Whatever their long term aims may be, suicide and self destruction are not on the agenda. They are willing to take losses of their cadres as long as their overall aims are achieved in the long term. They are rational enough to realise that they require some base,some land and some infrastruture to survive and have nuclear weapons. Nukes do require some facilities and personnel for maintenance and use, even if manufacture is not needed.

When it comes o the nitty gritty of survival, for the Pak Army/jihadi combine - a direct fight with the US is suicide. Especially if they nuke US forces. If the US decides to use its force on them - especially nuclear forces - they will be eliminated even if the US expends 2% of its available nuclear strength on them. So the only route to victory in the long term is to ensure that they do not provoke the US. Better still would be to get the US to keep funding them. So you can safely rule out a nuclear attack on the US or on US entities.

Now it is fashionable on this forum to state that India is a soft target. Fine OK. "Everyone on here knows all the truth and India is set to get nuked by a jihadi and our fizzles won't work" - this is a statement that will get no arguments on this forum because it is a comfortable bottom line for all to follow. That is why I have been asking that we step out of the boxes we have built for ourselves. It is my contention that a jihadi nuke on India is as risky as one on a US entity. India will hardly get cowed by a couple of jihadi nukes and even if our missiles are fijjiles and our nukes are 15 kt fission only - air dropped nukes and conventional forces will damage the future of the Paki Army-jihadi nexus enough to upset their longterm survival plans. So a jihadi nuke on India, is risky for Pakistan. Kasab may be Hindutva agent but a nuke on India will not be looked at that way.

The question that arises is, if Paki-jihadi nukes are no good against India or the US, what use are they? They are perfect for blackmail. And they are perfect for long term protection of Paki-jihadi nukes. The blackmail is the suggestion that Paki nukes may go "out of control" if the Pakistani army is pushed too hard. So both India and the US are forced to bend to this blackmail and not push the Paki army too hard, imagining, in their naivete, that the Pakistani army is keeping control of all its nukes. I am sure it is not. In fact rationality demands that the nukes should be spread out and distributed to all islamist factions so that is the Paki army is finally cowed down by the US and or India, the Islamist forces will still have nukes to blackmail the world.

[Rahul M]

Both the Pakistan army and their jihadi allies are rational players. They are looking for their own survival and the survival of their power and ideology. They are not planning on suicide anytime soon. Don't get fooled into thinking that they are irrational. That is precisely the impression that they want others to have.

They are looking to survive even if parts of the land "fall into the brink". In fact if parts of the land fall into the brink it is advantageous for them to use a nuke there to discourage meddling unkils and dhimmis. They will keep their land even after they nuke it.

fine, let's accept that the jihadis and their pro-jehadi faujis are rational players.

even then would it really hurt them there's a JDAM attack in India ? especially if there's a relatively pro-america govt in power ?

India's response would at best destroy a few military bases and topple the govt. the jihadis would have their caliphate once that happens.

[shiv]

fine, let's accept that the jihadis and their pro-jehadi faujis are rational players.

even then would it really hurt them there's a JDAM attack in India ? especially if there's a relatively pro-america govt in power ?

India's response would at best destroy a few military bases and topple the govt. the jihadis would have their caliphate once that happens.

I have no powerful "knock you down" argument against your conclusions. I believe that India has the ability to seriously damage their longterm happiness, far more than you are willing to credit India with. I can offer you no proof - only isharas and graphs based on historic data.

If you go through the history of Pakistani army actions against India, they have (after 1965) tended to either make small gains or otherwise hurt India without inviting a full scale war precisely because a full scale war, no matter how much it hurts India would be virtually suicidal for the Pakistani army, and by extension, to the jihadis. It is another matter that people do not want to believe that on the forum.

[Rahul M]

shiv ji, I've no doubts about ability, only intent.

[rajpa]

Both the Pakistan army and their jihadi allies are rational players. They are looking for their own survival and the survival of their power and ideology. They are not planning on suicide anytime soon. Don't get fooled into thinking that they are irrational. That is precisely the impression that they want others to have.

They are looking to survive even if parts of the land "fall into the brink". In fact if parts of the land fall into the brink it is advantageous for them to use a nuke there to discourage meddling unkils and dhimmis. They will keep their land even after they nuke it.

fine, let's accept that the jihadis and their pro-jehadi faujis are rational players.

even then would it really hurt them there's a JDAM attack in India ? especially if there's a relatively pro-america govt in power ?

India's response would at best destroy a few military bases and topple the govt. the jihadis would have their caliphate once that happens.

if there is a jdam attack, the response will have to be disproportionate... similar to the us-afghanistan situation.. dismantling of all current institutions in power - new government, new army, only self-defence constabulary forces for pukis, complete de-nuking, international peacekeeping forces in pukeland etc etc..

[Rahul M]

all I'm saying is we shouldn't take that for granted, it has to be discussed and acknowledged semi-officially. otherwise we run the risk of being hi-jacked by the 'oh they are victims too', 'the common people are so innocent only' crowd.

[shiv]

The other "objection" that is brought up in regard to nuclear terrorism is "How will a bunch of ragtag towelheads actually maintain and fuse a "noocleer baambs" that is oh so sophisticated and requires hi tech phorward people to maintain.

The answer of course is that if the Pakis can do it any terrorist groups can do it with Paki support. As long as Pakis are in cahoots with a terrorist group the latter will have the means to maintain and if necessary, detonate a nuclear bomb.

What Pakistan has done is to blur the distinction between "terrorist group" and "nation state". As long as Pakistan can continue to produce fissile material and nuclear bombs, terrorist groups too will be right up there neck and neck with the Pakis and playing a supporting role for the Pakis.

IOW China and the US used Pakistan to develop a nuclear armed proxy. The US did it because during the cold war, with 20 or 30 thousand weapons, a state with 2 or even 10 nukes - especially one that was a declared ally and one that was so Islamic - Islam being so sooo anti-communist, could never be a threat. And now that nuclear armed proxy has its own jihadi group proxies that are not answerable to China or the US.

In this connection it is interesting to note that the jihadi groups oppose the US and not China. That means that Pakistan is, to an extent still dependent on China and that information is known to the jihadi groups.

[Lalmohan]

Shiv - i buy your overall arguement w.r.t. PA and rational useage of weapons

some scenarios/issues to chew over:

1. PA threatened with annihilation
a. from Unkil in Afpak spill over - hari-kiri-samson option (or even fake yehudi/unkil attack on ummah)
b. from India due to another 26/11 - as above
c. from azad pashtunistan fauj in strategic alliance with azad baluchistan fauj... if i cant have you, i dont want no body baby option

2. trust between PA leadership and ummah birathers, e.g. Al Saud, and willingness to part with core bum takniki
b. defend the sunni heartlands against shia overlordship

3. dirty jdam with plausible deniability using usual jehadi footsoldiers (in many respects this is the only scenario that western analysts worry about)

[shiv]

1. PA threatened with annihilation
a. from Unkil in Afpak spill over - hari-kiri-samson option (or even fake yehudi/unkil attack on ummah)
b. from India due to another 26/11 - as above
c. from azad pashtunistan fauj in strategic alliance with azad baluchistan fauj... if i cant have you, i dont want no body baby option

Being rational players, neither India nor the US are going to attempt a direct annihilation of the Pakistani army. In that sense the Pakistani army has rightly assessed that its nuclear weapons are a true deterrent. It is not that India or the US are afraid of getting defeated, but the fear is starting a nuclear war with its horrendous consequences if it is avoidable. So a direct military threat to the Paki army is not on the cards unless they use a nuke first. But they are rational enough not to use a nuke on India or on US interests.

India does not want to see the Paki army stronger, but the US which has always supported an overly powerful Pakistani army as long as that army does the US's bidding. Until recently the Pakistani army has never been a threat to the US and the US typically arms and funds anyone who might help them if they are not seen as a threat. That is what they did to Iran after all.

But the Pakistanis have not been stupid.They outsourced their own work to irregular mufti militias. "Irregular" is the wrong term. They are regulars in mufti. That way the Paki army could appear to be toeing the US line while the militias did what was needed to maintain Paki interests.

Paki army interests and jihadi interests are the same. And military threats have been neutralized by nuclear deterrence. Any non military threat to the Pakistani army from outsiders - such as cutting off funding or applying pressure on a particular border is countered by claiming that the jihadis are taking over and "Do you really want Pakistan to be occupied by jihadis". This is the same threat that is being made by Hudoodbhoy and Irfan Hussein in the Paki thread. That threat "Do you want jihadis to win" is swallowed hook line and sinker by the Americans. Luckily Indians do not fall for that. India knows that there is no difference between the Paki army and the Taliban. It is only a matter of time before the US catches on to this fact. The Pakistan army's real test of survival will come when that happens, and there are many signs that the Paki army is reading the signs exactly like this and reacting.

The ideal solution is a war with India. 26/11 was the most blatant attempt at doing that. A war with India will get the Americans pouring money into the Pakistan army. But India is not taking the bait and the US is beginning to see the light. The survival plank of the Pakistani army is collapsing without war. The Pakistani army does not want to lose. They want to survive intact and with power. Unlike the US, China and India, their power has always come from gifts, begging and blackmail - not from a powerful internal economy with a cash rich Pakistani industry filling the army's coffers. Begging and blackmail are easier, faster and "more traditional" than setting the Pakistan economy in order which is nearly impossible. Setting the Pakistan economy in order will need a downgradation of the Paki army to Sri Lankan army levels.

The only way out will be to ally with religion based interests. I would judge that some degree of nuclear expertise among the so called "Taliban" and the "jihadis" is a given. Sharing with Saudi Arabia and Iran is likely. Sunni might not like Shia, but both don't like Israel and the arming of Iran and KSA with nukes seems likely. But none of these things will help the individual leaders of the Pakistani army to survive intact with power and privileges. One possible option is to shift allegiance to the jihadi groups. See a large scale "retirement" of officers from the Pakistan army to serve as behind the scenes leaders and advisors for the Taliban. The official designation of some Taliban/jihadi groups as being in control of some nuclear weapons is also a possibility. Once that begins to happen, we can see a gradual winding up of the power of the Pakistan army which will become subservient to the jihadi groups. The US will resist this and try to "save" the "moderate" Pakistani army, but if that fails they will star negotiating with the Taliban and offering to pay them money for not attacking US interests.

If that happens it will really be an acknowledgement of a US that is becoming weak and handing over power to new power centers. The US begging the Taliban for favors is just the situation that the Pakistani army is looking for and the best way to do that is to keep the Taliban strong while squeezing the US to keep the Paki army strong. It is win win either way for the Paki army/Taliban combine. Another win-win situation would be to get India to make concessions on Kashmir. that will only strengthen the islamist hand and prove that their tactics are effective.

A powerful Paki army/Taliban combine with nuclear weapons is what is being sought by the forces of islamic extremism. That will be a shot in the arm for the Wahhabis of KSA, for iran as well as other assorted groups and things will get really dangerous for Israel. The threat of nuclear bombs being detonated wherever there is an Islamic interest will then become reality and nuclear terrorism will be on our doorstep.

I am currently not clear in my mind what can be done about this and what is being done about this. The US, China and India are key players here and to a lesser extent European players and Japan. And of course the "aam junta" - the people of Pakisan have a big role to play - in fact their role this may be the biggest role.

[shiv]

Having argued above as to how the Pakistan/Army/Taliban combine have a great synergy that will keep them powerful with no guarantee that only the army will keep control of nuclear weapons we also need to look at factors that will spoil this Paki army-Taliban party.

India is a huge spoiler. India does not accept that there is any difference in the intention of either the Paki army or the Taliban. India will treat an attack from either entity as one and the same. Given India's strategic depth and size, whatever losses India faces, in a desperate situation neither the Paki army nor the Taliban will emerge victorious in an all out, direct confrontation. If the war goes nuclear the end result will be the same and the long term Islamist nuclear aspirations in Pakistan will be badly mauled in a debilitating war with India, no matter how much India is damaged in return. Such a war would essentially be suicidal. Even if India is badly damaged, US goals for Afghanistan will be met more easily.

India also deserves some credit for being the only player that has consistently been concerned about human development in the subcontinent - i.e roads, education and healthcare. The Pakistani army/RAPE combine have not given a damn about that in their own country and the US has played ball with them, making the RAPE and army stronger while not giving a rat's ass for human development in a Pakistan that is now inching towards 180 million people. The US has never been interested in human development of anyone other than Americans. For others funding and arms are provided to meet immediate tactical goals for the US. To be fair, the Afghans too were interested in their own human development until the US-Pakistan alliance allowed the Taliban to rape Afghanistan. So both Pakistan and the US, for their own individual interest were responsible for unleashing the Taliban on Afghanistan.

It is precisely the fact that India has stood as a solid wall against Pakistaniyat and Islamic extremism that has caused Pakistan to expand towards Afghanistan. This coincided with US anti-Soviet aims. But that led to 9-11, and now the US is the confounding factor in Afghanistan. That is why the Paki army-Taliban combine want the US out of Afghanistan, and that is what explains their game of "Pay us (the army) or we will lose to the Taliban" For the first time there is a coinciding of US and Indian interests in Afghanistan and keeping the Taliban out, while developing Afghanistan.

Pakistan resists this by claiming that India is out to surround Pakistan by its presence in Afghanistan. Pakistan also claims that it is unable to fight the Taliban because of India, and Pakistan claims that its army needs to be paid more (by the US) for fighting the Taliban. These claims are a strawman because getting India out of Afghanistan or getting Kashmir into Pakistan will in no way stop the Taliban. It will only make their survival easier. The main problem is US stupidity/blindness that keeps paying the Pakistani army that has the Taliban as an ally.

The fallout of this US blindness can have one of two consequences:

1) The US keeps on funding the Pakistan army which keeps supporting the Taliban
or
2) The US suddenly wises up and makes an effort to stop funding the Pakistan army

I will post my thoughts on this in a separate post.

[shiv]

1) The US keeps on funding the Pakistan army which keeps supporting the Taliban
or
2) The US suddenly wises up and makes an effort to stop funding the Pakistan army

Let us say that the US keeps on funding the Pakistan army. The Paki army will keep on pretending to oppose the Taliban and the Taliban will remain intact and strong while the Pakistan army bets stronger. The US will keep taking losses in Afghanistan and the fissile material stock of Pakistan will keep on increasing. At least some of this will have to be spirited away for safekeeping by their Taliban allies in the hills.

If and when the US gets out of Afghanistan we will have a powerfully armed and nuclear Pakistan with poor illiterate people (as usual).Rebellion among these people wil be ruthlessly put down by the Pakistan army/Taliban combine, and the country will need external campaigns to keep the nation busy. Controlling Afghanistan will be the first step. The only question is how the US will react to this. By stopping funding to the Paki army at this late stage, the US will be reneging on its "promise" not to forsake Pakistan again, and there will be no reduction in the nuclear risk - once nuclear arms get into Afghanistan - even if they are under Paki army control.

A total Talibanization of Afghanistan and Islamization of Pakistan and a powerful Pakistan army will serve as a threat to many nations apart from India. But India's role in this would be limited to hoping that the US is not that stupid or weak. But this is a possibility that can happen. The only two possibly positive things that can happen is a renewed Russian interest in Afghanistan as Russian Islamic republics are threatened and Chinese interest as Xinjiang comes under pressure. It is hardly likely that the Taliban/Paki army combine will be worried - having seen off both the Soviets and the Americans.

On the other hand, if the US "wises up" and decides to keep engaged in Pakistan and stop funding the Pakistan army, and seeks to fund only civilian projects (with accountability) the Pakistan army will being to squeal and protest. They will start "losing" to the Taliban and try and provoke incidents with India. This is exactly what has started now and the US will feel the pressure in two ways. The first is an increase in Taliban attacks in Afghanistan, and a choking off of supply convoys from Pakistan. This is going to be a difficult phase for the US. If the US can remain engaged in AfPak and tide over hi phase we are likely to see more signs of civil war in Pakistan and more signs of the army "allowing" the Taliban to take over Pakistan.

But I believe the Pakistan army's bluff needs to be called. It is OK to have the Taliban in Swat, but Pakistani people are not going to tolerate Talibanization in the Pakistan heartland. in the fertile areas of Punjab and Sindh there will be resistance to the Taliban. The resistance will come from teh Pakistan army itself whose cadres will otherwise have to observe their own villages and homes being over run by the Taliban. It is one thing to love the Talibs as long as they are in FATA. I is different when they are in your home town.

But if the Taliban come so deep into the Pakistani heartland - the RAPE are finished. They will flee in numbers. If a Pak army-Taliban war starts in earnest in Pakistan, we can expect to see a nuke exploding in Pakistan if the Pakistanis have already made the error of handing over control of some nukes to the forces of jihad. If they have no yet done that - then they will be fighting a last ditch battle to protect the nukes.

In the long term it is better to squeeze Pakistan and reduce its ability to make nukes. But China may not want that - unless we can ensure that some nukes can get into Xinjiang.

jmt

[Lalmohan]

good analysis dr saab, much to think about there before comment

[Atri]

Excellent posts, Shiv ji. These posts are keepers. I have copied them on my blog and cited your name as Author... Is it OK?

[shiv]

Chironji you are welcome to use whatever I post.

[shiv]

India army chief on Paki nuke button

http://trak.in/news/pakistan-should-hav ... ief/29297/
Nov 29 2009

“Having the nuclear button in hand is not an issue. Most important thing is that whatever nuclear weapons they have, they should have complete control over them. We are a bit apprehensive that these weapons do not fall into wrong hands,” General Kapoor said.
He also said that attempts of infiltration along the Line of Control (LoC) in Jammu and Kashmir are likely to increase to disrupt the peace in the State.

“Infiltration in India increased in the last two to three months, as Kashmir’s condition has become quite stable and peaceful in the past one to two years. Elections were conducted peacefully and a large number of people participated in it. Some people didn’t like it, so before the winters, more number of infiltrators will try to enter the Indian [^] borders, so that they can resume their terror activities,” GeneralKapoor added.

[Gagan]

Shiv ji,
Not specific to N weapons, but more as a response to that excellent post of yours. I disagree at some places here.

1. The pashtoons (IOW the Taliban) only have disparate tribes who have been bought together by the Pakistan Army to take over Afghanistan and take control of the hashish grown there. The Pak fauj then controls the transport of the crop, the tribes get some protection money. So US or no US, these guys have found a new life line in the drug trade, given that the monies from highway robbery has been dwindling. The US's presence has allowed protection money for the tribes in proximity of the Khyber pass and the land route to Afghanistan, these tribes also make money because of the transport of hashish.

2. The pashtoons don't have a unified leadership which is asking for pashtoonistan yet. I doubt they have a nationalist feeling yet.

3. If the US stays in afghanistan for 8 - 10 years, what is likely to happen is that the Pak fauj will tire of operating and taking losses in NWFP and FATA and leave it as such and withdraw to punjab to play games within pakistan and with India. The pashtoon tribes will have a sort of an unchallanged territory where their writ runs supreme. In the past the arabs bought the pashtoon tribes by paying them to stay there, hence these proclaimations of pakhtoon-honours-and-protects-their-guests bullcrap. Highway robbers having honour is a new one.
The US will eventually buy out the pashtoon tribes to do its bidding, and the Pak fauj will end up losing its hashish trade monies. The US will continue to pay the pak fauj generals to keep the arabs and the terror machinery off the west's backs. Also to keep the N weapons safe.

[Johann]

Shiv,

You're on the right general track, but there are important problems with the specifics that change the picture

- Pakistan's explosive population growth, its decreasing agricultural potential, and its structural deficits make it highly dependent on external finance. In other words, its not just about getting the generals rich - it is about national fiscal and economic survival. These are pressures that the generals can channel, but never ignore, except at their own peril. Musharraf, as well as Ayub experienced that first hand.

- The PA's power within Pakistan is based on being a major channel for patronage, but also on its reputation as a the strongest, most united force in Pakistan. One that is not worth fighting because you cant beat it.

- While the PA cheats the Americans, they can not get something for nothing. They do have to allow the Americans to bomb jihadis, and arrest figures within Pakistan, to talk to India, reduce covering fire on the LoC, go through the charade of trials of figures like Lakhvi and Omar Saeed Sheikh.

- These concessions absolutely enrage Deobandi jihadis committed to the idea of jihad. They do not see such dealings as a clever service to Islam and jihad; they see it as betrayal and cowardice that can only receive one reward - death in this world, and hellfire in the next. They have many supporters among the PA, both serving and retired.

The effect of fighting the Americans, and working with Arabs and Uzbeks, and the long leash the PA has given them for plausible deniability has been to widen their perspective of jihad. They no longer defer to the PA COAS and corps commanders out of reflex. They have their own conceptions of right and wrong, good and bad, and they will act independently on them.

- The protracted conflict between the PA and its semi-estranged jihadi elements not only makes the army looks weak (since they dont really want to have to crush them), its produced a nasty, nasty civil war within the PA's ranks, with the jihadis hitting back with all the force they can muster against the PA, with the active support of people in uniform.

- This eating away at the PA's cohesion and prestige undermines the PA's power within Pakistan. There are only two ways out if the jihad option is to be preserved - a war with India, or a break with America.

- A break with America will not necessarily mean a total loss of patronage or power - North Korea continues to extort food and fuel from the South, from Japan and the US. But it means a *lot* fewer shiny toys, and a lot of broken older toys.

The PAF's support for the PA in Kargil were severely limited not just by the PA's lack of coordinated planning, but the severe shortage of spares after a decade of sanctions.

- Southern Pakjab is already a heavily Talibanised area. The Potohar region in the north has always produced large numbers of volunteers for jihadi tanzims. Although there are popular elements that would not be happy with the total imposition of Pakiban culture, they would probably be about as successful as traditional Sufi and modern urbanised Pashtun opposition to the Taliban in Afghanistan. The Karzais had support, but they could do little until a major world power threw their weight behind them.

- the real threat that the PA will lash out against is not the Pakiban's brand of Islam (although thats what the middle and upper class urban population would prefer). It is the way the Pakiban attacked the class structure, mobilising tenants against landlords. That was the point at which the PA chose to intervene in Swat. It is not clear yet whether the PA has been able to restore the old order. Many landlords have not yet returned, which in turn signifies an erosion in trust or awe of the PA's power.

[Lalmohan]

my hypotheses (for debate): there is a faction within one of the deobandi/salafi groups that no longer believes the PA is the arbiter of the pakistani future. they wish to overthrow the PA and assume control and bring about a full social revolution in the rural heartland of punjab and maybe some of the other provinces. they are religious, but possibly national-socialist (i use the term after consideration). they may have supporters in the PA lower and middle ranks - those that have yet to taste the big money spin-offs. they are austere and spiritual, but driven to the full extremis of tamiya's doctrine of not being islamic enough to win. amongst them arises a new semi-mahdi, one who preaches that god will unleash a blinding light and cleanse the earth of the munafiqeen. their sympathisers have infiltrated kahuta and the cave complex. one day, a sympathetic major and the platoons under him assume control over a warhead or two, possibly a missile, it is taken to/fired on islamabad before anyone has figured out what is going on...

the signal is out, across punjab, the tanzeems rise up...

[shiv]

Gagan, Johann, Lalmohan - thanks for your inputs.

The crux of the issue as I see it (as expressed by some of you above) is loyalty to Islam versus loyalty to Pakistan the nation state.

Once upon a time the Pakistan army stood for both loyalty to Islam as well as loyalty to the nation state. The unstated factor here was that a powerful army needed to credibly protect the nation state to carry through the bluff of being a protector of Islam, and the hard reality of protecting a nation state means happy and well fed people, not just a powerful military.

By chronic mismanagement the Pakistan army frittered away the nation state of Pakistan, but enlisted Islam as an ally. By "enlisting Islam as an ally" I mean that the Pakistan army sought to protect what was left of the nation state by appealing to groups of devoutly Islamic Pakistanis (Islamic groups) to help them fight real and imaginary external enemies. It is interesting that the Islamic groups themselves were not able to read the writing on the wall and realise that Pakistan's real problems would come from a sick economy requiring lifesaving support. Perhaps that is because the Pakistan army, which continued to retain power through the early years of its decline cherry picked and selected the support of Islamic groups who would fight external wars and not complain about the internal state of Pakistan. The killing of all credible political opposition was part of the process that kept the army powerful while Islamic groups willing to wage war gained power.

The role of the Pakistani elite here has also been tragic in a way for both Pakistan and the rest of the world. For the Pakistani elite (the RAPE) their status and life was assumed to represent Pakistan. They were, and remain blind to Pakistan's problems and portray an image of Pakistan as a country that is almost European in its development and outlook.

So Pakistan today is split into four overlapping groups:

Group 1) The old British style secular army of discipline and loyalty to the nation state first.
Group 2) A section of the Army allied with retired army officers and men allied with militant Islamic groups who serve roles that vary between protecting Pakistan the nation state and protecting islam. The loyalty of this group is ambiguous. Islam could be their "first love" and they could renege on loyalty to the nation state if they could ally with non Pakistanis who are Islamic allies. Their concept of nation corresponds more closely to Islam an the ummah. They could choose either Pakistan or the nation of Islam depending on which they thought might win.
Group 3) The rich elite who belong to neither group 1 nor group 2 but serve as spokespersons for the Pakistani state because their eggs are in that basket
Group 4 The vast majority of Pakistanis who do not fear Islam per se, admire the Pakistani army but continue to led their lives guided by what they are fed as information from the 3 groups above them

Group 4 are important for Pakistan and the long term future of the subcontinent, but they do not matter one bit when it comes to the question of nuclear weapons and their possible control and use.

Group 1 used to be the most powerful, but Group 2 is now emerging as a real alternative. Group 2 has within its ranks an unknown number of members of Group 1.

The "Peak power" status that was achieved by Pakistan was a seamless alliance between Group 1 and Group 2. I believe that this era has now passed. The glory days of defeating the Soviets followed by the days of unchecked infiltration into India and jihad related victories in Lebanon, Africa, the Philippines and Russia reached their zenith with 9-11.

After 9-11 and Parakram, both the US and India have colluded to bring about a split in Pakistan between groups 1 and 2 using a good cop - bad cop routine where India the bad cop promises to spoil everyone's party, while the good cop US promises group 1 sops for getting rid of group 2.

With regard to nuclear weapons, the exact reach and influence of Group 2 is completely unknown. But in a power struggle between group 1 and 2 - both would naturally like control over some, if not all nuclear weapons. But the logic here is fairly simple.

a) Groups 1 and 2 used to be allies and their alliance resulted in a very powerful Pakistan with control over Afghanistan
b) The split between Group 1 and group 2 has mainly been engendered by the US which is paying "traitorous elements" of group 1 to oppose group 2
c) In the ideal situation groups 1 and 2 should re unite and fight together. Such a situation could occur of the cowardly Indians only agreed to fight a war.
d) If group 1 (supported by the US) controls the nuclear weapons and it prevails, the nukes could well come under risk because the US cannot be trusted.
e) group 2 alone can never control all the nuclear weapons (at least the probability is low)

The best chance for Islamist forces to control at least a few nuclear weapons if not all is to either take control and defeat group 1 or to spirit away a few weapons.

If Islamist forces (group 2) defeat group 1 they will earn the opposition of the US and India and will need powerful allies (China?). But China too may be wary of islamic groups because of their role in Xinjiang. If Islamist groups take control of Pakistani governance they will have to contend with a Paki economy without foreign aid as well as the military threat for which they have to be ready for nuclear war. They will have to threaten nuclear war to survive. That is the same as nuclear terrorism.

The slightly less dangerous option is for group 2 to surreptitiously take control of some nuclear weapons and allow group 1 to survive with US aid pouring in to protect group 1 and support the state of Pakistan. That way the day to day governance of Pakistan and the upkeep of the Pakistani military will not be the responsibility of the Islamist group 2 but they will have nuclear bombs that can, at some unspecified future date be used for blackmail to achieve various goals.

The real question is - have nuclear weapons already gone into the hands of Group 2 or not. We don't know. We do know that nuclear technology is on the loose. Either way the chances of nuclear terrorism in the name of Islam is already more likely than not.

[Lalmohan]

again, good analysis shiv.
i will postulate though that the pakistani bum is now far more threatening to pakistan itself than to India or the US. who will the blackmail be against? who will be the hostage?

the other sub-scenario here is that if group 2 detonate against group 1, group 1 might think it to be an indian pre-emptive strike, which may cause them to launch whatever they have left against India

[Prem]

Per lattest demographic survey by an entity in Stepmother Britania, 70% Paki identify themsleves as Muslamanian First and Paki second. So the IED is ticking , its onlee a matter of time before any Saala-Deen arise and sit on the self destruct button.

[ramana]

What if the Group 1 elements are slowly killed of in jihadi actions by Group 2 and only a thin layer/veneer is kept to maintain the figment of viability of the TSP state? I mean there is no last battle but a slow kill. For example no Group2 can be as effective a Zia ul Haq was in the mission.

[Lalmohan]

what if there is credible information that group 2 has a working bum and delivery system? what if we know that group 1 attack is imminent. backdrop: group 1 claim group 2 are indian agents, group 2 claim group 1 are indian agents (its already happening) - then a group 2 attack might spin off a group 1 strike against india

should india actually do a pre-emptive strike?
(to be safe, this has to be against both groups)

[ramana]

my take is Group 2 is already in control of the bum and maintians the veneer of Group 1 since Zia's time.

you should tweet all this.

[Gagan]

Are we sure that the pakistanis actually have a working bum?

Gen Kapoor's "Whatever bomb they have..." sounds suspiciously like 'whatever leftovers they have.'

The pakistanis are supposed to have botched a Uranium gun design. The US repeatedly talks of terrorists getting their hands on a or exploding a dirty radiation bomb.

[Lalmohan]

CHIC4++ is there
(++ == green paint)

[Ananya]

The recent visible history on this is Group 2 has already in control ( and spoardic elimination of brigadiers ) and group 1 is kept alive to milk US and take the funding in what ever way. Zardari's removal and the Surge policy that would be anounced today would shed some light on group 2 coming out to the open . they will not come out directly but would put in a proxy.

They cannot be quite for long