Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 2011

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 09 May 2011 17:32

Sushupti wrote:Pakistan being treated as hired gun: Imran Khan

http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/news/p ... dtv/198969

Every time I hear "Pakistan" and "gun" spoken together, I start thinking in Punjabi!

Baikul · Post by **Baikul** » 09 May 2011 17:57

Does the word 'lun' then come into your though process?

jrjrao · Post by **jrjrao** » 09 May 2011 17:57

Not sure if Amb. Munter in Isloo really said something this direct to the Pakis.

Its’ up to Pakistan to decide whether it wants another unilateral action or not: US Ambassador

ISLAMABAD - US ambassador in Pakistan Cameron Munter has said in unequivocal terms that Pakistan has to decide wisely whether it would take action against Al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri and spiritual leader of Taliban Mullah Omar with support of Obama administration otherwise US would do it unilaterally.

In an exclusive interview to a Private TV Channel, the US ambassador said, Pakistan needs to answer the question about existence of Osama in Pakistan and relations between both countries depend on these answers.
“We are committed to fight against terrorism. Our friends in Pakistan are committed to do exactly the same thing.

When asked about another unilateral action in Pakistan like Abbotabad to hunt Zawahiri or Mullah Omar Cameron said "I think it can happen”.

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 09 May 2011 18:11

Serving Major among 4 Pak nationals behind 2008 Mumbai attacks: US chargesheet

AoA

NEW DELHI: A suspected serving Pakistani Major, believed to be working with the ISI, is among four nationals of that country charged by the US with being alleged conspirators behind the 2008 Mumbai terror strikes.

The accused identified as 'Major Iqbal', was named along with Sajid Mir, Mazhar Iqbal and Abu Qahafa in a second superseding indictment filed by the federal prosecutors before a court in Chicago on April 25 last. Besides, the indictment mentioned an unnamed individual as "Lashkar Member D."

Indian investigators had named Major Iqbal along with another Pakistani Army officer Major Sameer Ali as the brain behind the Mumbai terror strikes and on the request of New Delhi, Interpol has issued a Red Corner Notice against them.

The dossier was handed over during the Indo-Pak foreign secretary-level talks on February 25, 2010 in New Delhi.

The role of 'Major Iqbal' emerged in the interrogation by the FBI of US terror suspect David Headley, arrested in Chicago in October, 2009 in connection with the Mumbai attack.

Bhaat happened to Non-Shtate actor, hain ji?...

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 09 May 2011 18:14

Sushupti wrote:Pakistan being treated as hired gun: Imran Khan

http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/news/p ... dtv/198969

Hired gun? Backfired gun is more like it.

Just wondering what the consequences could be if India consciously chose sides and decided to undermine the legitimacy and veneer of the pak civilian rubber-stamp by demanding direct talks with GHQ. That would be a fun-watch...

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 09 May 2011 18:49

Imran is 50% right -> Hired yes, but not gun, something else..

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 09 May 2011 18:54

SSridhar wrote:
This official angrily asserted that US had warned Pakistan time and again that it would undertake unilateral action against bin Laden if the US thought Pakistan would not act on its own.

"While willing to avoid placing excessive open pressure on a weak civilian government and often issuing statements that reassured Pakistan, Americans repeatedly said they felt betrayed," the report said.
Can some 'Chanakyan' interpret the bolded statement above ? Why should any foreign government bother about whether there is a military or civilian government in Pakistan or how weak the civilian government was ? The US government's past behaviour has been to support the military rulers to the hilt, condone their atrocious behaviour and stand shoulder-to-shoulder with them. Everybody knows that there are many no-go areas for any Pakistani civilian government such as relations with India, Afghanistan and the US, or nuclear weapons or terrorism or narcotics trade in which areas only the PA decided everything. How would 'excessive open pressure' or even 'no pressure' for that matter change the situation ? And, the US anyway bypasses the civilian Pakistani government and deals with the PA/ISI. At least the US therefore plays a double game. But, the funniest thing is that many Indians also believe that a civilian government in Pakistan should not be weakened by our actions. What a ridiculous notion !

Recap;

Two things happened in Pakistan in 2007 under intense US pressure - Musharraf resigned from the Army, and he allowed Benazir Bhutto to return and campaign.

Bhutto died rather conveniently for Musharraf (thank goodness for sun roof levers eh?), but US support switched to Zardari.

Both of these events politically weakened Musharraf, and the US certainly did not stand by him when the lawyers and then the Pakjabi upper classes launched their civil campaign in 2008 to push him out of the presidency.

This is hardly a first - in both Benazir's first and second terms the US hoped to gain more leverage over the PA through a civilian leadership.

If you remember Ramzi Yousef was hired by Pakistani Deobandi tanzeems (specifically the SSP) to kill Bhutto when she ran for elections in 1993 . The PA generally treated her as the anti-Army candidate and was absolutely determined to see she never came to power.

In fact although the Sharifs had popularity in Pakjab, the PA through the ISI supported him and helped cobble together coalitions because they needed a serious opponent to Benazir and the PPP.

If what any government - India or the US - wants to contain and diminish the PA's dominant political power in Pakistan, especially Pakjab, that's a good thing as far as I am concerned. Obviously Bhutto was also problematic, but she created openings. So does Zardari, although the epic scale of his corruption if anything was strengthening support for the PA until the OBL raid.

Baikul · Post by **Baikul** » 09 May 2011 18:55

jrjrao wrote:Wow.

This is lovely. Superbly lovely, in fact. A magnum opus of a blog post from Prof. Walter Russell Mead.

It is long, and will take some time to read, but it is very rewarding. Deserves a place on the opening page roster of this thread.

I tried to start quoting selections in this post, and then gave up...

May 8, 2011
High Noon in Pakistan
WALTER RUSSELL MEAD
http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/ ... -pakistan/

Allow me to quote a few, IMO, relevant parts, saar.

If Pakistan can’t or won’t help us with the capture of Osama bin Laden, what possible justification does the alliance have? Arguably, the two people who have done the greatest damage to American interests in the last twenty years have been A. Q. Khan, ringmaster of the nuclear proliferation circus that helped countries like North Korea, Libya, Syria and Iran advance their nuclear ambitions, and Osama bin Laden. What country produced one and sheltered both?

We are going to have to get tough. The Pakistani security establishment lives to a very large degree in what, to American eyes, looks like a dangerous and delusional imaginary world. As I’ve written before, Americans (and virtually everyone else in the world who looks at this question) sees Pakistan locked into a profoundly dysfunctional combination of misguided security ideas and comprehensive domestic failure. Pakistani strategists embrace these seemingly destructive policies out of some very deeply-held beliefs and in response to what they see as existential questions of national identity and cohesion. They will not be lightly diverted from this long-established and cherished course, however suicidal, and as is often the case with people whose goals are unrealistic, they are accustomed to very high risk strategies and brinkmanship. Defeat after defeat by India, progressive deterioration of the domestic security climate and the utter collapse of political morality in what passes for the governing class in Pakistan have not forced a reevaluation. Charm and appeals to sweet reason by American officials and emissaries won’t do it either. Neither will humanitarian aid: the suffering of ordinary Pakistanis has little impact on the elite, and in the short to medium term public opinion in Pakistan is so anti-American and so politically marginal that we could die of old age waiting for spending however generous to change our image in Pakistan enough to change the politics of the relationship

.

We have another card to play, I suspect. Some of the information the Seals acquired in Abbottabad is likely to show that under Pakistani protection Bin Laden continued to plot and scheme against the Saudis. Pakistan has betrayed everyone, including the Saudis. Nobody likes this kind of behavior; Pakistan has burned more than one bridge.

Arun_J · Post by **Arun_J** » 09 May 2011 19:03

@NaMaAstee I LOVE going there. I am an addict and Pakistanis are VERY much like Americans: betaqaluf, bebak, bechalaki, sidhe sadhe log.

I believe Ms. Fair has the typical "Chuck Yeager Syndrome". She is definitely fond of the "Puki Mehmaan Nawaazi".

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 09 May 2011 19:12

Here's another switch in the paki position, however illogical it may sound. The usual foot in the mouth disease that plagues most paki politicians.

Pakistan premier defends country in bin Laden case
Seems like Groper is groping for a third option.

Gilani said bin Laden's killing was proper justice.

He rejected claims that Pakistani authorities were either incompetent in searching for bin Laden or complicit in hiding him, and expressed full confidence in the country's armed forces and intelligence establishment.

So, is there a third option? And, now it seems the pakis did know about the raid. Pakistan says it knew of US raid after it began

Pakistani Interior Minister Rehman Malik told an Arab satellite TV on Monday he knew of the US raid which killed Osama bin Laden only 15 minutes after its launch but had no idea of the target.

So, is Rehman Chacha saying that President Obama lied or is he saying that the ISI and army/airforce were incapable of taking action or they purposefully held back (therefore, implying complicity)?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 May 2011 21:49

The only ray of hope for TSP is to dissolve themselves and re-merge parts with India.

BTW I dont buy this Ikhwan/Salfist/Deobandi BS they all are the same wrt India.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 09 May 2011 21:52

ramana wrote:BTW I dont buy this Ikhwan/Salfist/Deobandi BS they all are the same wrt India.

Are you suggesting Hamas and the Jasih-e-Mohammed had the same attitude and effect upon India? I am not sure the evidence supports that...

saip · Post by **saip** » 09 May 2011 22:00

Suppiah wrote:Imran is 50% right -> Hired yes, but not gun, something else..

Na not hired, it is 'used'.

abhijitm · Post by **abhijitm** » 09 May 2011 22:02

ramana wrote:The only ray of hope for TSP is to dissolve themselves and re-merge parts with India.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! re-merge the land onlee

unless you mean dissolve themselves and re-merge POK with India

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 May 2011 22:11

I am talking in context of India wrt to those three schools. Hamas is not operating near India as of now.

Nandu · Post by **Nandu** » 09 May 2011 22:11

Anindya wrote:
On twitter.
http://twitter.com/#!/CChristineFair
and scroll down.
Thanks for the link - she sounds like a Paki government official, with a little bit of verbal flourish

It would be accurate to refer to her from now on as a Pakistani American analyst.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 09 May 2011 22:33

SSridhar wrote:
"While willing to avoid placing excessive open pressure on a weak civilian government and often issuing statements that reassured Pakistan, Americans repeatedly said they felt betrayed," the report said.

Can some 'Chanakyan' interpret the bolded statement above ? Why should any foreign government bother about whether there is a military or civilian government in Pakistan or how weak the civilian government was ? The US government's past behaviour has been to support the military rulers to the hilt, condone their atrocious behaviour and stand shoulder-to-shoulder with them. Everybody knows that there are many no-go areas for any Pakistani civilian government such as relations with India, Afghanistan and the US, or nuclear weapons or terrorism or narcotics trade in which areas only the PA decided everything. How would 'excessive open pressure' or even 'no pressure' for that matter change the situation ? And, the US anyway bypasses the civilian Pakistani government and deals with the PA/ISI. At least the US therefore plays a double game. But, the funniest thing is that many Indians also believe that a civilian government in Pakistan should not be weakened by our actions. What a ridiculous notion !

Great question/
Pakistan military is a product of the US policy for the last 50 years. Check the video of the Pakistan President Gen Ayub feted in US including the NY ticker parade in 1961. Actually no other military dictator from any other country has received such an honor in US if I am correct.

This relationship has resulted in the hubris behavior of the Pakistan military. Gen Zia created an super Islamic elite in the military who have the self defined role of the protector of Islam. So this should not be a surprise.
With the entire US financial support Pakistan is very much sensitive to small changes in tilt by US policy.

India does not have any reciprocal relationship with the civilian or the military elite inside Pakistan. India can just have simple relationship.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 09 May 2011 23:08

On TimesNow et al. The discussion with Arnab bought about three points clearly (Ajit Doval), w.r.t. pressure points Pakistan has on US

1. You created AlQ jointly
2. The concept of strategic depth of Afg, is something we have but create it in your service.
3. Use of strategic assets to JOINT goals.

Pakistani's are hitting on all three heavily, and asking Unkil, "Kya hua, tera wada" (what happened to your promises)

They cant figure out why Unkil is forgetting all the past nice time, and to be frank neither can I.

Baikul · Post by **Baikul** » 09 May 2011 23:24

^^ Because like all clients that frequent brothels, Unkil's blood is never stirred by previous encounters, only current and future liaisons.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 09 May 2011 23:36

Pakistan has already welcomed Uncle with open legs many times. Where, then, is the attraction now of open arms and a churlish attitude?

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 09 May 2011 23:39

Can any one please tell me who is the Commanding Officer at PMA Kakul?

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 09 May 2011 23:52

Altair wrote:Can any one please tell me who is the Commanding Officer at PMA Kakul?

Chacha says one Lt Col Nadeem Rehmat Ullah is the Commanding Officer of the Battalion at PMA

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 May 2011 23:58

Dilbu, PMA commandant would be Lt Gen or a Maj Gen.

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 10 May 2011 00:06

In that case it must be Shuja Pasha himself.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 10 May 2011 00:22

Wiki says...

Officer in charge MG Maj Gen Mazhar Jamil, Commandant
Rector Gen Ashfaq Pervez Kiani, Chief of Army Staff

NikhilB · Post by **NikhilB** » 10 May 2011 00:57

jrjrao wrote:Wow.

This is lovely. Superbly lovely, in fact. A magnum opus of a blog post from Prof. Walter Russell Mead.

It is long, and will take some time to read, but it is very rewarding. Deserves a place on the opening page roster of this thread.

I tried to start quoting selections in this post, and then gave up...

May 8, 2011
High Noon in Pakistan
WALTER RUSSELL MEAD
http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/ ... -pakistan/

Superb article. I just want to discuss one point as other topics have been discussed to great depth here already.

Point #2 that current Chinese reluctance for betting on dying paki horse is due to slight fear in their mind about possible India-US alliance tightening against China fully.

From our point of view, US is no great friend of India. BUT, China too would not want tight India-US alliance that is 100% directed against it.

Pakis still have some slight jaan in their H&D and in nationstate becasue of unrealistic (and not yet materialised historically) hope of Chinese help in their stupid gazwa-e-hind venture in future.

Now, India has great leverage for keeping China away from helping pakis beyond certian limit is by keeping above fear alive in Chinese mind. And that is by NOT entering in any such tight alliance with US right now, rather just hinting about its possibility.

In summary, show carrot to US and stick to China. Can India do this ? Typhoon / Rafale MMRCA shortlisting decision can qualify as such move in right direction !

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 10 May 2011 01:08

But it does seem clear that the US now needs to muster all of its energy, resources and will for a strategic battle to determine the future parameters of our relations with Pakistan.

This is new. Maybe oct will show some surprise

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 10 May 2011 01:18

A gritty, lively, and revelatory look inside the crucial and volatile nation of Pakistan

In To Live or to Perish Forever, Nicholas Schmidle takes readers to Pakistan’s rioting streets, to Taliban camps in the North-West Frontier Province, and on many surprising adventures as he provides a contemporary history of this country long riven by internal conflict. With the intimacy and good humor available only to the most fearless and open-eyed reporters, Schmidle narrates what was arguably the most turbulent period of Pakistan’s recent history, a time when President Pervez Musharraf lost his power and the Taliban found theirs, and when Americans began to realize that Pakistan’s fate is inextricably linked with our own.

In February 2006 Schmidle had traveled to Pakistan hoping to learn about the place dubbed “the most dangerous country in the world.” It was while there that he befriended a radical cleric (who became an enemy of the state and was killed), came to crave the smell of tear gas (because it assured him that he was sufficiently close to the action), and in the end, was deported by the Pakistani authorities, managed to get back into the country, and was chased out a second time.

http://www.nicholasschmidle.com/toliveo ... tml#praise

Nicholas Schmidle is a writer covering issues related to transnational crime, militancy, and the intersection of culture, religion and politics abroad. He is the author of To Live or To Perish Forever: Two Tumultuous Years Inside Pakistan and a fellow at the New America Foundation. Nicholas contributes frequently to The New York Times Magazine, as well as The Atlantic, T: Travel, Slate, The New Republic and many others. He has written on a range of topics, including Sufi festivals and Taliban lashings in Pakistan, rising sea levels in the Maldives, and women’s boarding schools in Saudi Arabia, and al-Qaeda’s franchise in Mauritania.

In early 2006, Nicholas moved to Pakistan, backed by a writing fellowship from the Institute of Current World Affairs. He lived and reported in Pakistan for two years, before being deported from Pakistan in January 2008. He has also worked in Iran, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Central Asia, West Africa, Russia and the Balkans. Nicholas received the 2008 Kurt Schork Award for freelance journalism, based on his work in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He was named an International Reporting Project fellow in 2010. He speaks Persian and Urdu, and is a graduate of James Madison University and American University. He lives in Washington, DC with his wife.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 10 May 2011 01:42

^^^
http://prairieprogressive.com/2009/06/0 ... -schmidle/

Schmidle notes that the Taliban operated freely in Pakistan because “everyone, everywhere in Pakistan, seemed to be offering [them] some help.” As one Pakistani journalist told him, “Ninety-nine point ninety-nine percent of Pakistanis, from their heart of hearts, are happy to see the Taliban creating problems for the Americans in Afghanistan and for Musharraf” in northwest Pakistan. But it is “the idea of the Taliban,” not the men with turbans and guns that infatuates them. “One hundred percent of the people don’t want the Taliban in Islamabad, Rawalpindi of even Karachi,” the country’s capital, military center and largest city, respectively, said the same journalist.

Schmidle, in fact, often encounters this type of antithesis firsthand. Perhaps the prime example is when he asked the leader of one of the two major pro-Taliban factions seeking to implement sharia law in the Swat Valley if he wanted to accompany Schmidle to see the leader of the other faction. “No way,” the faction leader said. “Those people are extremists.”

Shankas · Post by **Shankas** » 10 May 2011 01:58

Given the hole Pakistan has dug for it self, I feel the timing may be perfect for Afganistan to fire a salvo stating the Durand line treaty expired in 1993 and it wants its territory back. The US at this time in history may be receptive to listening to it.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 10 May 2011 02:56

ramana wrote:I am talking in context of India wrt to those three schools. Hamas is not operating near India as of now.

In the regional context it makes more sense to speak of jihadis recruited within the region, and those from beyond it.

The Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan) is an Arab phenomenon, but it matters to India in the sense that it is important to understand what policy towards the Subcontinent would look like if they came to power.

Many assume they would be Pan-Islamist in rhetoric, but realpolitik in the actual conduct of foreign policy.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 10 May 2011 03:04

US ignored Pakistan's anti-India terror

The US may be fighting shy of designating Pakistan as a state sponsoring terror but it has no dearth of information linking Islamabad with outfits which are not only hostile to Washington's interest but have also been creating trouble in India.

India releases dossier linking 26/11 plotters with ISI

Just a week ahead of the crucial trial of a key 26/11 accused in the US, India on Monday released detailed dossiers on five Pakistanis, including a serving ISI major who have been chargesheeted by US authorities in connection with the Mumbai terror attacks.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 10 May 2011 03:54

Johann wrote: In the regional context it makes more sense to speak of jihadis recruited within the region, and those from beyond it.

The Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan) is an Arab phenomenon, but it matters to India in the sense that it is important to understand what policy towards the Subcontinent would look like if they came to power.

Many assume they would be Pan-Islamist in rhetoric, but realpolitik in the actual conduct of foreign policy.

THe problem is we may hear rhetoric on Kashmir, due to the apparent similarities with Palestine.

Obama is engaging the MB big time, he wants to empower them in both Syria and Egypt I think. US is upto something and taking big risks. Apparently, the arrested guys in the UAE were "known MB members".

jrjrao · Post by **jrjrao** » 10 May 2011 04:15

MSNBC video of today. When Michael Isikoff is asked what if any leverage can the US exercise to make Pakistan behave better, Isikoff says that the leverage vehicle is likely to be the Mumbai trial that starts next week in Chicago.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp ... 0#42962860

Shaashtanga · Post by **Shaashtanga** » 10 May 2011 04:16

For those who are interested in watching Najam Shady's latest Apas ki baat episode here is the url -http://www.friendskorner.com/forum/f319 ... -a-229101/ . For those who don't want to watch, the episode is full of talks around sovirginity violations by the biggest goonda in the world i.e. Unkil but all thru the episode he keeps telling in his analysis that talks bout sovirginity violation is cheap but are you (as in awam) ready to eat grass if they ask unkil to take a hike and tell them that if there are any such obl type episodes they will take action and that would mean going head on with unkil's might.... there are a few pakis in my building and one of them who i talk to sometimes is very depressed bout Pak Army hijdaapan and has only choicest expletives to express his displeasure... not sure if he reads brf but he said somethings that the gyan seems to be gained from brf i.e. Pak Army made a c*h*u*t*i*y*a of paki awam (only non-RAPE & lower class) since 1947. Then he got even more depressed stating that even if he wants to do something he can't coz he moved lock stock & barrel to canukistan and more people with a similar mind-set to his also moved to Naarth Amreeka or Down Under or EU.... he felt bad about the really poor pakis who will suffer the most if and when there is war with unkil coz the RAPE's and Army brass have enough resources to sustain themselves by the poor & lower middle class have no way out.... maybe he opened up to me like this knowing well that i am an Indian coz i didn't try to sprinkle namak on his wounds (after this obl episode) and i think all middle class sane pakis would be looking at other middle class Indians with the longing of kid in their eyes who are fed up with poverty and household violence in their own home and peeking a look into neighbors house that are living a happy content life..... these maybe the sob paki stories that cause bleeding hearts in JNU jholawals and MMS Pappi Jhappi routine.... but their is no safe way to salvage any healthy tissue from the cancerous mass that is TSP.

Shaashtanga · Post by **Shaashtanga** » 10 May 2011 04:27

Arun_J wrote:
@NaMaAstee I LOVE going there. I am an addict and Pakistanis are VERY much like Americans: betaqaluf, bebak, bechalaki, sidhe sadhe log.
I believe Ms. Fair has the typical "Chuck Yeager Syndrome". She is definitely fond of the "Puki Mehmaan Nawaazi".

*****Edited***** Dont do that again..

Shaashtanga · Post by **Shaashtanga** » 10 May 2011 04:33

jrjrao wrote:MSNBC video of today. When Michael Isikoff is asked what if any leverage can the US exercise to make Pakistan behave better, Isikoff says that the leverage vehicle is likely to be the Mumbai trial that starts next week in Chicago.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp ... 0#42962860

They keep talking about a rouge major who was the handler... why cant these anal-yeasts say it out loud that no major - rouge or otherwise can do such a thing without the blessings of top brass of TSPA & ISI.... are they trying to lay the ground work for oh these were some radicalized rouge low lifes who perpetrated Mumbai attacks and sheltered osmama.... unkil shud just pull out their troops out of Afg and bomb Pakjabi Aholes to stone age.... if thats not possible then atleast drop some daisy cutters on all their suspected nuclear weapon installations.... enough already....

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 10 May 2011 05:12

Arun_J wrote:
@NaMaAstee I LOVE going there. I am an addict and Pakistanis are VERY much like Americans: betaqaluf, bebak, bechalaki, sidhe sadhe log.
I believe Ms. Fair has the typical "Chuck Yeager Syndrome". She is definitely fond of the "Puki Mehmaan Nawaazi".

I also think that she is fond of needling India & Indians. The chuckle on her face in that famous Arnab Goswami interview a couple of weeks back said it all.

Anindya · Post by **Anindya** » 10 May 2011 05:25

From http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 211237.cms

Pataudi's first cousin tipped as next ISI chief

Front runners among those tipped to take over from Pasha is Major General Isfandiyar Ali Pataudi, first cousin of cricketing legend, former India skipper Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi, and an uncle to film stars, Saif and Soha.

Isfandiyar's father, Major General Nawabzada Mohammad Ali Pataudi, was the younger brother of Mansur Ali Khan's father Iftikhar Ali Khan. Major General Nawabzada Mohammad preferred to opt for the Pakistan army at the time of partition, while his elder brother stayed back to pursue a diplomatic career.

Sources here said Maj Gen Isfandiyar Ali Pataudi, who was appointed a deputy director-general of ISI a few weeks ago, stands a good chance if a major churning happens at the higher echelons of the Pakistan army. His liberal moorings and aristocratic background may work to his advantage at a time when Rawalpindi is required to allay US's fears of a fundamentalist takeover of the intelligence agency. An armoured corps officer, General Isfandiyar has another India connection: he was a classmate of the chief of the Indian Army, General V K Singh, at the Army War College in the US a few years ago.

Isfandiyar Pataudi was among the first officers sent by the Pakistan army to US military institutions after the restoration of bilateral military ties that had soured after the 1998 nuclear tests and 1999 military coup. Indian military had then read the selection of the first batch of officers including Pataudi for American courses as a deliberate Pak strategy to project a liberal face.

But now the liberal face happens to be at the senior level of a notoriously secretive ISI that is dominated by sympathizers of al-Qaida and handles many terror groups. And he is on the brink of emerging as possible DG of the all powerful intelligence agency. All his royal ancestry and liberal values may not be enough to reign in the intelligence organization, which is rated a semi-criminal enterprise by many Indian spies and rated among the world's best by many others.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 10 May 2011 05:57

Just as many in BRF had predicted, Osama mission agreed 10 years ago by US, Pak
Paki reaction is just a facade! The nautankis.

LONDON: The US and Pakistan struck a secret deal almost a decade ago permitting a US operation against Osama bin Laden on Pakistani soil, British daily newspaper report quoted.

The deal was struck between the military leader General Pervez Musharraf and President George Bush after Bin Laden escaped US forces in the mountains of Tora Bora in late 2001, British newspaper reported quoting retired Pakistani and US officials.

Under its terms, Pakistan would allow US forces to conduct a unilateral raid inside Pakistan in search of Bin Laden, his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and the al Qaeda No3. Afterwards, both sides agreed, Pakistan would vociferously protest the incursion.

"There was an agreement between Bush and Musharraf that if we knew where Osama was, we were going to come and get him," said a former senior US official with knowledge of counterterrorism operations. "The Pakistanis would put up a hue and cry, but they wouldn't stop us."