Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Jan. 29, 2010

[Neela]

Stating the obvious here. I wanted to write this down in simple words.

Isn't the GoI making human sacrifices for its failed policies with Pakistan?

[sum]

Stating the obvious here. I wanted to write this down in simple words.

Isn't the GoI making human sacrifices for its failed policies with Pakistan?

The most apt description i have heard which should replace the entire 7+ pages of the Pune bomb thread...

[Sanku]

Stating the obvious here. I wanted to write this down in simple words.

Isn't the GoI making human sacrifices for its failed policies with Pakistan?

Yes, and all the BS of sacrifices for the greater good, we are all B******* who are living off some one elses sacrifices.

Let every Mother sacrifice one son first and then we shall ask the nation if they are okay with this "price"

[Chinmayanand]

Let every Mother sacrifice one son first and then we shall ask the nation if they are okay with this "price"

Let us start with the President , Prime Minister and the UPA chairperson. Let them lead by example.

[Dilbu]

The claim from TSP is that they (terrorists) dont want you (India) talking to us (TSP establishment/civilian goburmand/whatever) and hence they are attacking you to try and disrupt biss in south asia. The truth is that there is no 'they' and 'us', both terrorists and TSP establishment are one and the same and moreover terror has got nothing to do with talks. TSP will keep India burning even if we keep talking to them non stop 24X7 like DDM anchors on TV. The notion of 'third party' terrorists is a cleverly created leverage by TSP to exploit bleeding heart peacnik constituency in India and abroad.

[Chinmayanand]

GoI may propose that since the non-state actors in pakistan are so powerful that TSPA is unable to handle them on its own , so TSPA and IA should have a joint operation against the non-state actors in pakistan. This will put the mirchi in tspa musharraf.

[anupmisra]

Capital Flight
And, apparently, it's all legal.

NRO beneficiaries transferring big sums abroad

The country has been rapidly losing foreign exchange through both legal and illegal channels as some big NRO beneficiaries are busy sending their money abroad, according to sources in banks and exchange companies.

However, some bankers said that a Pakistani foreign currency account holder could transfer unlimited dollars to his own account in any other country. They said that every big fish had opened several accounts in foreign banks and they could not be stopped from sending their illegal wealth abroad.

The country has increased its foreign reserves by borrowing of $11.3 billion from the International Monetary Fund and their return will begin within two years.

[AjayKK]

Stating the obvious here. I wanted to write this down in simple words.

Isn't the GoI making human sacrifices for its failed policies with Pakistan?

Yes, and all the BS of sacrifices for the greater good, we are all B******* who are living off some one elses sacrifices.

Let every Mother sacrifice one son first and then we shall ask the nation if they are okay with this "price"

And let us not forget the fake economic argument, which sounds exactly like -

"Ma, can't you put up with the neighbourhood aggressive hooligan, who is less than half our strength, while we thrive a little and add to our annual income and our agricultural prosperity, gather some support from others and do XYZ followed by ABC pursued by PQR and if there is any rape attempt, then please continue to make love to the rapist while we prosper some more and have time and money on our sides to finally take the aggressor on."

Replace mother by motherland.

[Malayappan]

Reassessing Liaquat Ali Khan’s role —Riaz Shahid
Some excerpts -

Common perception holds Zia or Bhutto responsible for mixing religion and politics, but it was Liaquat Ali Khan under whose leadership mullahs were given entry into politics and the right to decide the fate of the nation.

Ayub Khan was merely a colonel in 1947. Quaid-e-Azam had given orders that he will not wear wings for one year and will be transferred to East Pakistan forthwith due to his involvement in looting evacuee gold and silver. No less a person than Sardar Abdur Rab Nishtar had written a report on Ayub Khan’s misconduct. Ayub Khan’s British superiors had given him a horrible ACR for his timidity and refusal to participate in combat in Burma in World War II.

[Malayappan]

And this is the jugular vein and that is why pakistan wants Kashmir -
Azad Kashmir today

[SSridhar]

From what Malayappan has posted above,

First and foremost is the fact that Pakistan’s disastrous constitutional history has much to do with Liaquat Ali Khan. He had no constituency in Pakistan. His hometown was left behind in India. Bengalis were a majority in the newly created state of Pakistan and this was a painful reality for him. While India was able to promulgate a constitution by 1950 and hold a first direct election on adult franchise in 1951, the Muslim League under Liaquat Ali Khan scrupulously avoided its responsibility to frame a constitution. The reason was simple. Had a constitution been framed, the Bengali demographic majority would have granted Bengalis political power and Liaquat Ali Khan would have been sent out of the prime minister’s office. The person who would have replaced him would have been Hussain Shaheed Suhrawardy, the most popular political leader of Bengali Muslims and a great stalwart of the freedom movement. He had been chief minister and head of a Muslim League government of United Bengal before partition. Of course, the West Pakistani political elites, particularly those of Punjab, were also against a permanent Bengali majority in the National Assembly. Had Liaquat Ali Khan ignored his personal political interests and respected the ground reality of the Bengali majority, Pakistan might have got itself a workable constitution 60 years back. He was in a position to ignore the Punjabi elites and do the right thing. The Pakistani army was in formative stages and was in no position to challenge civilian authority. All the service chiefs were British.

Thus, Pakistan remained a Dominion of the United Kingdom for 9 long years after its Independence until the first of the jokes (I mean, Constitution of Pakistan) was announced. What did it mean ? Thus, the first State in the world to be founded on Islam, had a Christian Queen as the Head for nine long years ! When Prime Minister Khwaja Nizamuddin was dismissed by Governor General Ghulam Mohammed in c. 1953, he tried to appeal to the Queen of England praying for his re-instatement since Pakistan was a Dominon of the United Kingdom and she was the titular head !!

Pakistan is one *BIG* joke.

[Malayappan]

We have been agonising on the motives behind the talks offer, sometimes whining, sometimes screaming, and in addition, picking up scraps of information to understand things from wherever. This post is in the third category.
Jim Hoagland, in WaPo while giving an American view with a piece of advice to their president says

The dominant impression from three days of informal conversations organized here by the Aspen Strategy Group with Indian officials and analysts is that Pakistan has become a second-tier problem for India, even as it increasingly preoccupies Washington.

The article is worth a read also for some readings of an American perspective on India's hedging activities in AfPak
As Obama bets on Asia, regional players hedge

[sum]

But they also detect an air of ambivalence blowing their way from Washington -- and are reacting by hedging against a quick U.S. pullout from Afghanistan that would bring greater U.S. reliance on China and Pakistan, at India's expense.

How are we hedging in A'tan to account for Amir-Khan pullout?

Re-engaging with Iran and Russia?

[Hari Seldon]

Thus, Pakistan remained a Dominion of the United Kingdom for 9 long years after its Independence until the first of the jokes (I mean, Constitution of Pakistan) was announced. What did it mean ?

Wow.

So TSP was constitutionally constipated for 9 long yrs. It figures I guess. No wonder they seek solace in GUBO. Tch tch.

[svinayak]

Thus, Pakistan remained a Dominion of the United Kingdom for 9 long years after its Independence until the first of the jokes (I mean, Constitution of Pakistan) was announced.
Pakistan is one *BIG* joke.

Indians are the only ones who take Pakistan seriously.
Indians think that Pakistan is a real country with state institutions.

When you see US officials who come to Pakistan including Bush they just brush the Pak officials since they know that Pakistan is a fake country. Even they know that it is a joke.
They use Pakistan for their geopolitical goals and treat it as a joke.
US by giving this illusion of Pakistan as a normal country has fooled India into talks and into all kinds of false trails.


It is the same thing with PRC.

[A_Gupta]

Reassessing Liaquat Ali Khan’s role —Riaz Shahid
Some excerpts -

Common perception holds Zia or Bhutto responsible for mixing religion and politics, but it was Liaquat Ali Khan under whose leadership mullahs were given entry into politics and the right to decide the fate of the nation......

Even in his death - on Capital Talk, MQM Senator Babar Khan Ghauri said that the culture of political assassination with impunity began with Liaquat Ali Khan's assassination; that the current wave of violence in Pakistan is nothing new, it all began with that.

[Sriman]

Apologies if it has already been posted:

http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/ ... ermind.php

Qari Hussain Mehsud is alive

A top Taliban commander who trains children to become suicide bombers has disproved reports that he was killed during a US Predator airstrike in mid-January.

The Pakistani government claimed Qari Hussain was killed in the Jan. 14 US airstrike that targeted Hakeemullah in North Waziristan. But Qari Hussain confirmed he was alive when he contacted a Pakistani television station on Feb. 1 to deny that Hakeemullah was killed.

Still, Rehman Malik, Pakistan's Interior Minister, has twice claimed that Qari Hussain was killed, once on Feb. 3, and again on Feb. 10.

[shyamd]

Indians are the only ones who take Pakistan seriously.
Indians think that Pakistan is a real country with state institutions.

India is more than aware that India has to negotiate directly with army, who have the real power. Look at the statements post 26/11 from the top Indian sources. All say that, we no longer talk directly to the Pak politicians but to the army/ISI instead.

[g.sarkar]

Reassessing Liaquat Ali Khan’s role —Riaz Shahid
Some excerpts -

Common perception holds Zia or Bhutto responsible for mixing religion and politics, but it was Liaquat Ali Khan under whose leadership mullahs were given entry into politics and the right to decide the fate of the nation......
Even in his death - on Capital Talk, MQM Senator Babar Khan Ghauri said that the culture of political assassination with impunity began with Liaquat Ali Khan's assassination; that the current wave of violence in Pakistan is nothing new, it all began with that.

Are you saying that there was no hanky-panky in Jinnah's death? Actually it was Jinnah who brought religion in politics in Pakistan.
Gautam

[svinayak]

All say that, we no longer talk directly to the Pak politicians but to the army/ISI instead.

You mean now after 60 years

[chetak]

http://www.deccanchronicle.com/internat ... tenure-511

Zardari extends Kayani’s tenure

February 15th, 2010

Islamabad, Feb. 14: Embattled Pakistan President, Mr Asif Ali Zardari, has offered a two-year extension to the Pakistan Army Chief, General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, official sources said.

[shyamd]

You mean now after 60 years

Well yes, and when mussharraf was in power, I guess we were talking to army then too.

-----------
MMS confirms during CCS meet that TSP talks will continue. Congress party not backing PM apparently.

[A Arun]

Azad Kashmir today

Azad Kashmir was again in the cross-hairs of armed conflict. Against this backdrop, Pakistan under Gen Ziaul Haq decided to legally separate the geographically much larger Northern Areas of Gilgit and Baltistan from Azad Kashmir. This caused almost as much consternation in the latter as it did in India. The separation of the Northern Areas by Pakistan eliminated all doubts about the sovereignty of Azad Kashmir. With the reactivation of conflict across the Line-of-Control, the quality of life of the Azad Kashmiris was trammelled. Those who did not want to take part in the proxy war became pariahs.

Most of the cross-border infiltration was halted in the wake of 9/11 and the US invasion of Afghanistan. The attack on the Indian parliament in December 2001 was designed to reinvigorate the Kashmir issue but all it did was bring India and Pakistan to the brink of full-scale war in 2002. For a while the Musharraf regime sought to differentiate the struggle for freedom in Kashmir from political acts of terror but its spin failed to gain traction with the world community. Cross-border terrorism was quiet for several years.

The attacks on Mumbai by a group linked to militant activities in Kashmir in November 2008 were an attempt to reignite the conflict but succeeded only in drawing widespread opprobrium. During the past 62 years, the people of Azad Kashmir have been unable to arise out of poverty in large measure because they are caught in the crossfire between India and Pakistan. The land which their elders knew as a mountain paradise has been turned into a living hell.

Of the four million people who inhabit the region, nine of 10 live in extremely impoverished conditions in rural areas. Population growth is excessive, at 2.4 per cent per year, and the average house holds no fewer than seven people. Sadly, Azad Kashmir’s future is as murky today as it was in 1947. And the objective for its creation, the liberation of the vale of Kashmir, seems increasingly remote.

[Pulikeshi]

Pakistan is one *BIG* joke.

Sir, I believe you only have it half right -

Pakistan is one *BIG* joke on the Indian citizen!

-------------------
Kerry Says India-Pakistan Talks Must Go On

"The right thing is to talk; you lose nothing by talking," Sen. Kerry (D., Mass.) said while on a visit to the Indian capital en route to Islamabad. If India finds a Pakistani link to the Pune attack, "I hope India will have that conversation with Pakistan and, if they have evidence to that effect, that should be the first thing on the table and Pakistan has to deal with it," he added.

Has evidence of the fact and talking made a firk of a deference whatsoever?
Indeed talking has shown to be detrimental to Indian interests as Pak always pulls SES moves....
So, we are asking Charlie Brown (India) to trust lucy (TSP) not to pull back the football?
Gives whole new meaning to "You just can't win Charlie Brown"

He also reiterated the U.S. stance that Pakistan has to do more to combat terrorists on its soil if it wants to continue to receive substantial U.S. aid. "Pakistan has got to make clear its willingness to take on internal enemies," he said

Internal enemies to whom? More like willingness to sacrifices its internal friends and offspring
Kerry may as well be paying them blood money!

Bottom line - the time for India has come to evaluate the outsourcing of her Foreign Policy to the US.
The real question (and I will keep asking it) comes down to the cost of this outsourcing.
GOI seems to have evaluated that the key to TSP lies with the US - given it may be lower cost way
to manage TSP. However, this evaluation is incorrect, India needs to see this as an opportunity cost.
Similar to the dire economic situation in 91 needing drastic course correction, India seems reluctant
to take action until it is almost too late. The opportunity cost is never considered and seems lost.
If history is any indicator, GOI will lose another decade due to its incorrect cost calculation.

[krithivas]

The rhetoric from Paki land press is truly defeaning - Two months ago they were basket case beggars. Now they are apparently negotiating an India style nuclear treaty with the US, and are concocting a "strategic equilibrium" agenda with India. Something tells me that you have to truly work hard for nation building, and there are no, none whatsoever, short cuts to success. Even Om-baba willing.

[SSridhar]

Kerry Says India-Pakistan Talks Must Go On

Pulikeshi, you don't have to go all the way to a blue-blooded American like Mr. Kerry or a naturalized-American like Sidharth Varadarajan for support for talks. Read this, for the views of our own top people.

“I don’t think we should necessarily go by calculations of what will be achieved if the talks are held. A smaller neighbour feels ignored when there are no talks and this is a very important psychological aspect to keep in mind,” he {former Foreign Secretary, Muchkund Dubey} said.

Mr. Subrahmanyam wanted India to keep its cool even if there were more provocations. This would frustrate the Pakistan Army’s design to thwart talks and maintain the tension between the two sides. If trust and confidence were built up between the two sides, the Pakistan Army would be forced to act against militant organisations on the Af-Pak border, most of which were its own creation. In case of talks and normalisation of ties, its excuse of maintaining forces on the border with India because of tensions would not wash with the U.S.

[pgbhat]

language used absolves TSP of all its actions, there by putting onus on India to *resolve* the issue again and again and again and again........

[archan]

Mr. Subrahmanyam wanted India to keep its cool even if there were more provocations. This would frustrate the Pakistan Army’s design to thwart talks and maintain the tension between the two sides. If trust and confidence were built up between the two sides, the Pakistan Army would be forced to act against militant organisations on the Af-Pak border, most of which were its own creation. In case of talks and normalisation of ties, its excuse of maintaining forces on the border with India because of tensions would not wash with the U.S.

Wonder how many lives is Mr. Subrahmanyam willing to sacrifice in order to not be seen as reacting to provocations.

[Gagan]

While this = = talk from political leaders and 'intellegensia' bothers me, I see them as not wanting to up the ante by resorting to rhetoric at this point.

However I hope and pray that the steps that are needed to counter this menace, by dis-incentivising the pakistani elite, its army and intel agency from terrorism, are being carried out in rightful earnest.

Unless the Pakistani leadership, controllers feel the heat, this menace is not going to stop. These people need to be individually blackmailed, there are several skeletons in each closet.

If GoI feels that this is not the time to take the gloves off, I would recommend putting another set of gloves on.

[Gagan]

Is it OK to discuss in the open, what set of measures can GoI take to dis-incentivise pakistan from using terrorism?

To begin with, I would recommend following Newton's third law of motion.

[JwalaMukhi]

Wonder how many lives is Mr. Subrahmanyam willing to sacrifice in order to not be seen as reacting to provocations.

As many Indian lives at it would take and more. Probably to the last man standing, as long as it does not involve any of the near and dear ones, who are free to profusely advocate love fest of south asia. Either way some south asian lives are going to be lost, why not Indians. For every Indian life lost, it probably saved a life of other vulnerable south asian. All that matters is the bonhomie of south asia.
It is spoken as impartial observer, advising two sides how to behave taking into full concerns of US.

[Gagan]

Can someone post the 14 step dictator cycle of Pakistan and N^3s 4-5 steps to recognize a paki.

I want to know where Billa is on the 14 steps cycle. Although with hubby giving billa a two year extension this is a new step without any precedence.

[vera_k]

What's the legal position on this - can the government officials involved be dragged to court for taking actions that are resulting in the deaths of Indians? I mean, what is difference between say NSA Menon and and DSP Erda at this point?

[shyamd]

Wonder how many lives is Mr. Subrahmanyam willing to sacrifice in order to not be seen as reacting to provocations.

So what do we do? Bomb those tents and just annhilate TSPA installations? Where does that leave Af-Pak? I think this requires analysis.

[Rudradev]

Wonder how many lives is Mr. Subrahmanyam willing to sacrifice in order to not be seen as reacting to provocations.

An endless number provided none of them are near and dear to him or his bosses.

"Bheeshma Mahapita" indeed. (wish there was an icon for vomiting).

[RamaY]

Biraders, (^, ^^, ^^^, and so on)

Do not worry. Our beloved UPA govt got the popular mandate to do nothing inspite of repeated TSP terror attacks. But that is no reason to lose your faith.

Allaah is most merciful and he gifted us TSPA-Paquis. They will do something so stupid that GOI will be forced to respond. Remember East-Paquistan? Remember Kargil? ...

So don't worry.. be faithful

[Gagan]

I was just surfing the net on India's economic growth.
India has grown at 7.9% this quarter, and is one of the fastest growing BIG economies.
Chief economic adviser Kaushik Basu says, in 4-5 years, india will be THE FASTEST growing big economy in the world overtaking China's growth rate finally. The beginning of the narrowing of the gap between China and India.

This one factor more than any colours the way GoI acts on pakistan sponsored terrorism, and in fact on all decisions it makes today.

I feel that GoI intends to somehow convince pakis to maintain status quo on all issues while they are recovering from their err, issues at home. The current dispensation at the center as it is are masters of maintaining status quo on issues that they feel they can't handle just now.

So my impression is, that with these talks, india will seek to maintain status quo, keep pakistan amused, keep pulling out new lollipops for the pakis, while the main accent all the time is to keep the economy going full steam ahead.

Pakistan is an irrelevant sideshow for GoI which would prefer to ignore it, but the chi-pakis keep trying to bring the pakis onto center stage.

[shyamd]

^^LoL! I said the same last week before the blasts!

[Gerard]

The current dispensation at the center as it is are masters of maintaining status quo on issues that they feel they can't handle just now.

They can always appoint an expert committee to study the issue

[shiv]

Pulikeshi, you don't have to go all the way to a blue-blooded American like Mr. Kerry or a naturalized-American like Sidharth Varadarajan for support for talks. Read this, for the views of our own top people.

Mr. Subrahmanyam wanted India to keep its cool even if there were more provocations. This would frustrate the Pakistan Army’s design to thwart talks and maintain the tension between the two sides. If trust and confidence were built up between the two sides, the Pakistan Army would be forced to act against militant organisations on the Af-Pak border, most of which were its own creation. In case of talks and normalisation of ties, its excuse of maintaining forces on the border with India because of tensions would not wash with the U.S.

Unless the report is wrong, hasn't Subrahmanyamji not obfuscated and fudged in that report?
In an earlier paragraph he is quoted as saying:

Noted strategic affairs analyst K. Subrahmanyam pointed out that certain elements averse to the pressure being put on militants on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border have attempted to vitiate the atmosphere between India and Pakistan. The December 2001 Parliament House attack and the November 2008 Mumbai attacks were both aimed at derailing bilateral dialogue. The Pune blast is part of the same sequence and India should not be dissuaded from the coming meeting of Foreign Secretaries here on February 25.

He says that"certain elements" are causing trouble. Fine. But he later says that it was those very elements that wanted to break off talks in 2001 and 2008. But Sir, in 2001 it was the Pak army in power and we were talking to Pak army (Musharraf) backed people. In 2008 it was the current civilian government. Is Subrahmanyam saying that its is some hidden minority of the Pakistani army that is doing this

But but but....

If some hidden element in the Paki army wants to break off talks why does Subrahmanyamji go on to blame the entire Paki army in the later paragraph (quoted by Sridhar). Is the Paki army fully guilty or partly guilty as per Mr. Subrahmanyam? As I see it the Pakistani army is in it "up to here" as the saying goes. You cannot have one section of the Army doing one thing and another pretending that it is not happening.

Having said that I am glad some Indian has finally come out in the open and named the Pakistan army as the guilty party. But it bothers me that there is an semi-official acknowledgement that India is cooperating with US aims in trying to get the Paki army to fight in the West.

What irritates me about this policy of cooperating with US aims is that

• The US has had no success in making the Paki army pull out in the east
• The US has continued to arm Pakistan against India
• India is doing nothing to punish or weaken the guilty Paki army

What has the US got to show for a decade of making the Paki army fight? The Paki army are better equipped against India and Mullah Omar and Osama are still alive.

Who is trying to fool whom? And we are talking because "pakis will feel left out"? What the furk kind of reason is that? Sir.