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

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 23 Feb 2010 10:39

It would be, ahem, ingenuous to assume that Delhi has been bested by Pakistan's pressure. Let us see how things play out. No need to flip sundry wigs. Indian politicos are some of the meanest SOBs on the planet.

India is a lot like the US-all concern for human rights and doing the decent thing but uncompromising and unflinching with its interests. It maintains a facade, plays by hypocrisy and deceit with the best of them.

While Indians in their drawing rooms have been wringing their hands over Kashmir infiltration for twenty years, the military have occupied part of the Neelum Valley area, the Indian army operates west of the LOC, assassination teams are operating with near impunity in Pakistan/POK. Bodies of Pakistanis are sent back by the Jhelum Express.

I would say less than 0.1% of city dwellers are aware of these facts. I can also say that I am aware of some unsavory activities of GOI agencies, and I know the least of it.

negi · Post by **negi** » 23 Feb 2010 10:39

My beef with supporters of covert action is LeT , ISI are all doing the same in India (at least for an argument's sake it holds good) , what India needs to do is to make TSP pay dearly each time it decides to exercise its covert option .

Covert ops make sense when one has enough intelligence and more importantly political will to preempt the enemy , covert ops in reactive mode will seldom yield desired results unless one is talking about setting off a VLIED or taking down a big fish in ISI/TSPA circles . Lastly covert ops can only be sustained and carried out by governments who are not afraid of 'WAR' for each time such an op is carried out one risks a retaliatory strike by the adversary. From TSP's perspective they have been running a highly successful op since decades as they know only dossiers will be thrown their way as a retaliatory strike.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 23 Feb 2010 10:40

RamaY wrote: So you are for Indian proactive action in afpak, at fundamental level. When will India be ready for action in your opinion? Another 10 years?

India is ready for action now - though the actions it is capable of may be only baby steps in the direction it needs to go. Those baby steps should be taken.

If we do not know where we would be right now if we could be wherever we wanted, how can we possibly know where we will want to be five or ten years from now?

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 23 Feb 2010 10:44

I think it is silly to presume that there NO covert action going on...our top level babus may be SDREs but they are sometimes smart Chanakyans. Only there is no 'visible' and high profile success a.la Mossad. Perhaps that is deliberate or perhaps the key ones are too well protected. I think it is the former - India is a little bit MORE concerned about deniability than TSP. So actions are mostly perhaps in encouraging local elements and not direct hits. Furthermore, India has to rely on professional ranks, not religious zealots who work on different considerations.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 23 Feb 2010 10:46

Well a thought just occurred to me - very belated if others have thought of this before I did.

I mean the US is such a dear friend of India and Pakistan too. the entire subcontinent in fact.

As long as Pakistan and India were busy fighting, the rest of the world was happy. It was only when Paks were co-opted to fight in Afghanistan that took pressure off India - and that too after 9-11.

So how to take pressure off the US?

The best thing is to get India and Pakistan fighting again. India is a big country - four times the size of Pakistan. OK it will be twice the size of Pakistan+Afghanistan. There should be no real worry for the US even if parts of India became a part of Pakistan. As long as the US is not affected - individual details of what happens in Indipakistan should not be a problem.

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 23 Feb 2010 10:49

^^ this will be a fantastic argument for India to use with the jehadis - if we fight, we are helping Unkil, so lay off our backyard, we help you take on Unkil...MSI is most qualified to pursue this line of thinking with Talibunnies...

negi · Post by **negi** » 23 Feb 2010 10:50

Suppiah wrote:I think it is silly to presume that there NO covert action going on...our top level babus may be SDREs but they are sometimes smart Chanakyans. Only there is no 'visible' and high profile success a.la Mossad. Perhaps that is deliberate or perhaps the key ones are too well protected. I think it is the former - India is a little bit MORE concerned about deniability than TSP. So actions are mostly perhaps in encouraging local elements and not direct hits. Furthermore, India has to rely on professional ranks, not religious zealots who work on different considerations.

This post will make Rehman Malik proud , perhaps Chooha qureshi can quote this in upcoming talks.

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 23 Feb 2010 10:52

negi wrote:
Suppiah wrote: This post will make Rehman Malik proud , perhaps Chooha qureshi can quote this in upcoming talks.

If Malik reads every post in BRF he would have died of heart failure by now.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 23 Feb 2010 10:55

I have a request/suggestion for Admins. In the old days the Pakistan discussion thread had its name changed to reflect the message we wanted to convey about Pakistan. The terrorism message is quite clear - but can we have a name change now that links Pakistan and the Taliban. Can we have a new name for this thread series that links Taliban and Pakistan?

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 23 Feb 2010 10:57

How bout Fanatic Barbarian Terrorist Talibanic State of Pakistan thread

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 23 Feb 2010 11:02

How about occupied western territories of India (OWTI)

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 23 Feb 2010 11:08

shiv wrote:I have a request/suggestion for Admins. In the old days the Pakistan discussion thread had its name changed to reflect the message we wanted to convey about Pakistan. The terrorism message is quite clear - but can we have a name change now that links Pakistan and the Taliban. Can we have a new name for this thread series that links Taliban and Pakistan?

Under the Taliban, Afghanistan was the "Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan". So indirectly "Terrorist Emirates of Pakistan".

Maybe something like "The Terrorist Fiefdoms of Pakistan"? The idea is that Pakistan is a collection of loosely cooperating (but sometimes at loggerheads) terrorist factions.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 23 Feb 2010 11:18

Give us Kashmir or there will be a nuclear war.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 23 Feb 2010 11:24

^ From article posted above:

Secondly, the appointment of Shiv Shankar Menon as the national security adviser to the Indian prime minister could be a good omen for the peace process. Coming from once troubled southern India, the former envoy to Islamabad and Beijing served as India’s foreign secretary during eventful times in the last round of the peace process.

Menon is reviled by the media hawks and a section of the establishment for his pro-peace inclination; he belongs to a new generation of diplomats that see the dividends of peace in a broader context. I met him with a group of former diplomats and PPP and PML politicians in 2006, on the sidelines of a peace conference in Delhi, and found him keen to help his government build bridges with Pakistan and work towards dispute resolution.

Pakis love Menon!

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 23 Feb 2010 11:35

This article in the Business Times is now expired as per my google search and appears only in google cache. So am reproducing it in full, with some parts emphasized.

a. As is commonly said, it appears that India was the "loser" in the London conference on Afghanistan. It does appear that India is talking to Pakistan as a result of the conference.

b. However, "The London conference was almost delusional in its optimism". India will need to give some time for reality to sink in.

c. The Western recognition that Pakistan is the "paramount power in Southwest Asia" has given Pakistan a boost of bravado. But given time, Pakistan will hang itself as it tries to make sure any talks are with the Taliban that are in its pocket.

d. Question: just what capabilities does the Indian military have to have for India to be the preeminent power in Southwest Asia?

Published February 10, 2010

Resolving the Afghan conundrum

The West has to stay on as long as is needed to capture or eliminate Al-Qaeda and the hardcore Taliban leadership

By ISHTIAQ AHMED

CONSIDERABLE attention has been given to the conference hosted by United Kingdom's Prime Minister Gordon Brown at Lancaster House on Jan 28-29 2010 in London, in which nearly 70 countries, and the United Nations, backed a US$500 million Afghan government drive to tempt fighters to give up their weapons in exchange for jobs and other incentives.

Hopping to it: It is common sense to recognise that breaking the power of the Taliban in Afghanistan can be more successful if Pakistan's interests in Afghanistan are properly recognised. It remains the paramount power in south-west Asia

Before the conference took place, brisk diplomatic moves were underway in Istanbul and London to garner the support of important players such as China, Turkey, Iran and Russia.

It was realised that Pakistan was the key player in any peace deal in Afghanistan. It dawned upon the American and the British - the two major powers involved in fighting the Taliban - that only military action would not do. In recent years, the Taliban, who are almost all from the Pukhtun ethnic group, have expanded their influence outside the traditional Pukhtun strongholds of eastern and southern Afghanistan. They are reportedly present in almost all parts of the country, though it does not mean they exercise real power in them.

The US and Allied Forces troop surge that is to bring more than 35,000 soldiers has been qualified by President Barack Obama's statement that the US will start pulling back its troops from the summer of 2011. US top commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, remarked recently that, as a soldier, he felt that it was time to find another way of dealing with the insurgency in Afghanistan. The idea is that by mid-2011, the Afghan military and security forces should be large enough and trained properly to take over the responsibilities of maintaining the peace, and law and order.

In any event, hectic consultations with President Hamid Karzai and other leaders had convinced the West that it was possible to strike a deal with sections of the Taliban who were not hardcore ideological fanatics.

The general understanding is that it is a major victory for Pakistan, as its point of view that not all Taliban were bad was accepted. Equally, it has been seen as a major setback to India, which had insisted all along that the Taliban as a whole had to be defeated because they were committed to an ideology that was rabidly militaristic and expansionist, and any concession to them would gravely threaten India's security.

Such India-Pakistan sabre rattling in Afghanistan is symptomatic of their zero-sum postures on almost all security matters. The reality, however, is always more complicated and complex. Now, doubts are being expressed about the wisdom of such optimism about striking a deal with the Taliban. The Taliban have not responded to President Karzai's invitation to Taliban leaders to attend the traditional consultative assembly, the Loya Jirga.

Mr Karzai is travelling to Saudi Arabia to seek its influence in convincing the Taliban to attend the Loya Jirga. The Saudis are reportedly making it conditional to the Taliban openly declaring that they will part company with Al-Qaeda.

Pakistan's Chief of Army Staff, General Ashfaq Pervaiz Kayani, has stated: 'Pakistan doesn't want a 'talibanised' Pakistan'. Elaborating that point, he said that Pakistan did not want for Afghanistan what it did not want for itself.

Further, he stated that his country had no intention of controlling Afghanistan. He offered Pakistan's assistance and help in training the Afghan military. He also made the important point that Pakistan's geostrategic location continues to be relevant in the post-Cold War and post-9/11 periods. He urged Nato to fully appreciate that objective reality.

Wahid Mujdah, a writer who served in the Afghan Foreign Ministry under the Taliban, has expressed his scepticism in the following words: 'These efforts will not bear fruit. I do not see any change, because the Taliban are abiding by their old stance and I cannot see anything new on the part of Karzai either.'

Another voice of doubt is that of Daniel Korski of the European Council on Foreign Relation. 'Expectations stirred in London of a quick breakthrough in talks with senior militants are too rosy. The London conference was almost delusional in its optimism. Let's reject the idea that negotiations will happen according to a timetable that we find convenient. Let's reject the idea that 2010 is a make-or-break year. If the West and Karzai want the Taliban to negotiate, they will first need to score victories on the battlefield, improve the capabilities of the Afghan government and to weaken Taliban unity with well-run reintegration programmes.'

At any rate, Pakistan has demonstrated that it can defeat the Taliban terrorists and put them on the run. The Taliban have been expelled from Swat and South Waziristan. Since May 2009, Gen Kayani has been demonstrating an unwavering resolve to defeat the Therik-e-Taliban Pakistan.

The Pakistan military fought pitched battles with the Taliban. The latter retaliated with vicious suicide bombings and other acts of terror that claimed 3,021 lives and caused injury to 7,334 people last year. The fact remains that the Pakistan military would never allow the Taliban to capture power in Pakistan.

Gen McChrystal admitted some weeks earlier that the trust deficit between the US and Pakistan had begun to diminish. It is also commonsense to recognise that breaking the power of the Taliban in Afghanistan can be more successful if Pakistan's interests in Afghanistan are properly recognised. It remains the paramount power in south-west Asia.

Mr Obama has given Pakistan an additional US$500 million in military aid. This despite the fact that Pakistani Army spokesman Athar Abbas announced some days ago that they will be on a major offensive for the next 6-12 months. Gen Kayani also demonstrated another resolution that he adhered to with great consistency - to let the political process in Pakistan take its natural course.

Sensational media reports and conspiracy theorists predicted a military coup that never took place. Under the circumstances, the point seems to be that a strong military in Pakistan does not preclude per definition a civilian and democratic government.

It is, of course, too soon to jump to any conclusions. The military is and will remain the most powerful institution in Pakistan - for both bad and good.

India has started to recover from the shock that its standpoint on the Taliban was ignored at the London Conference. 'World Rejects India's stand' wrote Ashis Ray of the Times of India. Foreign Minister SM Krishna issued a statement that his country can do business with the Taliban provided they fulfil three preconditions: acceptance of the Afghan constitution, severing connections with Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups, and renunciation of violence.

'If the Taliban are accepted in the mainstream of Afghan politics and society, we could do business,' asserted Mr Krishna.

Mr Karzai has all along been very appreciative of India's help and assistance and India enjoyed considerable goodwill among the Northern Alliance old guard. Now, if the moderate Taliban return to the mainstream and are accommodated in the government, it will mean reduced stature for India in Afghanistan.

It is the duty of the West to stay on as long as is needed to capture or eliminate Al-Qaeda and the hardcore Taliban leadership. Most Talibans would abandon their leaders and ideology only when it is demonstrated to them that they have no chance of prevailing in Afghanistan militarily. A premature exit could mean chaos and civil war in Afghanistan that can destabilise not only Pakistan but also India.

The 35,000-plus troop surge will have to be used to inflict severe punishment and defeat on the Al-Qaeda and Taliban leadership. If that is not achieved, then the rational basis for beginning the troop pullout will be undermined. It is also important that India and Pakistan show maturity and vision.

It should be perfectly possible to accommodate India's continuing participation in the reconstruction and developmental projects while Pakistan takes care of training the Afghan military. Pakistan's centrality to facilitating peace and stability in Afghanistan need not be over-emphasised.

A division of tasks between India and Pakistan would in no way hurt their vital interests in Afghanistan. They may also learn the vital lesson that they gain more from cooperation than confrontation.

The writer is a visiting research professor at the Institute of South Asian Studies, an autonomous research institute at the National University of Singapore

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 23 Feb 2010 11:38

^^^ A Daniel Korski article.

sum · Post by **sum** » 23 Feb 2010 11:38

negi wrote:
Suppiah wrote:I think it is silly to presume that there NO covert action going on...our top level babus may be SDREs but they are sometimes smart Chanakyans. Only there is no 'visible' and high profile success a.la Mossad. Perhaps that is deliberate or perhaps the key ones are too well protected. I think it is the former - India is a little bit MORE concerned about deniability than TSP. So actions are mostly perhaps in encouraging local elements and not direct hits. Furthermore, India has to rely on professional ranks, not religious zealots who work on different considerations.

This post will make Rehman Malik proud , perhaps Chooha qureshi can quote this in upcoming talks.

Negi-saar,
what was wrong with the post?

sum · Post by **sum** » 23 Feb 2010 11:41

While Indians in their drawing rooms have been wringing their hands over Kashmir infiltration for twenty years, the military have occupied part of the Neelum Valley area, the Indian army operates west of the LOC, assassination teams are operating with near impunity in Pakistan/POK. Bodies of Pakistanis are sent back by the Jhelum Express.

Was this sarcasm or true ( esp bolded part)?

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 23 Feb 2010 12:08

The London meet and its euphoria is but a pipedream.

Each Muslim thinks he is a Kalifa and they can never come to any common goal. In Afghanistan, the Shia North will not allow Sunni South dominance. In Pakistan, the Talibanis will not give up what they know best - insurgency since it is not a cause, but a profession and an easy way to keep their hearth and home fires burning with the extortion and such like.

A long haul!

India should encourage the Balochis, the Shias of Gilgit, the Mohajirs in Sindh and then sit back and watch the 4th of July fireworks!

However, to have that, there has to be political will in India. Do we have it in our Govt and PM?

negi · Post by **negi** » 23 Feb 2010 12:09

sum wrote: what was wrong with the post?

It is a figment of imagination pretty much fueled by the same stuff as used by the likes of Zaid Hamid and Rehman . Btw if covert ops do exist then they there is all the more reason to to be concerned for they eFFin don't work.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 23 Feb 2010 12:14

India occupied part of the Neelum Valley in 1991 that I am aware of, there may be other areas it controls. Shireen Mazari has written about this briefy. Also there is some evidence that the Pak X corps was involved in this, confirming that Indi adid some very aggressive action there.

arun · Post by **arun** » 23 Feb 2010 12:27

Exit controls in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, at least those that permit an entry into India, look rather poor.

Though clearly poor that might be a state of affairs that is to the Islamic Republic’s liking as it permits Islamic Jihadi terrorists to infiltrate into India while preserving for the Islamic Republic a veneer of plausible deniability:

Pak boy takes train to India, lands in diplomatic row

sum · Post by **sum** » 23 Feb 2010 12:30

sanjaykumar wrote:India occupied part of the Neelum Valley in 1991 that I am aware of, there may be other areas it controls. Shireen Mazari has written about this briefy. Also there is some evidence that the Pak X corps was involved in this, confirming that Indi adid some very aggressive action there.

Thanks for that...Point to remember is the leadership at that time and now.

What about:

assassination teams are operating with near impunity in Pakistan/POK

Any nuggets about this since all possible pigs are merrily doing R&R in Pak with us only impotently bleating to GoP to hand them over?

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 23 Feb 2010 12:35

Piss-hour gets it this time...not sure if small pataka or big one..

http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/daw ... irts-qs-02

Pulikeshi · Post by **Pulikeshi** » 23 Feb 2010 13:00

Gagan wrote: DON'T EXPECT ANYTHING DRAMATIC TO HAPPEN AT INDIA'S INITIATIVE.

My personal opinion is that:
1. With time US's support to Pakistan will only increase, not decrease. The US is not leaving afghanistan. Pakistan's military spending is being nearly completely subsidized by its 1+2.5 friends, its economy might totter at the brink but will NOT be allowed to fall over.
2. The international community will frown at any changing of borders done unilaterally. So attacking pakistan to liberate POK is not on the table.
3. Pakistan does not have the military muscle to do another 47 or 65. It does not have the inclination in current times to do a kargil presently. (even with Kargil, musharraf's aims were modest - Apart from the 'walk into siachen' taking over the valley was not envisaged as fesable. No possibility of that being attempted in the near future)
4. We can't do a 71 on balochistan, not with the current military strength, and the current leadership.
5. All this essentially means that India is not going to war with Pakistan in the near future at all. What India can and will do is to make things very difficult for the pakistani army.
6. Hafiz-e-pig is jumping up and down, he is getting too prominent for his own good. Limelight is never good for those with shady characters.

More on this a little later. Please give your opinions.

Spot on! India seems to be reacting to external stimulus as usual...
Democracies by their very nature hedge risk. India, in this aspect is an extreme example of democracies
being risk averse - perhaps culture - but this is an import aspect to consider.

What is missing from the discussion (at least in open forum) is the cost to each option:

1. Keep Pakistan intact - India has to spend Rs. XX to maintain higher internal security (Brijesh Mishra any guesses?), Loss of World Cup (Rs. YY), Business impact (Rs. ZZ), Belt tightening (Rs. PP), etc.

2. Destroy Pakistan - India fights a nooklear war (Kgoan's War!

) and has to spend Rs. AA for the war effort and Rs. BB for rebuilding TSP in its own image, etc.

3. Create a loose confederacy of states - India severs Pakistan and creates Sindh, Baloch, Pasthunistan and a tiny Pakjabistan. This costs India Rs. DD, etc.

4. India twiddles around and waits for Pakistan to collapse - India has built a great economy, its now five years down the road. India chose to forego any of above options desiring peace and economic muscle building. Now with a collapsed Pakistan, it must spend Rs. EE to keep some sense of sanity on its Western front.

5. Other options as well...

Notice a few options have been presented based on my simple mind.
These could certainly refined and developed into a policy document.

Specific questions such as asking do we have adequate military, economic etc. strength for some butt
kicking can only come after these options have been laid out.
The irony is that, as "banias", does not seem like a good job is being done to lay out the options/costs.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 23 Feb 2010 13:20

Iran arrests Jundallah chief Abdolmalek Rigi

http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/daw ... sted-qs-01

An Iranian lawmaker said on Tuesday that top Sunni militant Abdolmalek Rigi was arrested while travelling on a flight heading to an Arab country via Pakistan.

“Rigi was arrested in Persian Gulf waters while he was travelling on a plane via Pakistan to an Arab country,” Mohammad Dehghan was quoted as saying by the official IRNA news agency.

“His plane was ordered to land, and then he was arrested after the plane was searched,” the lawmaker said without elaborating.

Pakis cooperate with Iran!

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 23 Feb 2010 13:39

Gentlemen,we should not be shocked at the US wanting to "talk" to the Taliban,they've done it before when the Taliban were in control of Afghanistan.The Taliban went to Texas to talk to US oilmen about routing Central Asian oil through Af-Pak into the Arabian Sea.Right now the massive Kashgan oilfeld in the Casspian Sea is trapped (the US has invested $150 billion+!) no route out unless the US sends it through Russia,which the US establishment will never do.Therrefore the only other way is through Af-Pak.Hence the battle for South Afghanistan.Having failed in defetaing the Taliban,the game has swung back to bribing them.Some US anlaysts are now turning back to the Russian strategy where they had some military success during their sojourn there until the Stingers arrived.

Therefore let us not fool ourselves as to our importance in the US's scheme of things.We are a troublesome nation of nuisance value to the US that must be neutralised .Why? It is because we are not willing to put up with Pak's outrageous demands to hand over Kashmir to them on a platter and if pushed too far will dismember Pak yet again, this time into even smaller pieces.This will put paid to the US's entire scheme of things.As oil prices rise,the squeeze on it to get the Caspian oil out increases.The Paki military and civilian establishment are being used by the US to defeat only "anti-US" Islamist forces,not "anti-Indian" Islamist forces.In fact,the US is secretly delighted that India is being kept off balance and its attention diverted by the Pakis and their terror catspaws.As long as the Paki uniformed forces kowtow to US diktat,India will have to "grin and bear it".We will be constantly and continuously subjected to Paki terror.DEstabilising India and its rgeat hopeof destroying us is the raison-d'etre of the Paki state.

Therefore,India has to re-examine its failed strategy of the last two decades.We have tried peace,with IKG,ABV,and now MMS,the good doctor of spin.Every genuine attempt by India failed.The Pakis demanded too much (say we) and we delivered too little (say they).We have even gone as far as forgoing our parliamentary resolution which has said that the whole of Kashmir,including POK belongs to India,by relaxing cross-border travel between the Kashmiris on both sidess,while Paki cross-border terror continues unabated!What are our options then? Let's take a look.

"War is politics by other means",said Clausewitz,therefore,what is our ultimate political objective with regard to neighbour Pak? Neutralising Pak permanently as an entity that can wage war against India would be my objective.

Option1:Ideally,we would like to have a friendly democratically elected civilian govt in place,like that right now in B'Desh,which cooperates with India on security matters.But the Paki military will not hand over real control of power,the control of their nukes and the US wants it that way.That being ruled out.

Option 2: Wage war and grab back POK,dismember Pak into little pieces,,etc.etc.Wonderful if this miracle could take place,but it requires India to have a 3-1 military superiority,both nculear and conventional.In addition,facing the prospect of catastrophic defeat,a mad lunatic might want to let loose a few nukes in our direction.We would also suffer from even a conventionalw ar as the Paki war amchine,high on military steroids courtesy the US and China,can cause significant damage to India's economy.

3.Get the US of other friendly nations,the UN,etc.,to control Pak.
Ha!Ha!Ha!

4.Batten hatches and wait for Pak to collapse.This is the easiest way out,but Pak will still be kept on life-support by China and the US.Inaction by India will only prlong the agony.At some point in time,the "tooth must out"!

5.Plan for the dismemberment of Pak by covert means ,also using diplomatic sanctions.
This has merit.We first ostracise Pak diplomatically,cutting off ALL ties with it.No more sporting ties,cultural ties,intellectual visits,visitors,etc.,etc. on Indian soil.If Indians and Pakis want to fornicate with each other abroad,by all means let them do so.But Indian soil must be taboo to evey Paki as long as Paki soil is used for terror against India.
Simultaneously,we must begin covert ops to widn the ethnic fissures in Pak,not a too difficult job right now.In fact,the only civilising entity in Pak is actually India.I say this becasue Bollywood and Indian sportsmen,cultural superstars give the Pakis a dream of a civilised existence,which their own state cannot provide,hence the popularity of everything Indian.Deprived of Indian cultural and sporting sustenance,the Pakis will then have no other entertainment but to slaughter themselves and some of them are doing a very good job at that! While they feed upon themselves,we sanitise the border massively,just as the Israelis have done with their wall-separating Israelis and Palestinians,and in a concerted urgent drive,boost the might of our armed forces dependign NOT upon suspect suppliers and pro-Paki entities like the US,but with trusted old friends like Russia,Israel and other independent EU and developing nations like S.Africa,Brazil,etc.,who also feel threatened by Islamist extremism and the Paki nation being its global HQ.Should the Pakis then make yet another mistake of attacking India to divert their people's atention from the disaster at home,then we will be in a very strong position to defeat them defensively,or deal them another crippling blow as was done in '71.There are several ways in which we can inflict massive damage to the Paki war machine without the nuclear threshold being crossed.

In simple English,our motto should be,
"Either Pakistan changes,or we must change Pakistan".

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 23 Feb 2010 14:07

Looks like MMS needs to be supported.

We need to avert terror attacks and buy time

"There is the possibility of terrorist attacks on India and we need to prevent it by all means available to us," said Subrahmanyam. "I don't know why the government has proposed the resumption of talks with Pakistan, but all I can say is that I envisage that it could be a tactical move by India. We need to avert terror attacks and buy time."

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 23 Feb 2010 14:14

Just spent time listening to the audio of this Rashid discussion at CFR...got interested because just read his book 'Descent into Chaos' primarily to kill a 4 hr flight....he made a lot of sense today..

There was an American guy in that but he was mostly talking crap so let us skip that...but he was strongly against any bargain with Taliban until Us gains position of strength..

Key highlights of Rashid's comments FWIW...not exact words 100% but should be fairly representative...

1. President Karzai and even the Taliban are tired of the manipulation faced under Pakistan..want to strike out on their own and want to have their own dialogue..it is a very very complex situation....
US military believes they cannot win this war..
2. Mullah B met with Karzai admin people in KSA. These are feelers, not negotiations..his arrest has tainted him now..
Pakistan should facilitate and help the mediation between Taliban & Afghan govt if it tries to play a role over the top, and IT WILL, it wants India eliminated, I think it will antagonise the whole region. India will NOT accept a central role for Pak, Iran, Russia, CA states will not accept. US may accept but not the REGION. We may then face another HUGE problem in the region...
3. Militiary regards Afghan Taliban as asset, not danger. They have carved out Kashmir and Afghan policy for themselves..in general foreign affairs
4. PPP remains only national party in the country others regional/ethnic even Nawaz Sharif is Punjabi party very little loyalty in other provinces..army cannot finish them off because what is left is far more fragmented...no one else could have stitched together this coalition not NS..no one wants the army back..all parties..America cannot like in past, deal with military just because it is convenient for them..
5. Pakistan has done no such thing (dismantling terrorist infra), yet Indians have come back..water issue more critical than Kashmir...basically we need new agreement.
6. Taliban itself is watering down somewhat even on women's education. AT much different from PT - they are not fighting to put women back in burqa etc., but for patriotic reasons. wrong perception in region Americans will leave in 18 months..AT are very tired. For them this is 30 year war...AT they are fed up with war..fed up of militirasation they have to undergo Pakistan..Arab, Iran manipulate them...they are fed up..they cannot take cities..families of top leadership living outside Afghan eminently hostage-able...to these manipulators..
7. What the Afghan Taliban see in Karzai...yes, he is corrupt, stooge etc. but cementation of Pashtun hegemony, non-Pashtun are common enemy.. non Pashtuns are arming, not in favor of dialogue..they will sit and talk as two Pashtuns how do we reestablish Pashtun rule...
8. Civilian military chasm getting wider. TSPA is more concerned about India - civilians are about their life, economy, fed up with India bogey, it does not mobilise people in any number, even in Punjab province, etc., vital US stays engaged with civilian govt..no matter how pathetic or ineffective.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 23 Feb 2010 14:42

abhishek_sharma wrote:Iran arrests Jundallah chief Abdolmalek Rigi

http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/daw ... sted-qs-01

An Iranian lawmaker said on Tuesday that top Sunni militant Abdolmalek Rigi was arrested while travelling on a flight heading to an Arab country via Pakistan.

“Rigi was arrested in Persian Gulf waters while he was travelling on a plane via Pakistan to an Arab country,” Mohammad Dehghan was quoted as saying by the official IRNA news agency.

“His plane was ordered to land, and then he was arrested after the plane was searched,” the lawmaker said without elaborating.
Pakis cooperate with Iran!

This is very big news. Either Iran was able to track him down or TSP gave him up without US permission.

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 23 Feb 2010 14:45

abhishek_sharma wrote:Iran arrests Jundallah chief Abdolmalek Rigi

Pakis cooperate with Iran!

The last time I checked Google maps, Arabia is closer to Iran, so no need to fly via Pakbarianistan. Why did he do so - because his 'handlers' are there to facilitate matters..

Which means, two possibilities:

TSPA/ISI was in cahoots with Rigi and he got sold off by ISI to win some points with Iran...which is going to make lots of Sunni Abduls very happy because they can attain matyrdom blowing themselves up all over Shias in TSP...

TSPA/ISI was facilitating his movement in and out, but somehow Iranians knew about it and arrested them...which is going to do wonders to Iran-TSP relationship..

Both ways I see no particular benefit to TSPA...

Edited later: Shyamd our posts seem to cross each other perfect timing..

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 23 Feb 2010 14:57

^^

Pakistan extradites Jundallah terrorists to Iran

Pakistani security forces have captured several members of the Jundallah terrorist group and handed them over to Iranian authorities.

During a meeting with Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki on Sunday, visiting Pakistani National Assembly Speaker Fahmida Mirza said that a number of Jundallah militants have been arrested and extradited to Iran.

She went on to say that Pakistani security personnel are making serious efforts to apprehend the Jundallah members still at large.

Jundallah is a Pakistan-based terrorist group comprised of members of the Baluchi ethnic group.

It has been reported that Jundallah is closely affiliated with the al-Qaeda network.

Since 2003, Jundallah members have carried out over 50 terrorist operations in Iran.

The government of Iran has accused them of mass murder, armed robbery, kidnapping, carrying out bombings targeting civilians and government officials, and acts of sabotage.

Abdolmalek Rigi is the leader of the terrorist group.

In their latest attack, which occurred on October 18, more than 40 Iranians, among them 15 members of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC), lost their lives when Jundallah terrorists carried out an operation in the border region of Pishin, which is located in Iran's southeastern province of Sistan-Baluchestan.

Shia and Sunni tribal leaders were also among the victims of the attack.

During his meeting with the Pakistani parliament speaker, the Iranian foreign minister said Tehran and Islamabad play significant roles in regional developments.

The two countries should endeavor to expand their strategic cooperation since there is ample potential to this end, he added.

Rigi and Jundallah were the creation of CIA, ISI funded by KSA. Something is happening, have relations with KSA soured for some reason? The taliban guys arrested are KSA GID links for negotiations. Now KSA just lost an asset against Tehran.

Abdolmalek Rigi, who heads Jundallah (Soldiers of God), was taken into custody in eastern Iran while he was en route from the United Arab Emirates to Kyrgyzstan, Press TV reported.

Al Qods forces have been active in Af-Pak region, and wanted to take on Jundallah in Balochistan. Looks like Iran was able to bear enough covert pressure against islamabad imo. Wonder what will happen to Indo-Iranian intel co-operation now. If Jundallah is being ripped apart, then Iran now has no reason to cooperate with Yindu's on counter terror. Iranian-Pak border is re-opening.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 23 Feb 2010 15:01

Pakistani Foreign Minister on the Sikh's beheading

Asked whether Pakistan would step up security for Sikhs and other minorities in view of the incident, Qureshi said Pakistan has always gone out of its way to welcome Sikhs.

“We will do whatever we can for their security and want them to visit Pakistan,” he said.

“We understand that they have some interests in Pakistan because the religious holy sites we have. Because of that they love to come to Pakistan.

“They speak the same language and are good friends. We have lot of commonality. We try to improve facilities to facilitate them and improve the conditions of the sites,” the Foreign Minister said.

What a load of cr@p is this FM of Pakistan. The unfortunate Sikh who was beheaded was a Pakistani national, not a visitor from outside.

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 23 Feb 2010 15:06

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=11 ... =351020101

Yet another report from same source...everyone knows Pakbarians very well...down to the smallest prosecutor in a small Iranian town..

According to Abdolhamid, the Pakistani government was well aware of the whereabouts of the Jundallah terror group.

"It is impossible to believe that Pakistan is unaware of Jundallah's presence on its soil," he said. "Pakistan is a perfect haven for Jundallah."

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 23 Feb 2010 15:28

What is the height of optimism - TSP imposing 'CAPITAL GAINS' tax on share market gains..

http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/daw ... -320-za-02

Isn't it UnIslamic to make profit from shares? Hope TTP is aware of this...

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 23 Feb 2010 17:38

Since we are discussing covert action in Pakiland, here is an interesting Stratfor piece entitled "The Utility of Assassination": http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20100222 ... c553c8b59b

The main point being made is that when there is a broad movement (like the Jihadist mindset in Pakiland), assassinating someone may be of limited utility. Because the target may be replaced by someone equally rabid.

IMHO, the main goal should be the penetration of Paki Jihadist gangs (including the Paki army). Assassination is only one of the means to this end. Assassination has to be coupled with infiltration, and establishment of relations with second, third level leaders, through monetary inducements or otherwise. Consider how Lal Bahadur Shastri was assassinated in the Soviet Union, which led to Indira Gandhi becoming the PM, who then, despite being nationalistic in her own corrupt way, remained very close to the Soviets.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 23 Feb 2010 18:09

deleted - copyright

Malayappan · Post by **Malayappan** » 23 Feb 2010 18:51

What is going on here? I recommend reading this in full, for whatever that is worth. Could be PsyOps, but to me it is probable that there will be 'some' truths buried inside. But which of these are truths and which are psy ops? Since I cannot make any sense on this count, I dare not post excerpts. Worth reading in full - if someone can make sense of what is happening....
Cross-border militants strike back by SSS. And it is not just about those blasts in Mingora...

Rangudu · Post by **Rangudu** » 23 Feb 2010 18:56

SSS is a tool of the TSPA jihadi establishment to leak stories that support their tactics of the day. He is also used by TSPA/ISI to talk in a language that they cannot do so publicly. Read his pieces after 26/11 or after other major events.

Malayappan · Post by **Malayappan** » 23 Feb 2010 19:03

Rangudu,

Indeed, but even from that pov, I keep wondering why he could be saying (or they through him could be saying) these things. There seems to be an attempt to show that paki army or at least parts of it are sincere, but then Kayani still did a double cross. Some are angry, but paki army still needed to do that. Even if true, why say it like this? They cannot be trying to convince the taliban. And the Americans will not need this information from SSS or ATWOL. And will all of it be false?