Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 2011
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
http://www.ziyaraat.net/books/Reconstru ... hought.pdf
The Reconstruction of Religious
Thought in Islam
by
Dr. Muhammad Iqbal
All the index looks like a south asia religion
Preface
Knowledge and Religious Experience
The Philosophical Test of the Revelations of Religious Experience
The Conception of God and the Meaning of Prayer
The Human Ego - His Freedom and Immortality
The Spirit of Muslim Culture
The Principle of Movement in the Structure of Islam
Is Religion Possible?
Notes and References
Bibliography
Index
The Reconstruction of Religious
Thought in Islam
by
Dr. Muhammad Iqbal
All the index looks like a south asia religion
Preface
Knowledge and Religious Experience
The Philosophical Test of the Revelations of Religious Experience
The Conception of God and the Meaning of Prayer
The Human Ego - His Freedom and Immortality
The Spirit of Muslim Culture
The Principle of Movement in the Structure of Islam
Is Religion Possible?
Notes and References
Bibliography
Index
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Io9ab3T4 ... detailpage
I think i should have posted in the benis thread but, thought i relieve the tension, here first.
saas dhamki devai, obama chutki devai, sasural genda phool
mulan gaali devai, drone jaan levai, sasural genda phool
sleeping suit pehne, khai ki mang naan
sab damadon se alag hai, karzai gi ki shaan,
saas gali, devai, drone jaan leveai, Bharat maza levai,
sasural genda phool.
I think i should have posted in the benis thread but, thought i relieve the tension, here first.
saas dhamki devai, obama chutki devai, sasural genda phool
mulan gaali devai, drone jaan levai, sasural genda phool
sleeping suit pehne, khai ki mang naan
sab damadon se alag hai, karzai gi ki shaan,
saas gali, devai, drone jaan leveai, Bharat maza levai,
sasural genda phool.

Last edited by menon s on 30 Oct 2011 08:30, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Pakistan: Reversing the Lens
by Conn Hallinan, October 29, 2011
| Print This | Share This | Antiwar Forum
Since the United States invaded Afghanistan in October 2001, Pakistan has lost more than 35,000 people, the vast bulk of them civilians. While the U.S. has had slightly over 1800 soldiers killed in the past 10 years, Pakistan has lost over 5,000 soldiers and police. The number of suicide bombings in Pakistan has gone from one before 2001, to more than 335 since.
"Terrorism," as Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari says, "is not a statistic for us."
For most Americans, Pakistan is a two-faced "ally" playing a double game in Central Asia even as it siphons off tens of billions of dollars in aid. For Pakistanis, the spillover from the Afghan war has cost Islamabad approximately of $100 billion. And this in a country with a yearly GDP of around $175 billion and whose resources have been deeply strained by two years of catastrophic flooding.
Washington complains that its $20.7 billion in aid over the past nine years has bought it very little in the way of loyalty from Islamabad, while Pakistan points out that U.S. aid makes up less than 0.3 percent of Pakistan’s yearly GDP.
Both countries’ opinions of one another are almost mirror images. According to a U.S. poll, 74 percent of Americans do not consider Pakistan to be an ally, while the Pew Research Center found that six in 10 Pakistanis consider the Americans an "enemy" and only 12 percent have a favorable view of the United States.
http://original.antiwar.com/hallinan/20 ... -the-lens/
by Conn Hallinan, October 29, 2011
| Print This | Share This | Antiwar Forum
Since the United States invaded Afghanistan in October 2001, Pakistan has lost more than 35,000 people, the vast bulk of them civilians. While the U.S. has had slightly over 1800 soldiers killed in the past 10 years, Pakistan has lost over 5,000 soldiers and police. The number of suicide bombings in Pakistan has gone from one before 2001, to more than 335 since.
"Terrorism," as Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari says, "is not a statistic for us."
For most Americans, Pakistan is a two-faced "ally" playing a double game in Central Asia even as it siphons off tens of billions of dollars in aid. For Pakistanis, the spillover from the Afghan war has cost Islamabad approximately of $100 billion. And this in a country with a yearly GDP of around $175 billion and whose resources have been deeply strained by two years of catastrophic flooding.
Washington complains that its $20.7 billion in aid over the past nine years has bought it very little in the way of loyalty from Islamabad, while Pakistan points out that U.S. aid makes up less than 0.3 percent of Pakistan’s yearly GDP.
Both countries’ opinions of one another are almost mirror images. According to a U.S. poll, 74 percent of Americans do not consider Pakistan to be an ally, while the Pew Research Center found that six in 10 Pakistanis consider the Americans an "enemy" and only 12 percent have a favorable view of the United States.
http://original.antiwar.com/hallinan/20 ... -the-lens/
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Pakistan's radical reputation
By Daud Khattak Friday, October 28, 2011 - 3:05 PM Share
http://afpak.foreignpolicy.com/posts/20 ... reputation
Intolerant, fundamentalist and extremist. This is the general impression of Pakistani society in the world outside Pakistan, though a deeper look would lead the observer to discover another layer - altogether different than the one visible from Europe and America. Following the Urdu-language Pakistani media, one is easily brought to the conclusion that there exists widespread radicalism and fundamentalism among Pakistanis. The television anchors and their repetition of ‘national interests' aside, the key question is: Is the Pakistani society really extremist? A cursory look at the events of the past few years can tell the answer.
Following the highly-rigged general elections in 2002 in favor of the now defunct religious alliance, Muttahidda Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), Pakistan's religious parties looked poised to assert their newfound power in the country. But just six years later, in the February 2008 general election, Pakistanis overwhelmingly supported secular political parties such as the ruling Pakistan People's Party (PPP) and the Awami National Party (ANP), while the religious parties managed to retain only seven seats in the country's National Assembly. The religious parties and their affiliates also failed on several occasions to start a political movement by using issues such as the jailing of Pakistani doctor Aafia Siddiqui, the US drone strikes in Pakistan's tribal northwest, the Raymond Davis episode, or the U.S. Special Forces raid in Abbottabad and killing of al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden.
Pakistan's security establishment also contributes to the West's fundamentalist and extremist image of Pakistani society. Over the years, the Pakistani state has supported the armies of Kashmir-focused jihadists in order to gain leverage over its more powerful and several-times-larger rival India, as well maintain a Pakistan-friendly government in neighboring Afghanistan. To achieve these goals, the establishment willfully encouraged a number of elements within its own borders, ranging from pro-jihadist religious parties to extremist literature in schools, colleges and universities, in order to generate support for the jihadist cause.
Within Pakistan, the armed forces are often presented as heroes and the true custodians of Pakistan's ideological and geographical frontiers, while the liberal political forces are labeled (albeit with some truth) as vested interests, too corrupt and inefficient to run the country and ensure its defense. Pakistani youth are flooded with hardliner propaganda and find attraction in extremist views because of the stance of the esteemed military, the jihadist literature in classrooms, government-controlled electronic media, and a state policy of encouraging certain jihadist organizations.
This policy approach, although it dates back to the creation of Pakistan, was institutionalized during the 10 years of military rule under the dictator General Zia ul-Haq, who championed jihad and the Islamization of society. The majority of the secular leaders at that time were either won over one way or another, forced to keep silent, or pushed into exile, thus leaving room for the fundamentalists to come forward and "purify" the society by holding mass gatherings in cities, speaking on the official electronic media, becoming involved in educational institutions and spreading jihadist literature. Zia and his rightist support base thus maneuvered hard, and the ultimate result was the emergence of a hardliner approach among the upper layer of the Pakistani society to Muslim causes - be it Kashmir, Afghanistan, Palestine, Bosnia, Chechnya, Kosovo or any other place in the world. The support for extremists and jihadists did not end with the death of Gen. Zia. Elements in The state security apparatus continued the same policies, eventually resulting in the emergence of the Taliban in Afghanistan who converted areas of the country into a safe haven for extremists and jihadists all over the world.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Presumably these 12 percent have immigration or visa or green card applications currently pending for processing.Acharya wrote: Both countries’ opinions of one another are almost mirror images. According to a U.S. poll, 74 percent of Americans do not consider Pakistan to be an ally, while the Pew Research Center found that six in 10 Pakistanis consider the Americans an "enemy" and only 12 percent have a favorable view of the United States.
http://original.antiwar.com/hallinan/20 ... -the-lens/

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
'Pakistan will act against terrorist safe havens'
By AFP
Published: October 29, 2011
http://tribune.com.pk/story/284631/paki ... fe-havens/
Lieutenant General Asif Yasin Malik says his troops would not leave the area until complete security had been ensured. PHOTO: APP/FILE
PESHAWAR: Pakistan’s top military commander fighting militants in the northwest Saturday said Pakistan will act against terrorist safe havens and urged NATO and Afghanistan to do the same.
Lieutenant General Asif Yasin Malik, who is supervising military operations in the northwestern province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, told reporters that his troops would not leave the area until complete security had been ensured.
“We will take action against the terrorists in our area and NATO and Afghanistan should also take action against them (terrorists) in their area across the border,” he said.
Malik was speaking during a visit to the development projects started by Pakistan army in the Kotkai area of South Waziristan tribal district on the Afghan border, where the military launched a ground offensive two years ago.
“Pakistan will not tolerate any infiltration in its area. The Afghan government and NATO should not allow terrorists’ safe havens in Afghan provinces along the Pakistan border,” he said.
“Our troops will stay here until complete security is ensured in this area, the Pakistan army is not going back from the tribal regions,” Malik said,
Militants are dug in on both sides of the border, and last week the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called on Pakistan to do more to squeeze militant safe havens in its territory, notably those of the Haqqani network.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Drone strikes are “unjustified”: KharAPP Yesterday
http://www.dawn.com/2011/10/29/drone-st ... -khar.html
Foreign Minister of Pakistan, Hina Rabbani Khar – AP Photo
PERTH: Pakistan on Saturday termed the US drone attacks inside its territory as “unjustified” saying these were counterproductive and decreased space for creating support against extremists.
http://www.dawn.com/2011/10/29/drone-st ... -khar.html
Foreign Minister of Pakistan, Hina Rabbani Khar – AP Photo
PERTH: Pakistan on Saturday termed the US drone attacks inside its territory as “unjustified” saying these were counterproductive and decreased space for creating support against extremists.
The Foreign Minister in her lecture at the Centre for Muslim States and Societies of the University covered wide ranging issues – including role of women in all spheres of life in Pakistan and the challenges it was confronting, particularly in the wake of the ongoing war in Afghanistan and its fallout on Pakistan.
She said Pakistan’s biggest foreign policy objective was peace and stability in its neighbourhood.
Talking about Pakistan’s role in Afghanistan, she said it has “gigantic” interests in its strife torn neighbour and wants to ensure it stays secure and stable as it is in the vital interest of Pakistan.
Khar termed economic issues as the second and essentially linked most serious internal challenges confronting the country.
She termed the death of Professor Burhanuddin Rabbani as most damaging for the Pakistan and Afghanistan relations and termed it a “death blow to the peace process.
She said blaming Pakistan was just complicating the matters.
She however hoped that President Asif Ali Zardari in his forthcoming meeting with President Hamid Karzai in Turkey would be able to clear up the misperceptions.
Ms Khar however was very clear that Pakistan does not want to see any chaos in Afghanistan post 2014.
“That is too horrific a scenario to imagine with grave implications not only for Afghanistan, but also for Pakistan and the region as a whole.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20

Fatima Bhutto slams Hina Rabbani Khar
Published: October 5, 2011
http://tribune.com.pk/story/267597/fati ... bani-khar/
Bhutto says she is not concerned with Khar’s age or gender, what matters for her is Khar’s work.
Fatima Bhutto, granddaughter of former prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto criticized Hina Rabbani Khar for toeing the line in her new role as Pakistan’s foreign minister.
Bhutto told Deutsche Welle in an interview that she was not concerned with Khar’s age or gender — what mattered for her was Khar’s work.
“What is sad about the political culture of Pakistan is that we don’t talk about ideas, we just talk about people. Gender is never a substitute for ethics or justice… I don’t care whether she is young or old, or a woman. I want to know what she is saying. And what she is saying seems to be exactly the same thing that people have been saying before for the last 30 years,” Deutsche Welle quoted Bhutto.
Answering a question about Khar being a part of the small elite that rules Pakistan, Bhutto said that if democratic institutions are not strengthened, dynasties that have ruled Pakistan in the past will supersede the democratic process.
Deutsche Welle quoted Bhutto saying “making someone like Khar foreign minister sends a message especially to young people that the only way into politics in Pakistan is through families – and for a country of 180 million people that’s a really rotten thing to tell them.”
Talking about the problems faced by Pakistan, Bhutto said that corruption has become a part of the political culture and violence has become an acceptable thing. However, she called Pakistan a survivors’ country.
“I think it’s a place that survives against the odds: the ordinary people that make it run,” Bhutto said.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Ungrateful India
News & Views
Mohammad Jamil
http://pakobserver.net/detailnews.asp?id=122319
Indian military’s chopper that violated Pakistan’s airspace was allowed to return to Kargil within hours after the crew explained that it was due to the bad weather that they entered Pakistani airspace. Instead of appreciating and expressing gratitude, India chose to unleash propaganda against Pakistan stating that “Indian security has been breached in the sensitive Siachen Glacier-Aksai Chin-Ladakh-Kargil sector as Pakistan Army downloaded the GPS coordinates of all helipads from the army helicopter that strayed across the Line of Control (LoC) into Skardu region”. To add insult to the injury, Indian officials reportedly said the incident was being probed at a high level as the GPS data of the helicopter was found wiped out along with nicknames and code signs of all the helipads in the 14 Corps. There is a possibility that after being traced, the crew might have erased the data so that Pakistan may not download the same. But India uses every incident to paint Pakistan in poor light, though it should have expressed gratitude for the good treatment meted out to the chopper’s crew, and which was returned the same day.
It has to be mentioned that two Indian fighter planes had shot down Pakistan Navy’s training aircraft in August 1999, killing all the 16 officers and sailors on board. The wreckage of the plane was found 2-3 km inside Pakistan territory in marshy areas, Badin district, around 100 nautical miles off Karachi, which means Pakistani aircraft was in Pakistani airspace and territory when it was shot down. The plane - French-made Breguet Atlantic maritime patrol aircraft - had left PNS Mehran airbase in the city at 9.15am for a routine training flight to the coastal areas of southern Sindh. It was scheduled to return to its base after four hours. America’s most secretive National Security Agency (NSA) satellite data had then confirmed that Indian fighter planes shot down a Pakistani unarmed aircraft within Pakistani territory resulting in the death of 16 people. A secret National Security Agency spy satellite transcript leaked to selected American and Canadian journalists had confirmed earlier reports that Indian control tower ordered its fighters to shoot down the Pakistan plane and return to base quickly.
Transcript recorded from the scene had also indicated that Indian fighters also violated Pakistani airspace during their operation. Indians also tried to get hold of the bodies. An Indian publication confirmed that Indian Border Security Force (BSF) personnel met with stiff resistance from the Pakistani Rangers when they tried to retrieve the bodies of Pakistani personnel whose plane was shot down by the Indian Air Force.
Pakistan had taken a team of foreign diplomats for a visit to the site. Military attaches from the embassies of 28 countries including the United States, Britain, Canada, Germany and France, flew to the site in five helicopters. With the help of the Global Positioning System, instruments, charts and maps, the attaches were briefed about the location of the site to show that it was within the Pakistani territories. But shameless Indian officialdom brazen-facedly insisted that Pakistani aircraft was within Indian airspace when it was shot down by 2 Mirages. There is a long list of India’s machinations. Apart from the core issue of Kashmir, Siachen, Sir Creek and violation of Indus water treaty are the glaring examples of India’s intransigence. After 26/11, India had unleashed propaganda against Pakistan, and tried to get Pakistan declared as a state that sponsored terrorism. India should remember that if there was a Mumbai, there was Samjhota Express too.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
What the Pakistan Army should do
By Khaled Ahmed
Published: October 29, 2011
http://tribune.com.pk/story/284667/what ... should-do/
The writer is Director at the South Asian Media School in Lahore [email protected]
A recent All Parties Conference (APC) has formally handed over foreign-cum-Taliban policy to the army. What the political parties are after is one another’s scalp: their default position is plotting the downfall of elected governments. The Pakistan Army is now in a precarious position of either taking the country out of the terrorist mess or repeating past blunders. If it doesn’t want to fight the terrorists, then there can be two reasons why: it likes what the terrorists are doing; or it is certain it will lose fighting against them.
The APC wants Pakistan to talk to the terrorists from a position of weakness. The army is deceived by an apparent retreat in the stance of the Americans to think it can persuade the terrorists to become non-terrorists. This is not going to work. Other options are equally vague. Will it play the Chinese card? One analyst says: “China has crucial interests in the South China Sea; and building a navy to counter the US fleet is a full-time job. China will not want a confrontation with the US in a place where it has no natural advantage over the latter”. News is that China actually wants military bases inside Pakistan to counter terrorism seeping into its Xinjiang province.
What will the neighbours think of doing? “Iran will actually prefer a US presence that is predictable to the armed hordes controlled and paid for by its Sunni adversaries in the Middle East. India’s capacity to influence events in Afghanistan is very limited”. No one will accept a repeat of what Pakistan did in Afghanistan in tandem with the Mullah Omar government in the 1990s. Pakistan is the wrong state to consult if you want a peaceful Afghanistan unless, of course, the Pakistan Army has changed its thinking. There is no evidence of that change.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Safe havens threaten Afghan goals, report says
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/67130.html
Coalition forces have made important gains in Afghanistan, says a new report. | AP Photo Close
By CHARLES HOSKINSON | 10/28/11 8:37 PM EDT
Coalition forces have made important security gains in Afghanistan and are on track for a full handoff to local forces in 2014, a Pentagon report said Friday, but safe havens in Pakistan and weak Afghan governance continue to threaten that goal.
“Pakistan continues to tolerate and abet the insurgency in Afghanistan, particularly the Haqqani network,” the semiannual report to Congress said, echoing the administration’s recent tough line with Islamabad. “Enabled by safe havens in Pakistan, the insurgency remains resilient with a notable operational capability, as reflected in isolated high-profile attacks in Kabul and sustained violence levels in eastern Afghanistan.”
The report shows that President Barack Obama’s plan “is working on the ground in Afghanistan,” a senior defense official said at a background briefing for reporters, pushing back against new poll results showing nearly two-thirds of Americans oppose the war, and 58 percent worry that it is turning into another Vietnam. The CNN/ORC International poll of 1,007 adults was conducted Oct. 14-16 and had a margin of error of plus or minus three percentage points.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/10 ... z1cEZ5lUCZ
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Acronyms and demonyms
The most surprising thing I have learned today is that "Pakistan" is completely made up - Pakistan the name, I mean
By Ruth Walker Byline TitlePublished: 00:00 October 30, 2011
http://gulfnews.com/opinions/columnists ... s-1.920400
The most surprising thing I have learned today is that "Pakistan" is completely made up - Pakistan the name, I mean.
I ran across this nugget in "Johnson," The Economist's language blog. The topic was why the people of Afghanistan are Afghans, not "Afghanistanis," never mind that Johnson turned up 24,400 hits when he googled this unfortunate neologism. Even US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta has used it in a briefing at least once, although that might have been just a slip.
But here's the thing: "Stan" is a combining form meaning "country" or "home of," as in Kurdistan, home of the Kurds (not an actual country but that's another story). It really means "where they stand," I learned from the Online Etymology Dictionary, and so is a distant word-cousin of our English "stand." (Surprise No. 2 for the day.) Afghanistan is the home of the Afghans. They were a people before they were a country.
But with Pakistan, the country, or at least an idea for a country, came first; "Pakistanis," as the demonym (name for the inhabitants), came later.
The coinage of "Pakistan" is ascribed to the Muslim nationalist Choudhary Rahmat Ali, a student at Cambridge University in England, who used it in a pamphlet published in 1933. The name was an acronym, made up of initial letters of Punjab, Afghania (the North West Frontier or "Afghan" Province), Kashmir, and Sindh, with the "tan" from the tail end of Balochistan.
These regions were envisioned as forming the new state that would be created when British India was partitioned in 1947. An "i" in the middle was added, making pronunciation easier and alluding to the Indus River, which gave its name to India but flows through Pakistan. It helped that pak was a Persian word meaning "pure" — the "land of the pure" had a nice ring to it.
Place names are endlessly fascinating, and in the world of international news, they are continually changing — or more to the point, being changed.
Partition
And yet it's striking how organic and deep-rooted most place names are. The political status of a place, and hence its official name, may change, as when Ukraine emerged from the Soviet Union as an independent country. But we knew what to call it.
The British had created "India," and as it became clear that partition was in prospect, somebody needed to come up with a name for what would become "Pakistan." The name was an artificial construct, but it had roots, at least, in "real" place names like Punjab.
The United States of America were a collection of separate places with separate "real" names — not acronyms! — until they were fused in the crucible of the Revolution (and the United States were plural like that, until the Civil War).
It was a surprise to discover that a country in such a long-settled part of the world would have a made-up name. But redrawing the map and rewriting its labels are essential processes of history. Pakistan came into being during a post-Second World War period of cartographic rearrangement that also brought about two Germanys, Israel, and an independent Philippines, among other changes.
We don't yet know how the Arab Spring will last through autumn and into winter, much less what changes it will bring to our atlases. But I'll venture that the "real names" are mostly already on the map.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
India Toying With Dangerous Cold Start War Doctrine – Analysis
Written by: World Security Network
October 29, 2011
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s ... -analysis/
By BrigGen (ret) Dr. Muhammad Aslam Khan Niazi
Indian Military ‘Cold Start Doctrine’ (CSD) surfaces occasionally in Indian and Pakistani media as an unexplored paradigm. The opinion makers enjoy Voltaire’s philosophy support across the board, that in the third millennium globalized world politics, has become synonymous to the ‘Controversy Theory’ which allows the scholars perceptional as well as approach variations while evaluating any concept, doctrine or theory.
CSD is very high-sounding concept with its corollary ambiguity and those not possessing deep insight to the operational methodology tend to bolster its psychological fall out on the Pakistani readership, which is the only significant gain so far for India. Wittingly or unwittingly, its interpretation through plethora of contemporary theories projects it like an intricate myth if not monster. At times, it virtually appears that the war would flash like a bolt that would mince Pakistan’s military retaliatory capability to the dust unless some big ‘ifs’ were not resolved by Pak Army. It is therefore pertinent to put the threat in real perspective that could otherwise haunt world peace.
India
The roots of CSD like doctrine were nourished more by the unbridled euphoria of a maverick Indian Army Chief than by operational necessity. General Krishnaswamy Sundarrajan, besides being an architect of several brilliant episodes as well as reverses, was perceived by Indians to have carried a feather in his cap called Operation Brasstacks. Commencing in July 1986 as a war game, it developed into an ever-biggest exercise in Asia when air, artillery, armor and mechanized formations’ ‘blitzkrieg-like’ integrated deep offensive strategy was tested. The much-trumpeted exercise reached its crescendo in December 1986, employing three strike corps (I Corps-Mathura, II Corps-Ambala and XXI Corps-Bhopal) along Indo-Pak southeastern borders but to the misfortune of Indian Chief, Pakistan had shrewder military strategist, General Zia-ul-Haq who lie in wait to let Indian Chief put all his eggs in one basket, Rajasthan. Before he went with broad smile to launch cricket diplomacy in India, he ordered his Army reserves in the North to sally unobtrusively from army garrisons by the time Sundarji (Indian Chief’s short name) had achieved optimum assembly of forces comprising nine divisions excluding the holding corps, in Rajasthan. It was fantastic move by Pak Army and a masterpiece work of our ISI and military intelligence outfits. Soon in GHQ, heap of signal interception reports (sinrep) indicated that scramble back from Rajasthan to their original battle locations was ordered to all the Brasstacks forces immediately. When a formation complained of lack of transport, a sinrep indicated, it received prompt advice to use all mobility means, even obsolete like bull carts. Thus some of our young officers, referred to ‘Operation Brasstacks’ in light vein as ‘Operation Bull Carts’. Sundarji’s dream of his flashing saber like masterstroke to cut Pakistan into two halves simply crashed in the sand dunes that he had nurtured all along to eliminate status quo-like operational equation between India and Pakistan prevailing since 1947. Thanks to Rajiv Gandhi, Indian Prime Minister who rescued Sundarji by agreeing with Gen Zia-ul-Haq to de-escalate the conflict in February 1987. Later Sundarji candidly admitted his failure, saying, he had over reached with Brasstacks. Not many people know the severity of dilemma Indian Army intended to create in the region and the reverses it faced in the process.
Briefly, one would put here the heightened concern for lack of strategic equivalence between the forces system of the two countries to rest by maintaining that it cannot be achieved in number game, as Pak Army is in comfortable position without it in the face of our weak economy. Jonathan Marcus, a BBC defense correspondent had also observed in 2003, “In straight numerical terms of population, economic might, military manpower and equipment it is almost meaningless to speak about an India-Pakistan balance”. Nevertheless, through persistent sharp scrutiny of Indian Army doctrines that are ‘war-gamed’ by Pakistan without laxity ever and her expansion as well as modernization, Pak Army has taken some potent measures by regrouping, modernizing and at times resorting to modest new raising of forces level to keep adversary’s hostile designs in effective check. Strategic imbalance, for several reasons, would remain Pak Army’s perennial friend and we have to coexist with it. Pak Army has some spare arrows in the bow to act as force multipliers in the power game like our ever readiness to wage a war as a cherished duty, conventional or nuclear if it is thrust upon us and exploiting geo-strategic advantage that geography renders us. We are in position to deploy and employ our holding corps as well as reserves in a manner that achieves effective counter level, yet with remarkable economy of effort. Pak Army has overwhelming edge in time and space factor and hence expeditious assembly of forces and convenient readjustment of the forces posture is possible if a hypothesis unfolds, other than the one on which defensive/offensive maneuver is mounted. Thus, our strategic orientation remains superior, allowing us to operate on interior lines, an advantage that Indian army cannot even wish.
Instead, India has to maintain Eastern Command far away for Chinese and Bangladesh borders as well as Northern Command for Chinese border and Pakistan Northern Areas/Line of Control. Western, Southern and South Western Commands remain poised against international borders with Pakistan while Central Command is in the depth at Lucknow because it has to meet certain contingencies in different directions. On achieving credible nuclear deterrence, Pakistan stands compensated for Indian preponderance in the conventional forces ratio while the nuclear claw of our adversary has also been defanged that she would have been rattling on us every now and then. In fact, Sundarji’s venture of 1986-87, in all probability was driven by such hypothesis that Pakistan would resort to ‘diplomacy’ means only to de-escalate once haunted by the specter of Indian nuclear force projections and not confront India by mobilizing its holding or punch formations for war. Their hypothesis was way off the mark.
Despite such reverses, however, the flare for Concept of Simultaneity (targeting more than one objective at a time) and lightening strikes against deep objectives in a theatre and destruction of Pakistan Army lingered on among Sundarji’s subordinates. On the contrary, three years of evaluation of Sundarji’s finesse enabled Pak Army to further fine tune its offensive as well as defensive plans. Not content with it, General Mirza Aslam Beg, our Army Chief, kicked off yet another mega exercise, ‘Zarb-e-Momin’ (Stroke of a Believer) in 1989 in Central Punjab that the world rated as the beginning of Pakistan Army ‘glasnost’ ensuring that posture-balance was maintained to preempt any mischief from the adversary.
Foxland and Blueland wrestled for several weeks at the final stages of exercise with troops. Chief Control HQ at Sargodha, assisted by Blueland and Foxland Senior Controls, orchestrated the entire conduct, monitoring and evaluation. Three corps, two armoured brigades, two artillery divisions, an air defence division and the Pakistan Air Force participated….Fourteen new concepts were tested; many vital lessons were learnt.The events were covered by national and international media. Several international delegates, Asian as well as Western, visited and were briefed including the leaders of our, what Zbigniew Brzezinski also called them, the holy warriors. Gulbadin Hikmatyar, Prof Burhanudin Rabbani, Sibghatullah Mujadadi, Abdul Rab Rasul Sayyaf and Mulvi Younis Khalis were prominent. Some observations, they made, were point black and dictated by their grip on war making strategy. Over all the visiting delegates appreciated, the conduct that was meticulous and agreed that Blueland maneuvers could blunt Foxland offensives. That was precisely the message Gen Beg had intended to convey across the border.
Indian Military hierarchy’s frustration with what Sundarji had left for them as a model doctrine, employing three strike corps in ‘blitzkrieg’ style, grew worse in the wake of ‘Operation Parakaram’ that trailed December 13, 2001 attack on Indian Parliament. Mobilization of Indian army was ordered on 18 December 2001 to maul Pakistan severely for its alleged involvement that India detected ‘marvelously’ in just about three days time. Other than a few leading powers, world was oblivious of the Indian ‘responsibility’ to spark off an inferno in the Subcontinent. However, assembly of Indian forces was sluggish and stretched over three weeks. In the mean time, President Musharraf played his cards by ordering formations to occupy battle locations. He also gave a ‘turn about’ address to the nation, renouncing ‘Jihadis’ to woo Western sympathies, particularly of US that could not afford to see Pakistan switch its forces from Western to its Eastern borders. Conflict was averted through international actors’ intervention. Thus, masked operational lacunas in Indian Army planning, surviving comfortably hitherto fore, came under sharp scrutiny. Walter Ladwig III of Oxford University clearly saw the flaws in Indian’s war making ambitions like loss of strategic surprise, large size of strike forces that forced a long gap between political decision and military action and finally denuding of holding corps of any offensive punch. Hence, it was imperative to evolve a doctrine that should over-ride such weaknesses of one of the largest standing armies in the word that had clung to defensive-defence strategy since partition. In other words, a dangerous conflict averted in 2001 led to pursuits that are more lethal in the realm of deceptive war making in all forms.
Indian Army Chief, General Padmanabhan unveiled CSD in April 2004. Could it be summed up as a novel and brilliant idea? Certainly not because it carried conspicuous Sundarji’s stamp with mix of Indian Army Chief’s astuteness who managed now to substitute Sundarji’s lightening ‘blitzkrieg-like’ deep offensives doctrine with sharp and crisp shallow multiple strikes called CSD, also claiming to knock out their own holding and offensive corps’ capability gaps. In other words, now Indian defensive corps could contribute as effectively as strike corps, at least hypothetically and the latter were to become known as Integrated Battle Groups (IBGs). Media leaks suggested that initially Indian army would constitute eight IBGs and each would be a concentrate of firepower and mobility under lavish air umbrella, built upon division size armor or mechanized formation with ability to operate as groups or sub-groups executing independent operations within the Group’s area of operation. The destruction of Pakistan Army has been retained as most lucrative objective, employing tremendous firepower and state-of-art means of ground as well as aerial mobility that would interdict and destroy its reserves, comprising mechanized formations.
General Padmanabhan’s brand of CSD sounded fantastic, as did Sundarji’s blitzkrieg and concept of simultaneity during peacetime about a decade earlier. Once the military logisticians, assembly of forces experts and their Ordnance Corps would have sat together to formulate the inventories to equip the Army with Padmanabhan’s long indent for latest machines, weapons and munitions, finance organ of Indian Government would have shuddered. Commenting on CSD within a month of its unveiling in his May 2004, what he called, strategic paper, Dr. Subhash Kapila, almost had the rub with the vision that CSD could not be harnessed militarily as per the perceived scales and if proceeded with, it would amount to asking for moon. He wrote as an indirect admission, “The unveiling of a new war doctrine throws up a host of factors for discussion in terms of why a new war doctrine is required, what are the attendant factors in putting it into operation, the limiting factors that may come into play…”. Commenting three and half years later in December 2007, Dr. Subhash Kapila’s apprehensions further blossomed. He even argued to defer CSD until 2010 because, “India’s COLD START WAR DOCTRINE woven around the operational concept of offensive operations at the very outset of hostilities cannot proceed towards success on Indian Army undertaking military operations with incomplete military inventories…”. Hence, it says all to conclude that CSD is a concept on paper and may be nothing more than at experimental stage with old clattering machines. Conversely, maintaining vigilance about our adversary is the hallmark that our Army must observe. For our consumption, we have to underscore the need for meeting our adversary in the battlefield as if they are equipped right now to the needle details. Indian endeavor to fling strategic surprise on Pakistan as a pre-emption strategy must be checkmated by covert peacetime measures so that our forces instinctively remain out of their bite through ruses, well conceived by our military leadership even when the war balloon has not gone up yet.
One would not question Indian Army’s prerogative to equip its forces to any limit but a pertinent question comes up here. Why did General Padmanabhan switch to intense multiple shallow maneuvers concept? Obviously, the answer is that in the presence of nuclear strike capability with Pakistan Army, there has to be a limited war on the cards. In other words, the change of heart did not emanate from his vision but driven by a compulsion, forced on Indian army under the obtaining politico-military environments. Therefore, CSD has another inhibiting factor that Indian battle sweeps have to remain short of reaching nuclear retaliation threshold. Answer becomes a question again if one asks the proponents of CSD that when India initiates conflict under the label of limited war, how friendly India would remain with Pakistan to keep the war under ‘limited’ tag. Do the adversaries prescribe the counter measure levels to each other? What India marks as limited objectives, in Pakistan Army reckoning they might not be ‘limited’ category? Military will and intentions on two sides have to differ because they work against each other. Though Pakistan would never ever be nuclear button-happy-power but when destruction of our Army is envisaged by CSD, that is the center of gravity of our survival, how would Indian wizards ensure that Pakistan would desist from using nukes, particularly once Pakistan Army concept of operations hinges on offensive-defence strategy? About the nukes, Shireen Mazari says, “Pakistan’s nuclear escalation ladder has only ‘one rung’.” Thus, she seals the argument.
The proposition would remain dangerous when India intends resorting to such measures like CSD under the assumption that by subjecting Pakistan to retribution, it would desist from proxy war in Kashmir that Pakistan denies. Instead, Pakistan maintains that Indian state terrorism has pushed Kashmiris to the brink. The scholars, world over have labeled CSD as dangerous to execute on prefixed speculations based on tunnel vision. CSD also creates space of legitimacy for Pakistan to demand from India to rub off its intrusive footprints in Baluchistan, FATA, Pak-Afghan border areas and thus leverage for escalation of crisis is afforded to Pakistan to recover its internal stability. Indian military collaboration with Israel is also a cause of change in Indian overtone when she talks of military ventures or handles Kashmiri demonstrations in mode and severity parallel to Israeli handling of the Palestinians’ demonstrations. With Israel colluding with Indian military extensively, resentment against Israel has grown manifold in Pakistan though, it did not enjoy a favorable score since inception of state of Israel.
India has to realize that its stakes in regional peace are far greater than Pakistan and hence its unimpeded economic spiral would be a factor to force India to reach for reconciliation with Pakistan in an earnest manner. Seeking ‘peace’ through dialogues and negotiations fervently by both the powers is the ultimate option they would have to embrace but an early embrace would augur well for the regional as well as for the world peace. Powers that have the clout with India and Pakistan must facilitate the adversaries to reach at workable solution. International community is also encumbered with the responsibility to caution India to desist from such momentary madness of 18 December 2001 that could have far-reaching repercussions beyond remedy.
You have to see this analysis in the context of almost perennial hostile relations prevailing between India and Pakistan since independence from colonial rule in 1947. Britain gave up this rich colony to avert the replay of events that occurred to some other European powers while leaving their African colonies in blood of the natives and considerably bruised themselves. Britain left in haste, leaving many thorny territorial division issues between India and Pakistan unresolved, ‘Kashmir’ the major one. The state had predominantly Muslim population but a Hindu chieftain ruled it. There have been military conflicts of varying intensity between India and Pakistan in 1948, 1965 and 1971, the last being more devastating for Pakistan when Indian military also helped public revolt against Pakistan by launching full-fledged offensives and its eastern wing, erstwhile ‘East Pakistan’ was clipped that emerged as Bangladesh. Thus, the hostility simmers, forcing both the countries to maintain large standing armies as of operational necessity. India and Pakistan now possess nuclear weapons, which means looming war scenario, has an added dangerous dimension to it. Some major powers and the beneficiaries are happy with threatening status quo in Kashmir. The simmering hostility nourishes their national interests perhaps better than the resolved conflict would do. Hence, no effective arbitration has been attempted by any power or organization except UN in early years of their inception by adopting Resolutions 38(1948) and 47(1948), which recognized Kashmiris right to choose between India and Pakistan through a plebiscite. India concurred initially but later backtracked. Tragedy of the time is that the Subcontinent remains prone to a horrific nuclear conflagration, possibly at the cost of world peace.
BrigGen (ret) Dr. Muhammad Aslam Khan Niazi, has military experience of about 32 years and is from the Regiment of Artillery. Recipient of sitara-e-imtiaz (military), he served on various command, staff, instructional, administration, operational, research and evaluation appointments during his career. Holds first class Masters’ degree in International Relations as well as doctorate from University of Peshawar, Pakistan.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Pakistan opposed to regional solution on Afghanistan
Times of India - 3 hours ago
New Delhi: Pakistan is blocking the establishment of a regional monitoring group to oversee cooperation on Afghanistan's economic and security future. As leaders from 12 nations head to Istanbul on November 2 to help Afghanistan become a stable
Times of India - 3 hours ago
New Delhi: Pakistan is blocking the establishment of a regional monitoring group to oversee cooperation on Afghanistan's economic and security future. As leaders from 12 nations head to Istanbul on November 2 to help Afghanistan become a stable
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Pakistan appreciates Iranian nation’s support of Kashmir cause: ambassador
Political Desk
http://www.tehrantimes.com/index.php/co ... ticle/4064
On Line: 29 October 2011 17:48
In Print: Sunday 30 October 2011
Font Size
Pakistan’s ambassador to Iran, Khalid Aziz Babar, speaks on Saturday at the Pakistani Embassy in Tehran during a ceremony held to commemorate the Black Day marking the 64th anniversary of the Indian occupation of Jammu and Kashmir.
TEHRAN – The Pakistani ambassador to Tehran has thanked the Iranian nation for their support of the people of Kashmir.
Ambassador Khalid Aziz Babar made the remarks on Saturday at the Pakistani Embassy in Tehran during a ceremony held to commemorate Kashmir Black Day, which is the anniversary of the Indian invasion of Kashmir that began the occupation of the territory.
A number of Iranian academicians, scholars, intellectuals, and journalists, and some members of the Pakistani community in Tehran attended the function.
In his address to the gathering, the Pakistani ambassador highlighted the suppression of the Kashmiri people at the hands of the Indian security forces and stated that according to a recent report by Human Rights Watch, over the past 22 years more than 100,000 Kashmiri men, women, and children have laid down their lives for the cause of freedom. In addition, he noted that thousands of Kashmiris have been incarcerated and their places of worship and cultural heritage sites have been destroyed.
Ambassador Babar said that Pakistan has adopted an initiative and several measures for the peaceful resolution of the Kashmir dispute.
Dr. Mohammad Rajabi, the former president of the ECO Cultural Institute, called on the UN and the Organization of the Islamic Conference to play an active role in efforts to resolve the Kashmir issue.
Iranian scholar Dr. Mostafavi Sabzevari and Tehran Times journalist Hamid Golpira spoke about the historical background of the Kashmir dispute and called on the international community to pressure the Indian government to recognize the Kashmiri people’s right to self-determination.
In addition, Iranian scholar Mohammad Hossein Tasbihi and journalist Nasir Yamin Mardokhi recited poems focusing on the suffering of the Kashmiri people.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Rally against Indian occupation of Kashmir
News Comments (0)
http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2011/10 ... f-kashmir/
STAFF REPORT Thursday, 27 Oct 2011 10:53 pm | Comments (0)
ISLAMABAD - Hundreds of protestors belonging to the‘Tehreeke Azadie Jammu and Kashmir’ on Thursday gathered at Aabpara Chowk to mark 27 October as a ‘Black Day’ in light of the atrocities committed by the Indian army in Jammu & Kashmir. The protestors carried banners inscribed with slogans against the Indian government and army, wore black armbands or held black flags and raised slogans including ‘We want freedom’, ‘Stop atrocities in Jammu and Kashmir’, and ‘Jehad is the only way out for freedom’. The Tehreek, along with members of other Kashmiri Jihadi organisations, said on the occasion that on 27th October, Kashmiris on both sides of the Line of Control and all across the world were observing a Black Day to convey to India their rejection of its illegal occupation of Jammu and Kashmir.
It was on October 27, 1947 that Indian troops had landed in Srinagar and forcibly occupied Jammu and Kashmir, against the partition plan of the Subcontinent prepared by the British, and the Kashmiri people’s aspirations.
The day was also marked by complete shutdown of activity in occupied Kashmir, for which All Parties Hurriyat Conference Leaders Syed Ali Shah Gilani and Shabbir Ahmed Shah, and the Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front had called. Rallies in support of the Kashmiris’ struggle for liberation were held from Srinagar to Muzaffarabad and Islamabad. Addressing on the occasion, the participants said the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) had once had the strongest economy in the world which had now perished; the United States of America (USA) was struggling in Afghanistan; and India’s downfall was just around the bend. “We want Jihad as it is the only peaceful solution to tackle the Indian barbarism in Jammu. Jihad is the way of peace, because it conveys a message against brutality. Mujahideen are not at all ‘terrorists’ as the world has labelled them; their only objective is to maintain law and order in Jammu and preserve their freedom against Indian barbarism,” they said.
Participants said they would not mind exchange between India and Pakistan on a diplomatic level and they were not against the exchange of trade, culture or sports, but they would not accept Pakistani rulers tagging India as their ‘most favoured nation’, when Indian atrocities against innocent Kashmiris were on the rise. “This is against the legacy of the Kashmiri martyrs who lost their lives for this noble cause,” they said.
The leaders of these organisations also paid tribute to the over 40 Kashmiris who had been killed in Bijbehara town on 22nd October, 1993 when Indian troops had opened fire on a peaceful demonstration against the military siege of Srinagar’s Hazratbal Shrine.
Strict security measures were taken at Aabpara Chowk, which was closed for general traffic. However, an alternate route had been provided to vehicles. Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT) and Islamabad Traffic Police (ITP) officials were deputed on the spot.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
High time to resolve Kashmir issue: Mirwaiz
OCTOBER 29, 2011 RECORDER REPORT 0 COMMENTS
http://www.brecorder.com/general-news/s ... 2/1246561/
APHC Chairman Mirwaiz Omar Farooq has said that international community failed to fulfil its commitment with Kashmiri people and India has to demonstrate flexibility in its behaviour to accept that Kashmir is for Kashmiris only.
Talking to Radio Pakistan on Friday, he said it was high time for Pakistan and India to resolve Kashmir issue by taking Kashmiris into confidence, adding despite callousness of international powers, Kashmiris' courage was high as they believed their movement was based on justice and ultimately they would succeed to achieve freedom.
He said Kashmiris observed Black Day on October 27 across the world against Indian interference in Kashmir on this day in 1947.
He said international community had kept silence over severe violation of human rights of Kashmiris by Indian forces.
He said 9,000 Kashmiris had been disappeared during last 20 years from Indian occupied Kashmir adding that situation was a challenge for international community, which claimed to be champion of democracy and human rights.
He asked Indians to mount pressure on their government for the solution of Kashmir issue peacefully.
He said India used all means to suppress Kashmiris, but it failed to do so, instead Kashmiris remain steadfast with their cause and commitment.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Indian troops working for domination in IHK: Mirwaiz
Submitted 19 hrs 43 mins ago
http://nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-news ... HK-Mirwaiz
In occupied Kashmir, the All Parties Hurriyet Conference (APHC) Chairman, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq has said that the Indian troops are opposing removal of black law, Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) to maintain its domination in Kashmir.
Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, addressing a gathering at Chrar-i-Sharief in Budgam, said the India had landed its troops in Kashmir in 1947 under a well-planned conspiracy and Kashmiris were suffering from a sense of insecurity due to of the presence of armed forces.
Flaying National Conference, Peoples Democratic Party and other pro-Indian parties for orchestrating drama over revocation of Armed Forces Special Powers Act in Jammu and Kashmir, Mirwaiz said, "If pro-India parties are really sincere, they can repeal the Disturbed Areas Act on floor of the so-called Assembly".
"They have been enacting dramas over one or the other issue to four months to befool Kashmiris. If they have guts, they can repeal AFSPA by revoking DAA in the so-called Legislative Assembly," Mirwaiz said.
"These parties are on same page with New Delhi on each and every policy. Their impression of being sympathizers of Kashmir is a farce. Kashmiris don't have a short memory. They all are power hungry and interests of Kashmiris hardly matter for them." he added.
Kashmiris were steadfast in their pursuit of freedom and would never allow the sacrifices of their martyrs go waste, Mirwaiz stressed. He said India was constantly trying to suppress the voice of Kashmiris through force, but it should remember that people's aspirations couldn't be subdued for long.
Paying glowing tributes to Sheikh Noor-ud-Din Noorani, he said the aulia-i-kiram devoted their life to the cause of Islam and spread its message across Kashmir despite difficult circumstances.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Sydney Morning Herald
Kashmir Black Day observed at Pakistan Embassy in Tehran
Associated Press of Pakistan - 12 hours ago
ISLAMABAD, Oct 29 (APP): A function was held at the Embassy of Pakistan in Tehran on Saturday on the occasion of Kashmir Black Day marking the 64rd anniversary of the Indian occupation of Jammu and Kashmir.
Kashmir Black Day observed at Pakistan Embassy in Tehran
Associated Press of Pakistan - 12 hours ago
ISLAMABAD, Oct 29 (APP): A function was held at the Embassy of Pakistan in Tehran on Saturday on the occasion of Kashmir Black Day marking the 64rd anniversary of the Indian occupation of Jammu and Kashmir.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Now they are stiffing us in poetry and song??Acharya wrote:Pakistan appreciates Iranian nation’s support of Kashmir cause: ambassador
Political Desk
http://www.tehrantimes.com/index.php/co ... ticle/4064
On Line: 29 October 2011 17:48
In Print: Sunday 30 October 2011
Font Size
Pakistan’s ambassador to Iran, Khalid Aziz Babar, speaks on Saturday at the Pakistani Embassy in Tehran during a ceremony held to commemorate the Black Day marking the 64th anniversary of the Indian occupation of Jammu and Kashmir.
TEHRAN – The Pakistani ambassador to Tehran has thanked the Iranian nation for their support of the people of Kashmir.
Ambassador Khalid Aziz Babar made the remarks on Saturday at the Pakistani Embassy in Tehran during a ceremony held to commemorate Kashmir Black Day, which is the anniversary of the Indian invasion of Kashmir that began the occupation of the territory.
A number of Iranian academicians, scholars, intellectuals, and journalists, and some members of the Pakistani community in Tehran attended the function.
In his address to the gathering, the Pakistani ambassador highlighted the suppression of the Kashmiri people at the hands of the Indian security forces and stated that according to a recent report by Human Rights Watch, over the past 22 years more than 100,000 Kashmiri men, women, and children have laid down their lives for the cause of freedom. In addition, he noted that thousands of Kashmiris have been incarcerated and their places of worship and cultural heritage sites have been destroyed.
Ambassador Babar said that Pakistan has adopted an initiative and several measures for the peaceful resolution of the Kashmir dispute.
Dr. Mohammad Rajabi, the former president of the ECO Cultural Institute, called on the UN and the Organization of the Islamic Conference to play an active role in efforts to resolve the Kashmir issue.
Iranian scholar Dr. Mostafavi Sabzevari and Tehran Times journalist Hamid Golpira spoke about the historical background of the Kashmir dispute and called on the international community to pressure the Indian government to recognize the Kashmiri people’s right to self-determination.
In addition, Iranian scholar Mohammad Hossein Tasbihi and journalist Nasir Yamin Mardokhi recited poems focusing on the suffering of the Kashmiri people.
And we yet continue to waffle in our iranian policy!!!
Why not do business with them and also kick them in the family jewels like they are doing to us?
When is our supreme national interest going to kick in? or will we forever keep pandering to sunni and shia vote bank politics??
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Pakistan is not an acronym.
Pakistan is a demonym!!!
Aka Pakasur
or Pak Demon
Pakistan is a demonym!!!
Aka Pakasur
or Pak Demon
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Why are retired TSPA hawa ldars(Gas Bags) so verbose?
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Isn't Pakiobserver, one of the sister sites of the infamous RupeeNews? I thought those were not deemed worthy enough to be posted at BRF.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
He recognizes the causes and the path but does not take ownership of the problems. Blaming dead Zia is transferring responsibility. Why did the civilians keep silent while Islamification was going on? Because they too were Islamists only a matter of the shade.Acharya wrote:Pakistan's radical reputation
By Daud Khattak Friday, October 28, 2011 - 3:05 PM Share
http://afpak.foreignpolicy.com/posts/20 ... reputation
Intolerant, fundamentalist and extremist. This is the general impression of Pakistani society in the world outside Pakistan, though a deeper look would lead the observer to discover another layer - altogether different than the one visible from Europe and America. Following the Urdu-language Pakistani media, one is easily brought to the conclusion that there exists widespread radicalism and fundamentalism among Pakistanis. The television anchors and their repetition of ‘national interests' aside, the key question is: Is the Pakistani society really extremist? A cursory look at the events of the past few years can tell the answer.
Following the highly-rigged general elections in 2002 in favor of the now defunct religious alliance, Muttahidda Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), Pakistan's religious parties looked poised to assert their newfound power in the country. But just six years later, in the February 2008 general election, Pakistanis overwhelmingly supported secular political parties such as the ruling Pakistan People's Party (PPP) and the Awami National Party (ANP), while the religious parties managed to retain only seven seats in the country's National Assembly. The religious parties and their affiliates also failed on several occasions to start a political movement by using issues such as the jailing of Pakistani doctor Aafia Siddiqui, the US drone strikes in Pakistan's tribal northwest, the Raymond Davis episode, or the U.S. Special Forces raid in Abbottabad and killing of al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden.
Pakistan's security establishment also contributes to the West's fundamentalist and extremist image of Pakistani society. Over the years, the Pakistani state has supported the armies of Kashmir-focused jihadists in order to gain leverage over its more powerful and several-times-larger rival India, as well maintain a Pakistan-friendly government in neighboring Afghanistan. To achieve these goals, the establishment willfully encouraged a number of elements within its own borders, ranging from pro-jihadist religious parties to extremist literature in schools, colleges and universities, in order to generate support for the jihadist cause.
Within Pakistan, the armed forces are often presented as heroes and the true custodians of Pakistan's ideological and geographical frontiers, while the liberal political forces are labeled (albeit with some truth) as vested interests, too corrupt and inefficient to run the country and ensure its defense. Pakistani youth are flooded with hardliner propaganda and find attraction in extremist views because of the stance of the esteemed military, the jihadist literature in classrooms, government-controlled electronic media, and a state policy of encouraging certain jihadist organizations.
This policy approach, although it dates back to the creation of Pakistan, was institutionalized during the 10 years of military rule under the dictator General Zia ul-Haq, who championed jihad and the Islamization of society. The majority of the secular leaders at that time were either won over one way or another, forced to keep silent, or pushed into exile, thus leaving room for the fundamentalists to come forward and "purify" the society by holding mass gatherings in cities, speaking on the official electronic media, becoming involved in educational institutions and spreading jihadist literature.Zia and his rightist support base thus maneuvered hard, and the ultimate result was the emergence of a hardliner approach among the upper layer of the Pakistani society to Muslim causes - be it Kashmir, Afghanistan, Palestine, Bosnia, Chechnya, Kosovo or any other place in the world. The support for extremists and jihadists did not end with the death of Gen. Zia. Elements in The state security apparatus continued the same policies, eventually resulting in the emergence of the Taliban in Afghanistan who converted areas of the country into a safe haven for extremists and jihadists all over the world.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Farce of Chinese presence
Shumaila Raja
http://pakobserver.net/detailnews.asp?id=122503
There had been reports of the Chinese troops’ presence in Pakistan’s Northern Areas since the Attabad Lake disaster, and with ambiguous denials from government circles, but not a comprehensive and reasonable clarification. The eminent American think-tank, Selig S Harrison, who has close eye on South Asian affairs and who intriguingly ‘advocates’ Balochistan’s ‘independence’, has recently written an article “China’s discreet activities in Pakistan’s northern borderlands”, confirming the reports of Chinese presence. Similar reports have appeared in the Indian media. A Pakistani journalist, Amir Mir, in his October 26 article said the Chinese government has requested Islamabad for establishment of its military base in the area along the Pakistan-China border. Again the Foreign Office has yet to speak on the subject, but credit goes to Gen Jehangir Karamat’s (R) Spearhead Research think-tank, which has carried out a survey of the area and concluded that the “the results are contrary to what has been alleged.”
The factual situation seen on the ground and the facts about the presence and involvement of Chinese in various infrastructure activities in Gilgit-Baltistan area of Pakistan are different. The survey concludes that the China Roads & Buildings Corporation (CRBC) has been working on rehabilitation of KKH (Karakoram Highway) since 2009 with varying strength of Chinese workers and engineers. Presently, about 637 Chinese Engineers and workers are living in about seventy makeshifts camps stretching from Khunjrab to Raikot Bridge. The project is being supervised by NHA (Pakistan’s National Highway Authority) and the Karakuram Security Force (KSF) which is responsible for the protection of Chinese nationals working on the project.
The survey found that the majority of people in Gilgit-Baltistan are quite content and satisfied with the political autonomy granted under the “Gilgit-Baltistan Empowerment and Governance Ordinance 2009”. There is a realization that vested interests may be exploiting the situation to create unrest but there are no signs or indications of any latent or overt revolt. The area remains peaceful and as beautiful as ever.”
Shumaila Raja
http://pakobserver.net/detailnews.asp?id=122503
There had been reports of the Chinese troops’ presence in Pakistan’s Northern Areas since the Attabad Lake disaster, and with ambiguous denials from government circles, but not a comprehensive and reasonable clarification. The eminent American think-tank, Selig S Harrison, who has close eye on South Asian affairs and who intriguingly ‘advocates’ Balochistan’s ‘independence’, has recently written an article “China’s discreet activities in Pakistan’s northern borderlands”, confirming the reports of Chinese presence. Similar reports have appeared in the Indian media. A Pakistani journalist, Amir Mir, in his October 26 article said the Chinese government has requested Islamabad for establishment of its military base in the area along the Pakistan-China border. Again the Foreign Office has yet to speak on the subject, but credit goes to Gen Jehangir Karamat’s (R) Spearhead Research think-tank, which has carried out a survey of the area and concluded that the “the results are contrary to what has been alleged.”
The factual situation seen on the ground and the facts about the presence and involvement of Chinese in various infrastructure activities in Gilgit-Baltistan area of Pakistan are different. The survey concludes that the China Roads & Buildings Corporation (CRBC) has been working on rehabilitation of KKH (Karakoram Highway) since 2009 with varying strength of Chinese workers and engineers. Presently, about 637 Chinese Engineers and workers are living in about seventy makeshifts camps stretching from Khunjrab to Raikot Bridge. The project is being supervised by NHA (Pakistan’s National Highway Authority) and the Karakuram Security Force (KSF) which is responsible for the protection of Chinese nationals working on the project.
The survey found that the majority of people in Gilgit-Baltistan are quite content and satisfied with the political autonomy granted under the “Gilgit-Baltistan Empowerment and Governance Ordinance 2009”. There is a realization that vested interests may be exploiting the situation to create unrest but there are no signs or indications of any latent or overt revolt. The area remains peaceful and as beautiful as ever.”
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s ... lationship
Second, India is sensationalising a trivial issue involving Chinese assistance to Pakistan in upgradation and expansion of Karakoram Highway (KKH).
The Karakoram Highway is the lifeline that connects Gilgit-Baltistan from Kashgar, a city in the Xingjiang region of China, to Abbotabad. An extension of the highway south west from Abbottabad, in the form of N-35, meets the Grand Trunk Road, N-5 at Hassanabdal Pakistan that would finally link to the southern port of Gwadar in Balochistan through Gwadar-Dalbandin Railway.
Chinese engineers and builders are in Gilgit-Baltistan region to help repair the Karakoram corridor which has been severely damaged by the earthquakes, floods and landslides. Actually, the KKH trade route agreement has alarmed many powerful economies.
The US viewed the highway project as alarming because Washington does not like Chinese working on developments in Pakistan. India considered it as a dangerous development for its security. The Kashgar-Gwadar trade route affected the trade and economic interest of neighboring states of the region. Therefore, the theme of Chinese troops presence in GB has been blown out of proportion so as to deny Chinese access to Karakoram corridor.
Indian strategists consider that infrastructural improvements of the ‘Karakoram Corridor’ heralds a new phase of China flexing its muscles not only against India but more significantly against US in the wider global context.
India’s propaganda regarding ceding of the Gilgit-Baltistan Region to China is a devious ploy to politically implant US against Pakistan that it is no longer a frontline state of US strategy. All this is aimed at undermining the strategic relationship between the two countries.
China and Pakistan have achieved fruitful results in military and defence cooperation. Through joint efforts, the two countries have successfully developed hi-tech military equipment such as K-8 jet trainers, type 2000 main battle tanks and the Xiaolong fighter jet. In May 2011, China agreed to provide 50 new JF-17 Thunder multi-role fighter planes to the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) with the possibility of J-20 Stealth and Xiaolong multi-purpose light fighter aircraft in the pipeline.
Meanwhile, the two navies and land forces have respectively launched maritime and anti-terrorism joint military manoeuvers.
During the past 55 years, trade between the two countries has continued to increase. Since 2000, bilateral trade has risen rapidly, with the volume exceeding $4.2 billion last year, setting a new record.
In the near future, more Pakistanis will master the Chinese language and become China experts. When an earthquake hit the northern part of Pakistan in 2005, China contributed $20.5 million for earthquake relief.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Reality of lollipops
Eschmall Sardar
http://pakobserver.net/detailnews.asp?id=122508
International newspapers, TV channels and wire services widely picked up the Afghan President’s talk to a Pakistani TV anchor the other day, saying Afghanistan would support Pakistan if it were to go to war with the US, or any other nation (he meant India), calling Afghanistan to Pakistan. The interview sparked a wave of criticism from many Afghans, particularly in the north of the country, who believe that Pakistan is responsible for much of their ongoing struggle with militancy. The broadcast of the interview came just after Hillary Clinton left Pakistan after crucial talks, where she pushed Islamabad to facilitate reconciliation in Afghanistan, while at the same time pressing Pakistan to take more action against the insurgents. Pakistan reportedly made it clear to the visiting US delegation that it was willing to assist the reconciliation process, but opening a front against the Haqqanis based in NW was not an option, and that Pakistan and the US came to an agreement on the way forward in Afghanistan. Hillary said in an interview later that she urged Pakistan to use methods “besides overt military action,” and to do so while it has coalition support from the other side of the border in Afghanistan.
But Karzai’s soothing statement, Hillary’s ‘lenient’ approach and ‘goodwill’ gestures around are being taken as part of the carrot of ploy, which the observers believe is a hoax amidst the already struck strategic deal with New Delhi and the various statements issued from Kabul assailing Pakistan and blaming the army for harbouring terrorists. Such a lollypop doesn’t worth attention. The statement of Hillary, in an interview with Bloomberg, warning Pakistan of dire consequences if failed in operating against the militants in North Waziristan exposes it all.
—Peshawar
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Focus on Afghanistan, not Pakistan, army chief tells U.S.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/ ... NO20111019
By Qasim Nauman
ISLAMABAD | Wed Oct 19, 2011 7:51am EDT
(Reuters) - Pakistan's army chief told parliament's defense committee the United States should focus on stabilizing Afghanistan instead of pushing Pakistan to attack militant groups in a crucial border region, a committee member told Reuters on Wednesday.
Army chief General Ashfaq Kayani's comments could deepen tensions in the U.S.-Pakistan relationship, an alliance critical to efforts to stabilize Afghanistan before the end of 2014 when NATO combat troops are due home.
Kayani said Pakistan alone would decide if and when to launch a full-scale offensive in North Waziristan, which Western intelligence agencies say is a sanctuary for militants who cross the border to attack U.S.-led NATO forces in Afghanistan.
He also said the United States would have to think "10 times" before taking any unilateral action there. Pakistan is not like Iraq or Afghanistan, the parliamentarian quoted Kayani as saying, suggesting that any North Waziristan operation would be very risky.
The MP spoke on condition of anonymity.
"The problem lies in Afghanistan, not Pakistan," the parliamentarian quoted Kayani as telling the committee in a national security briefing at army headquarters.
The United States, the source of billions of dollars in aid, has urged Pakistan over the years to go after militant groups in North Waziristan, a rugged mountainous region where militants have forged ties with powerful tribes.
"The purpose of this briefing was to mobilize support domestically and to signal to the U.S. that this is the line we are not going to cross at this stage," political analyst Hasan Askari Rizvi said.
"They have signaled what can and what cannot be done."
The pressure on Pakistan has become acute since U.S. special forces killed Osama bin Laden in May in a Pakistani garrison town where he had apparently been living for years.
The unilateral raid infuriated Pakistan's powerful military, which described it as a violation of sovereignty. In Washington, some angry officials wondered if elements of Pakistani intelligence had sheltered bin Laden.
Pakistan said it had no idea he was living in the town of Abbottabad, about a two-hour drive from the capital, Islamabad.
TAKE ACTION
Although ties have been severely damaged over the issue of militancy, few expect a complete rupture.
Pakistan's powerful military, which sets security and foreign policy, has been reluctant to attack North Waziristan, saying it was stretched fighting homegrown Taliban fighters elsewhere in Pakistan.
"If someone convinced me that all problems will be solved by taking action in North Waziristan, I'd do it tomorrow," the parliamentarian quoted Kayani as saying.
"If we need to take action, we will do it on our schedule and according to our capacity."
Admiral Mike Mullen said before retiring as chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff last month that the militant Haqqani group that attacked U.S. targets in Afghanistan was a "veritable arm" of Pakistan's spy agency, the Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence.
The remarks infuriated Pakistani leaders, who denied links to the group and said Pakistan had sacrificed more than any other country that joined the U.S. "war on terror" after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States.
"All intelligence agencies have contacts. Don't the CIA and (the British spy agency) MI6 have such contacts? It is through these contacts that we get information," the parliamentarian quoted Kayani as saying.
"The nice guys don't give you information. It is contacts like this that yield intelligence. It is about whether you use this information positively or negatively."
Analysts say Pakistan maintains ties with the al Qaeda-linked Haqqanis because it sees the group as a lever in Afghanistan, where rival India is vying for influence.
The Pakistani Taliban, who have ties to al Qaeda and Afghan Taliban factions, are blamed for many of the suicide bombings across unstable, nuclear-armed Pakistan.
On Tuesday, Pakistan's interior minister said the government would only hold peace talks with insurgents if they laid down their weapons first. Both sides earlier signaled a willingness to consider negotiations.
Past peace deals with the Taliban, which the United States has put on its list of foreign terrorist organizations, failed to improve security and instead enabled it to build up strength and impose its harsh version of Islam in areas ceded to it.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Pakistan asks US to do more
http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDe ... 845&Cat=13
Mehtab Haider
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
ISLAMABAD: Encouraged by the gradual easing of tensions between the two countries, Islamabad has asked Washington to help Pakistan’s ailing economy by ensuring approval of the spent plan for 2011 for disbursing assistance under the Kerry Lugar Law (KLL) from Congress, even though the fiscal year in the USA has already commenced, it is learnt.
Background interviews with senior members of the economic team also revealed that Islamabad’s policy planners want Washington to re-prioritise its initiatives. A senior member of the government’s economic team said Washington would have to move towards taking practical steps such as getting approval on the spent plan 2011 for KLL money as its fate was hanging in the balance for the last few months.
“The US Congress has notified the spent plan 2011 but it has not yet been approved,” he said, adding that the Obama administration would have to throw its weight behind this to make it happen. He opined that if the US really wanted to help out Pakistan, it should spend $7.5 billion in a five-year period on the energy sector by allowing consolidation of development projects.
Another important member of the economic team said instead of spending money on smaller and soft projects, the US should spend money for the construction of hydel power projects and other energy sector initiatives.
It was also pointed out that since 1947, Washington had disbursed $49 billion in the form of economic and military assistance according as per current dollar rate whereas in historical terms and calculated at a fixed rate, this amount came to a mere $19 billion.
“In the current rate of assistance of $49 billion, it does not include the reimbursed amount of around $9 billion in the shape of the Coalition Support Fund (CSF) after Pakistan’s decision to become an ally of USA in its war against terrorism,” said the official and explained that it would be unfair to consider the CSF amount as assistance as this was the money already spent by Pakistan for launching military offensives in the tribal areas and the US had only reimbursed the same after a thorough process of reconciling the incurred expenses.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20

http://www.channel4.com/news/suspected- ... n-pakistan
Some young people in the crowd set fire to a wooden model of a drone, shouting "No more drone attacks," "No to USA."
"The USA says Pakistan is a terrorist country, but they come and kill in Pakistan, who is the true terrorist then?" said Nawad Kayani, 28, a Khan activist and businessman. "We come here to support the Waziri people: 90 or 95 per cent of the drone victims are innocent civilians. Our government is just a puppet directed by America, they just polish American shoes, " He added.
But critics of US foreign policy say that targeted killing by drone attack is "state terror".
Writer and philosopher Noam Chomsky, talking in an interview with Public Service Europe, said that the use of drones is unacceptable.
He said: "There is no justification for targeted assassination.
"The Obama administration has extended earlier procedures to a global assassination campaign directed at people suspected of encouraging others to carry out what the US calls terrorist acts.
"What are called 'terrorist acts' also raises rather serious questions. Take, for example, the Guantanamo Bay case of a 15-year-old boy, who was accused of having picked up a rifle to defend his village in Afghanistan when it was being attacked by American soldiers. He was accused of terrorism and sent to Guantanamo for eight years. This is terrorism, a 15 year old boy defending his village from terrorism?"
Earlier this year a lawyer representing the families of drone victims in Pakistan said the escalation in America's use of the unmanned aircraft would become the "next Guantanamo".
But a senior US official responded, telling Channel 4 News they are "the most precise system we've ever had in our arsenal."
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Reimagining our destiny
http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDe ... 4930&Cat=9
Babar Sattar - The writer is a lawyer based in Islamabad.
Saturday, October 29, 2011
Back in 2008 we made it to the cover of The Economist, which warned that “for sometime Pakistan has been the main contender for the title of most dangerous country in the world.” India was the magazine’s cover story this week, and it has been argued that, “with the Western way of doing things under siege, India’s rise offers a dollop of reassurance to anyone who believes in the combination of democracy and capitalism...it is a superpower-in-waiting whose people vote, whose society is raucous, and whose firms are red-blooded and striding onto the world stage.” While one is happy that India has managed to latch on to the path of progress despite its innumerable problems, as a Pakistani it has been hard not to feel a tinge of sadness or envy amid the growing gulf between the fortunes of the citizens of these two neighbouring countries despite the conspicuous similarities in their ingenuity and industry.
Despite India’s poor human rights record, stories of simmering discontent within minority communities and ethnicities and narratives highlighting Hindu prejudice (that get prominently reported in the Pakistani press), vastitude of poverty and tales of corruption, India has managed to take off from the third world and emerge on the global stage as a force that ought to be reckoned with. The continuity of India’s political process, its insistence on retaining a secular state edifice, its investment in education and science, the emergence of a vibrant middle class and a successful business elite, and the influence of an increasingly proud Indian diaspora, have all helped India project itself as a “superpower-in-waiting” and an engine of growth for the global economy, that our formal allies – the US and Afghanistan – have proudly forged strategic alliances with India.
On the contrary, Pakistan as a nation state remains an entity that both friends and foes worry about. Most states in our neighbourhood, including friends like China and Iran, view Pakistan as a possible exporter (even if unwitting) of religious extremism and violence. Political scientists around the world are positing theories that project failing states as the paramount international security threat confronting global order. Pakistan stands in the company of states such as Sudan and Afghanistan that are held up as examples to argue that the concept of absolute sovereignty of nation states within the Westphalian model needs a rethink. And that new exceptions to the principle of non-intervention in the internal affairs of nation states should be created by the international community to confront the threat posed by militant non-state actors proliferating within weak states.
Setting aside its role, standing and perception within the comity of nations, the Pakistani state is floundering in fundamental ways to uphold its end of the contract with its own citizens. It has now been judicially determined that the state has failed to protect the life, property and dignity of citizens in Karachi. The health of these foundational rights is even more harrowing in Balochistan. Whether you consider the armed wings of political parties in Karachi, the role of law-enforcement and intelligence agencies in Balochistan, the militants-dominated tribal agencies, or our indigenous jihadi groups such as Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad in Punjab, the state is failing to protect the security of citizens from itself and the non-state actors that it continues to nurture and tolerate.
There seems to emerge a consensus after every thoughtful discussion that if Pakistan is to emerge as a civilised country that is habitable and seen as a responsible partner by the international community, we need to move away from the devastating path that Ziaul Haq led us on. But even after over two decades of his demise, we continue to embrace his political, social and national-security agenda. The thing about harmful social practices is that if continued over a period of time they begin to influence social consciousness, and once accepted by collective consciousness (even if hesitatingly) as part of reality, they get assimilated within the culture of the community. The Lal Masjid episode, the barbarism in Swat, the killings in Karachi and Balochistan, and the murder of Salmaan Taseer and Shahbaz Bhatti are all frightening episodes.
But even more frightful is the spectre that we might have internalised violence, intolerance, lack of integrity and depleting ethics and our collective consciousness informed by our evolving national culture is no longer outraged by any of this. A guard responsible for protecting Governor Salmaan Taseer killed him in cold blood and the former chief justice of Lahore High Court has risen up to defend this murderer. One is ashamed as a lawyer and a proponent of the rule-of-law movement to have witnessed the day when a chief justice (one who was projected as a hero of the lawyers’ movement) volunteers to help undermine rule of law. But more perturbing is the fact that the “code of honour” that “incensed” Qadri into assuming the role of God, passing judgment against another human being, and then claiming his life, seems justifiable not just to Khwaja Sharif but a large part of our purportedly “peace-loving” populace.
There is also general consensus across Pakistan that education is the only medicine capable of curing the root causes of our ills. Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani had declared 2011 as the Year of Education for Pakistan. The education task force put together by him ran a vocal campaign called “March for Change” and placed in public domain some shocking figures exposing our pitiable national priorities and abject refusal to invest in this country’s future. And even after scribbling into our Constitution that free school education is now a fundamental right, between 25 to 30 million kids remain out of school, the allocation of resources to education and our country’s future remains as puny as before, madrasses continue to brainwash impressionable minds (and spew hate) for free, and the threat that an illiterate, unskilled, intolerant and increasingly angry youth poses to itself and the country (wherein the average national age hovers around 21.5) continues to multiply.
And in this backdrop, our khaki guardians remain committed to the national- security mindset concocted by Zia that identified parity with India and an interventionist Afghan policy to achieve strategic depth and prevent India from encircling us as the primary goals of our national security doctrine. Let us assume for a minute that our immediate aims are realised, that the US-led allied forces are forced to withdraw from our neighbourhood without being able to secure continuing military presence in Afghanistan, the Taliban are back in the saddle with majority control in Afghanistan, and the India-Afghanistan strategic pact amounts to naught. Will that end our need to treat hate-spewing violent non-state actors functioning autonomously over vast swaths of Pakistan as strategic assets? Will such favourable outcome in Afghanistan result in liquidation of militancy and violence within Pakistan and make us stronger?
What vision for Pakistan’s future is defining our national security doctrine? When the lost lives of over 35,000 civilians and soldiers are projected as a sacrifice that Pakistan has made in its struggle against terrorism, the highest officer-to-soldier death ratio in contemporary history is presented as a commitment of our armed forces to fighting militants, and the evolution of the TTP and the spawning militant and jihadi groups within Pakistan is explained as a necessary cost to defend our strategic interests, and yet our legend as a pariah state continues to grow, is it not time to revisit our national-security policy? What is the benefit of successfully implementing a flawed policy – fixated on India and strategic depth and non-state assets – that defines state security in a manner that can only be secured at the expense of its citizens? The need to recalibrate our national priorities and security doctrine and begin treating the citizen and not the state as the prime consumer and beneficiary of security is overdue.
Email: [email protected]
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
[/quote]Acharya wrote:http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s ... lationship
In the near future, more Pakistanis will master the Chinese language and become China experts. When an earthquake hit the northern part of Pakistan in 2005, China contributed $20.5 million for earthquake relief.

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
04:21 PM ET
http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/2 ... n-at-risk/
Pentagon says Pakistan safe havens place Afghanistan mission at risk
By Senior National Security Producer Charley Keyes
The Taliban is weakened but the ability of insurgents to hide across the border in Pakistan is the greatest threat to success in Afghanistan, according to the latest Pentagon evaluation of the war, released this week.
"The insurgency's safe havens in Pakistan, as well as the limited capacity of the Afghan government, remain the biggest risks to the process of turning security gains into a durable, stable Afghanistan," according to the "Report on Progress Towards Security and Stability in Afghanistan," a congressionally mandated evaluation of the war's progress that is provided twice a year.
The report comes at a time when American support for the 10-year war is at an all-time low. According to a CNN/ORC International Poll released Friday, only 34% of the public say they support the war in Afghanistan, one point less than the previous low of 35%, with 63% opposed to the conflict.
The report points directly at Pakistani authorities for aiding the strength of insurgents on that side of the border.
"Pakistan's selective counterinsurgency operations, passive acceptance – and in some case, provision – of insurgent safe havens, and unwillingness to interdict materiel such as IED components, continue to undermine security in Afghanistan and threaten ISAF's (International Security Assistance Force) campaign," the report says.
On Thursday, the deputy U.S. military commander in Afghanistan raised one example of how the Pakistani military is complicit in insurgent attacks.
"We have seen indications where fires have originated from positions that were in close proximity to some Pakistan outposts," Lt. Gen. Curtis Scaparrotti told Pentagon reporters. "You'll see what just appears to us to be a collaboration or was a collaboration or, at a minimum, looking the other way when insurgents conducted rocket or mortar fire in what we believe to be visual sight of their posts."
The report looks back over the six-month period ending September 30 and was delivered to Congress on Thursday afternoon. Eight of these so-called 1230 reports - known for the part of the legislation which requires regular assessment of security and stability - have been issued.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
US "timidity" is because the Paks have not fulfilled the purpose for which they were created. The west has still not given up on the Pak project. Now the west is in a tight spot since the Paks have bums and are not so obedient.GopiD wrote: I think US is hesitant to take this war to the next level....and it is precisely on this plane the Pakis can be checkmated....I guess, there is a lot of timidity and overcautiousness in the present US government setup, similar to the GOI here....
I guess this should be the roadmap for India too when confronted with Paki Terrors pigs backed by TSPA.
The best case scenario for the west would be to have the Yindoos deal with the Paks, but that has not been happening.
Last edited by Pranav on 30 Oct 2011 13:21, edited 3 times in total.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
No need to go haywire actually. You have done the usual thing. You have spoken of the US's purported strengths and possible weaknesses, and of known Indian weaknesses. What you have not mentioned is Pakistan's strength, which is non-zero.GopiD wrote:
I am coming to terms with limitations of the the local dada to punish the punk and the dada's machoness myth is being broken.... but nothing is done to break the myth of my impotence and more is being done towards surrendering to this bully of mine, which is emboldening my impotence myth..... and now I am going haywire....
You have also chosen to link the US's impotence to India's impotence which is a fake argument. The US's impotence against Pakistan is the US's impotence against a Pakistan that has received US aid. India impotence against Pakistan is India's impotence against a Pakistan that has received US aid.
If US aid is removed the degree of impotence of both India and the US will decrease.
For reasons incomprehensible to me, the US counts aid to Pakistan as an improvement in US security. India counts US aid to Pakistan as a decrease in Indian security. The Indian argument is clear to me.
It is the absolute stupidity of the US viewpoint that seeks to aid Pakistan and yet laments that Pakistan is a security threat that makes me laugh at the irony.
My views on this are crystal clear. Only a deep and blind admiration of the US can make anyone fail to see the contradiction in the US game plan. One could say "The US is impotent wrt to Pakistan because of its own policies. India is impotent with regard to Pakistan at least in some small part because of US aid"
Remove US aid to Pakistan and everyone gets stronger wrt Pakistan.Pakistan gets weaker. Now what is it that prevents the US from stopping aid to Pakistan? Is it a desire to dominate the world? Dominate India? Or just plain stupidity?
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Doc, I go with plain stupidity and the fact that the Pakis have the US by the short hairs and do give it a painful tug, once in a while.
It has been fascinating to see US administration, after administration falling for the Paki whares. Sometimes I wonder if there is something the Pakis have on the Americans. So when thieves fall apart, this is the scenario that results.
It is not the American armed forces which are weak (CRamS, music to your ears
) but their politcal leaders who have weakened the US.
As Paki based outfits kill ISAF, and in particular US troops, it would be interesting to see how the drama unfolds.
I have this feeling that we will be disappointed. The more things change, the more they remain the same.
It has been fascinating to see US administration, after administration falling for the Paki whares. Sometimes I wonder if there is something the Pakis have on the Americans. So when thieves fall apart, this is the scenario that results.
It is not the American armed forces which are weak (CRamS, music to your ears

As Paki based outfits kill ISAF, and in particular US troops, it would be interesting to see how the drama unfolds.
I have this feeling that we will be disappointed. The more things change, the more they remain the same.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Condy Rice's book and the revelations of the split personzality of the US establishment,CIA vs Pentagon-assessment of India's intentions after the Parliament attack,only undrescores what we've been consistently reiterating,that the CIA-Paki/ISI nexus is so deep and devilish,that it has fogged the thinking and decision-making of the US establishment for decades.The mutual lust between the CIA and ISI has been so intense,that seasoned minds have been cast aside.This has forced many CIA veterans and analysts to leave the entity,disgusted with the situ over the last decade and the so-called war on terror.The conflict between the Pentagon and the CIA which conntinues to have its favourites in Pak,has given the State Dept. the mother-of-all-migraines!
"What ye sow,ye shall reap",and the latest suicide attack in Kabul that has just killed 13 US soldiers is yet another sad result of the US establishment's deviant mentality. Instead of turning the screws on Pak with extreme prejudice,it wants India to succumb to Paki blackmail and allow the continuing nuclear blackmail by Pak-that of arming its terrorist footsoldiers with them,to increase global WMD insecurity.It is past time for Obama to squeeze the "ghoulies" of the paki military elite,but does he also have the "ghoulies" to do it?
"What ye sow,ye shall reap",and the latest suicide attack in Kabul that has just killed 13 US soldiers is yet another sad result of the US establishment's deviant mentality. Instead of turning the screws on Pak with extreme prejudice,it wants India to succumb to Paki blackmail and allow the continuing nuclear blackmail by Pak-that of arming its terrorist footsoldiers with them,to increase global WMD insecurity.It is past time for Obama to squeeze the "ghoulies" of the paki military elite,but does he also have the "ghoulies" to do it?
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
I just wonder. The US has described Pakistan as ally ally ally ally ally ally ally ally for decades. Now suddenly they are saying that Pakistan has been fooling them for years.rajanb wrote:but their politcal leaders who have weakened the US.
Someone in the US administration is going to have to have his ass chewed off for this stupidity. A series of governments across party lines have supported the "ally" story. Now who would want to admit being stupid? So the US will have to put on a stiff upper lip and not make any sudden changes while hoping that all turns out well an that they can somehow get away by making some cosmetic moves.
This is what I suspect will happen.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
Six killed in North Waziristan drone attack
NORTH WAZIRISTAN: Six suspected militants were killed on Sunday in a drone attack in North Waziristan’s Datta Khel area, DawnNews reported.
The drone fired two missiles into a vehicle as it drove through a village near Datta Khel town about 30 kilometres west of Miramshah, the main town in North Waziristan district, Pakistani security officials told AFP.
A house was also partly destroyed.
Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Sep 22, 20
'N-missiles put along LoC after House attack
Washington: India had deployed nuclear-capable missiles on its western border and refused to budge under United States pressure to hold any talks with Pakistan after the 2001 attack on its Parliament, says former top American diplomat Condoleezza Rice.
Did we??"While CIA was informing the White House that India was on its way to war, the Pentagon was concluding that it was not the case," Rice, who then was National Security Adviser to President George W Bush, said.
"We reasoned that the two wouldn't go to war with high-ranking foreigners in the region," Rice writes.
But the situation continued to deteriorate, she said, adding that by December 23 there were reports of troop movements as well as that India was preparing to move short-range ballistic missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads to the India-Pakistan border.