Actions needed to achieve aforesaid objectives:
With Pakistan -
· Adopt tough carrot and stick policy with Pakistani regime;
· Get Pakistan to live without being obsessed with India - provide Pakistan some non-harmful alternative reason to be proud of and be busy with;
· Keep continual pressure and vigilance on ISI – use carrot and stick with key people and buy their support/allegiance;
· Always double-check any so-called key intel, important tactical advice provided by Pak;
· DO NOT BLINDLY TRUST PAKISTAN;
· Seek intel from India and Israel and cross-check Pak’s intel always.
Military tactics -
· Adopt pincer-like movement in cutting off AL- Qaeda /Taliban and taking them out (Pakistan to push from South and US/ISAF pushes from North) in Southern Afghanistan;
· Adopt similar tactics in other areas of Afghanistan;
· Use advanced technology to detect IED’s from distance, intercept messages, locate enemy, blast underground network etc.;
· Use devastating air attacks where civilian casualties are not likely at all;
· Increase troop levels in regions/areas as required.
· Allow some Taliban to escape to China’s Uyghur region, Iran to create trouble there.
Economic -
· Karzai to make sure job opportunities are visibly available and achievable to poor;
· Karzai to make sure small business opportunities are available to masses;
· Keep providing monetary and other aid to Afghanistan.
Set time frame for Karzai -
· Keep pressure on Karzai to develop further Afghanistan’s own security and police base/network in a given time frame (3-5 years)
· Evaluate periodically Karzai’s performance against given KPI’s
Other -
· On a dual track approach explore if some Taliban are willing to join democratic process (but do not get obsessed with finding out good Taliban / bad Taliban);
· Take out/eliminate private fund providers to Taliban (most of them operate in Gulf and ME, some in Europe);
· Keep up an international media blitz that moderate Islamic elements are being courted and radical elements being eliminated;
· Keep an eye on China’s game in region;
· US/NATO to maintain an unified, aligned and integrated approach.
· Do not piss India off.
Showing posts with label Pakistan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pakistan. Show all posts
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Saturday, July 18, 2009
US PURSUING ITS AF-PAK POLICY CLEVERLY – GETS INDIA TO YIELD TO PAKISTAN
The recent joint statement issued by India and Pakistan, following the meeting between the Prime Ministers of the two nations on the sidelines of NAM Summit at Sharm El-Sheikh seems to indicate that the bickering greedy loser Indians have once again been humbled by the shrewd Pakistanis.
The joint statement sees some departures in both Indian and Pakistani positions in that there is no reference to Jammu and Kashmir in the statement but both countries have agreed to discuss outstanding issues.
There is nothing in non-mention of Kashmir for the Indians to gloat about because Pakistan got a significant victory by getting to include a reference to threats in Balochistan which is an oblique reference to allegations by Pakistan of Indian involvement in the region. This reference on Balochistan will prove very disadvantageous for the Indians in the overall diplomatic duel between the two countries.
Within days of the joint statement K-word got mentioned. As Pakistan wanted, Kashmir was mentioned in Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s statement on reaching India. The fact of the matter is that to make its Af-Pak policy more effective, the US is playing all the necessary political games. And, in this process they are getting the ‘pawns’ to do what they want them to do to suit their tactical moves. From US’s point of view this totally makes sense.
As part of all encompassing diplomatic push there was a statement from Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs Philip J Crowley who said "The meeting in Sharm El-Sheikh and the statement between the Indian leader and the Pakistani leader in terms of cooperation on terrorism (is) vitally important to stability in the region."
But what the common Indian must be thinking is: what did or will India get in return from US by playing ball with it in making Pakistan happy. It is important to note that Pakistan wants to extract some pound of flesh as quid pro quo for acting militarily against the Taliban – Pakistan wants US to pressure India to yield on Kashmir issue permanently.
US wanted to throw some crumbs in Pakistan’s way and they got the Indian suckers to drop their pants to the Pakistanis. US would think that this will help them in pushing the rogue Pakistanis further in their (Pak’s) overt military action against the Taliban. May be it will, may be not, because the schmuck Pakistanis have proven time and again shrewder than the Americans in the Af-Pak geo-political theatre.
The joint statement sees some departures in both Indian and Pakistani positions in that there is no reference to Jammu and Kashmir in the statement but both countries have agreed to discuss outstanding issues.
There is nothing in non-mention of Kashmir for the Indians to gloat about because Pakistan got a significant victory by getting to include a reference to threats in Balochistan which is an oblique reference to allegations by Pakistan of Indian involvement in the region. This reference on Balochistan will prove very disadvantageous for the Indians in the overall diplomatic duel between the two countries.
Within days of the joint statement K-word got mentioned. As Pakistan wanted, Kashmir was mentioned in Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s statement on reaching India. The fact of the matter is that to make its Af-Pak policy more effective, the US is playing all the necessary political games. And, in this process they are getting the ‘pawns’ to do what they want them to do to suit their tactical moves. From US’s point of view this totally makes sense.
As part of all encompassing diplomatic push there was a statement from Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs Philip J Crowley who said "The meeting in Sharm El-Sheikh and the statement between the Indian leader and the Pakistani leader in terms of cooperation on terrorism (is) vitally important to stability in the region."
But what the common Indian must be thinking is: what did or will India get in return from US by playing ball with it in making Pakistan happy. It is important to note that Pakistan wants to extract some pound of flesh as quid pro quo for acting militarily against the Taliban – Pakistan wants US to pressure India to yield on Kashmir issue permanently.
US wanted to throw some crumbs in Pakistan’s way and they got the Indian suckers to drop their pants to the Pakistanis. US would think that this will help them in pushing the rogue Pakistanis further in their (Pak’s) overt military action against the Taliban. May be it will, may be not, because the schmuck Pakistanis have proven time and again shrewder than the Americans in the Af-Pak geo-political theatre.
If US thought that they can get the Pakistanis to completely crush the Taliban in NWFP and FAP, they would be foolishly mistaken. Pakistan will NEVER EVER destroy the chess piece that gives them THE leverage vis-à-vis USA. When the other day in an interview with CNN correspondent the former ISI chief of Pakistan said that they (Pakistan) can mediate between US and Mullah Omar, it was immediately clear that the rogue Pakistanis had another important card up their sleeve.
Pakistanis know that without their support the US and the ISAF can achieve nothing in Afghanistan and this IS their biggest trump card. And, US with all their vaunted intelligence network and military might will not able to make any friggin’ damage to the Taliban network unless their schmuck bootlicking poodle Pakistan provides necessary support.
Well, to do some ego massage of the ever obliging stupid Indians, Hillary Clinton has visited India first but this visit is just a window dressing. The main substantive portion of the Af-Pak policy will be further pushed by Richard Holbrooke visiting India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Brussels in the week of July 20.
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is facing disquiet within his own political party, while the opposition parties in Parliament are tearing him to pieces for the perceived ‘disastrous’ joint statement issued at Sharm El-Sheikh. Singh’s foreign minister S.M. Krishna does not seem to have much clue about how foreign policy games are played. He seems to have merely gone by the strategy paper prepared his Foreign Secretary.
It will be interesting to see how the Af-Pak policy of US pans out in the near and longer term. Hopefully, USA will not be lulled in to believing that Pakistan is cooperating sincerely just because of their military action in Swat valley. Pakistanis can never be trusted - even sons don't believe their fathers - that's Pak history. One hopes US will keep the pressure on the rogue Pakistanis to achieve ultimate success against the Al Qaida and the Taliban.
Pakistanis know that without their support the US and the ISAF can achieve nothing in Afghanistan and this IS their biggest trump card. And, US with all their vaunted intelligence network and military might will not able to make any friggin’ damage to the Taliban network unless their schmuck bootlicking poodle Pakistan provides necessary support.
Well, to do some ego massage of the ever obliging stupid Indians, Hillary Clinton has visited India first but this visit is just a window dressing. The main substantive portion of the Af-Pak policy will be further pushed by Richard Holbrooke visiting India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Brussels in the week of July 20.
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is facing disquiet within his own political party, while the opposition parties in Parliament are tearing him to pieces for the perceived ‘disastrous’ joint statement issued at Sharm El-Sheikh. Singh’s foreign minister S.M. Krishna does not seem to have much clue about how foreign policy games are played. He seems to have merely gone by the strategy paper prepared his Foreign Secretary.
It will be interesting to see how the Af-Pak policy of US pans out in the near and longer term. Hopefully, USA will not be lulled in to believing that Pakistan is cooperating sincerely just because of their military action in Swat valley. Pakistanis can never be trusted - even sons don't believe their fathers - that's Pak history. One hopes US will keep the pressure on the rogue Pakistanis to achieve ultimate success against the Al Qaida and the Taliban.
Saturday, December 13, 2008
PAKISTAN - THE MAIN SOURCE OF ISLAMIC TERRORISTS - NEEDS TO BE KICKED HARD TO COOPERATE MEANINGFULLY!
The recent terrorist attacks in Indian city of Mumbai has clearly brought out that Islamic terrorists not only find safe haven in Pakistan, they are also being trained and deployed by Pakistan's ISI. This has been put beyond any shade of doubt by Ajmal Amir Kasab, the lone captured terrorist in Mumbai.
This terrorist has written a three-page letter to the Pakistani High Commission, stating that as a citizen he was entitled to seek legal help from his own country to fight his case in Indian courts. The document finally settles the debate about the origins of Kasab and his fellow terrorists, and also establishes that the Mumbai attack was planned and launched from Pakistani soil.
US is rightly worried about threats to its own citizens from such attacks, Why? Because, these terrorist acts are supported and abetted by ISI - Pakistan's intelligence agency. This is the same agency which helped, in concert with CIA, in creating and training Taleban to fight the Russians during their occupation of Afghanistan.
It is no secret that ISI has factions which still sympathises with Taleban, Al-Qaida and the Islamic terrorists. One of the main reasons why US and NATO forces have not been successful to that extent in Afghanistan, and there is resurgence of insurgency is because the Taleban supporting faction of ISI provides necessary intel and logistics to the adversaries of US/NATO forces.
The reason for American worry is that the pro-Taleban faction of ISI may be covertly supporting some Taleban operation to strike within US. There seems to be some warnings already to this effect. One may ask, why this faction of ISI would support such an act to take place in US? The answer is simple: As long as the Al-Qaida remains alive, ISI would continue to have some leverage with US. Musharraf used this leverage very effectively for his survival.
ISI virtually acts as an autonomous organisation reporting only to the Army chief of Pakistan. This agency is rarely in control of democratically elected Prime Minister or President of Pakistan. Former President Musharraf could control ISI by virtue of having the Army Chief's post at the same time.
Also, the continuance of Taleban and Al-Qaida assures unmitigated flow of funds for ISI, these funds are used by ISI bosses to amass their personal wealth and also to carry out it covert operations in various countries, including India. These covert operations are used by ISI bosses as bargaining cards vis-a-vis their political masters for furthering their own careers.
However, whenever Pakistan is asked to cooperate in actions meant to take out the Taleban/Al-Qaida, it enthusiastically responds but only through glib verbiage. But what happens on ground actually depends on what the controlling factions of ISI decide to do. Generally, the action on ground is just a sham to show to the American masters that Pakistan is cooperating.
Moreover, Pakistan is also the breeding ground of new terrorists - they are created in the hundreds of madrassahs operating in that country. These institutions are providing a steady supply of half-mad radical Muslims ready to die for any 'jihad'. They just need to be brainwashed as the captured terrorist in Mumbai calls it "I was misled, Lashkar's devils ensnared me." (Lashkar is a terrorist outfit supported by ISI).
This terrorist has written a three-page letter to the Pakistani High Commission, stating that as a citizen he was entitled to seek legal help from his own country to fight his case in Indian courts. The document finally settles the debate about the origins of Kasab and his fellow terrorists, and also establishes that the Mumbai attack was planned and launched from Pakistani soil.
US is rightly worried about threats to its own citizens from such attacks, Why? Because, these terrorist acts are supported and abetted by ISI - Pakistan's intelligence agency. This is the same agency which helped, in concert with CIA, in creating and training Taleban to fight the Russians during their occupation of Afghanistan.
It is no secret that ISI has factions which still sympathises with Taleban, Al-Qaida and the Islamic terrorists. One of the main reasons why US and NATO forces have not been successful to that extent in Afghanistan, and there is resurgence of insurgency is because the Taleban supporting faction of ISI provides necessary intel and logistics to the adversaries of US/NATO forces.
The reason for American worry is that the pro-Taleban faction of ISI may be covertly supporting some Taleban operation to strike within US. There seems to be some warnings already to this effect. One may ask, why this faction of ISI would support such an act to take place in US? The answer is simple: As long as the Al-Qaida remains alive, ISI would continue to have some leverage with US. Musharraf used this leverage very effectively for his survival.
ISI virtually acts as an autonomous organisation reporting only to the Army chief of Pakistan. This agency is rarely in control of democratically elected Prime Minister or President of Pakistan. Former President Musharraf could control ISI by virtue of having the Army Chief's post at the same time.
Also, the continuance of Taleban and Al-Qaida assures unmitigated flow of funds for ISI, these funds are used by ISI bosses to amass their personal wealth and also to carry out it covert operations in various countries, including India. These covert operations are used by ISI bosses as bargaining cards vis-a-vis their political masters for furthering their own careers.
However, whenever Pakistan is asked to cooperate in actions meant to take out the Taleban/Al-Qaida, it enthusiastically responds but only through glib verbiage. But what happens on ground actually depends on what the controlling factions of ISI decide to do. Generally, the action on ground is just a sham to show to the American masters that Pakistan is cooperating.
Moreover, Pakistan is also the breeding ground of new terrorists - they are created in the hundreds of madrassahs operating in that country. These institutions are providing a steady supply of half-mad radical Muslims ready to die for any 'jihad'. They just need to be brainwashed as the captured terrorist in Mumbai calls it "I was misled, Lashkar's devils ensnared me." (Lashkar is a terrorist outfit supported by ISI).
These madrassahs produce jihadis with newer ideas to operate, the recent one being termed as 'asymmetric tactics'. This tactics was in evidence in the killing of 3 British soldiers in Afghanistan by a 13-year old suicide bomber.
If US, Britain and other west European powers want to be safe from potential Islamic terrorist attacks, they will need to kick the ISI real hard to make it kneel and cooperate in fighting Islamic terrorism. The kicking needs to be done literally using the booted foot, and in the form of most uninhibited tongue lashing through to turning the screws militarily and economically.
Pakistan cooperates best when it is kicked with hobnailed boots. History testifies to this. Maharaja Ranjit Singh and his commander-in-chief Hari Singh Nalwa used this philosophy to subjugate and stamp out any potential opposition from the then areas of what constitutes today's Pakistan and Afghanistan (including the border areas between the two countries). It appears this truth has finally dawned on Bush administration but only too late.
As well, it seems President-elect Obama knows a bit of the history, that's why he did tough talking saying "we will stamp out any attempt to repeat Mumbai-like killings." May be he knows the Pakistanis better than the previous American presidents.
So, in summary if US and its western allies want to see an end to the Islamic terrorism in the world, they got to kick Pakistan in to submission and force it to cooperate in real sense in war against terror. But if US continues to allow itself to get fooled by sweet-worded assurances of Pakistani leadership and the ISI, there will be more American blood to be shed - whether in Afghanistan or on the US soil itself. One hopes this will not happen because US would have seen through by now the Pakistani sham and its habit of lying shamelessly.
Saturday, November 8, 2008
MR. OBAMA, PLEASE HANDLE INDIA (AND KASHMIR ISSUE) WITH CAUTION!
This is a open letter to President-elect Barack Obama on the above subject.
Dear Mr. Obama,
Hearty congratulations to you on your election to the presidency of United States of America!
Many, including me, heard your comments on your first press conference with great interest. The media is also reporting about your team formation process and the 'deliberate haste' that you are proposing to exercise. So far so good.
However, there are some media reports that suggest that you are considering to bring in former President Clinton to act as a mediator for resolving Kashmir issue. You are reported to have said during your luncheon meeting with Clinton in New York recently, “We should probably try to facilitate a better understanding between India and Pakistan and try to resolve the Kashmir crisis so that Pakistan can stay focused not on India, but on the situation with those militants (on Pak-Afghan border).”
The news is also rife that Gen David H Petraeus, who took over as commander of the US Central Command on October 31 and visited Pakistan and Afghanistan soon after that, has reportedly nominated Ahmed Rashid and Shuja Nawaz, author of the recently published book on Pakistani Army called "Crossed Swords", as members of a brains trust to advise him on a new strategy towards Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Ahmed Rashid (along with Barnett Rubin) in an article in Foreign Affairs called for a “grand bargain” in which the Pakistani state trades a course correction on its western front with a more sustained international effort at resolving the Kashmir dispute with India. Former Pak president Pervez Musharraf justified abandoning the Taliban regime in September 2001 as a legitimate price Pakistan had to pay in order to keep up its support for militants in Kashmir.
But the outgoing US administration rightly found it difficult to accept such a trade-off, especially, after the brutal murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl which highlighted the fact that there are no walls that separate the terrorists operating in different parts of Pakistan.
Mr. President-elect, the foregoing, which I tried to keep as brief as I could, is meant to provide a background so that I could make a sincere request to you: In your administration's eagerness to deal with anti-American forces in Afghanistan/Pakistan please do not push anything on India regarding Kashmir.
Mr. Obama, American interests will be best served if your administration can get Pakistani military to forswear involvement in politics for all time to come. Once that step is taken in earnest, the policy of building alliances with or tolerating terrorists in Afghanistan, Kashmir and Pakistan itself would naturally come to an end.
Instead of achieving the above, if your advisers get launched on the so-called “grand bargain” trajectory, it will be like trying to address the surface rather than trying to hit the root cause. And, in the process the strong partnership which got built between US-India during the last four years can potentially get undone.
Mr. President-elect, India has unhappy memories of some of your foreign policy advisers — Anthony Lake, Strobe Talbott, Robert Einhorn and Richard Holbrooke. Please tell your State Dept folks to DELINK Kashmir from any US strategy on Afghanistan. It doesn't require much brain to understand that support to any terrorist elements, be it in Kashmir or in any part of the world by any govt (in this case Pakistan) is totally unacceptable.
What I am trying to say, if your policy advisers tell you that to incentivize Pakistan (read Pak military & ISI) to help US in winning against Taleban, US has to mediate and 'solve' Kashmir issue (in some way that would please Pak), there is nothing more foolish, illogical, unethical, unprincipled than this.
If YOU didn't subscribe to anything Bill Ayers purportedly said about radicalism, how can you let your judgement be clouded by any "grand bargain" strategy which predicates itself on pleasing one set of radical elements (i.e. the militants in Kashmir) to almost beg support from a govt (Pakistan) to serve US interests.
If you don't handle the Kashmir issue from moral, logical grounds you may end up screwing up an excellent alliance that got built up between US and India - an alliance which has far more strategic spin-offs for US than one could imagine.
My suggestion to you would be that before embarking on any US-Pak-Afghan policy that potentially impacts India, please have a chat with your running mate, Joe Biden. He will have a lot to contribute in finding a strategy that on one hand will get US its desired outcome, but at the same time it will not seek to bulldoze India in some uncomfortable situation which will have immense potential negative knock-on effect.
You may also like to consult Karl Inderfurth, one of your foreign policy advisers.
I hope you will handle India (and Kashmir issue) in a 'deliberate' and sensible manner. Please remember it takes a long time to build a mutually advantageous alliance; and it takes a far shorter time to weaken and/or destroy that alliance!
With warm regards.
Dear Mr. Obama,
Hearty congratulations to you on your election to the presidency of United States of America!
Many, including me, heard your comments on your first press conference with great interest. The media is also reporting about your team formation process and the 'deliberate haste' that you are proposing to exercise. So far so good.
However, there are some media reports that suggest that you are considering to bring in former President Clinton to act as a mediator for resolving Kashmir issue. You are reported to have said during your luncheon meeting with Clinton in New York recently, “We should probably try to facilitate a better understanding between India and Pakistan and try to resolve the Kashmir crisis so that Pakistan can stay focused not on India, but on the situation with those militants (on Pak-Afghan border).”
The news is also rife that Gen David H Petraeus, who took over as commander of the US Central Command on October 31 and visited Pakistan and Afghanistan soon after that, has reportedly nominated Ahmed Rashid and Shuja Nawaz, author of the recently published book on Pakistani Army called "Crossed Swords", as members of a brains trust to advise him on a new strategy towards Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Ahmed Rashid (along with Barnett Rubin) in an article in Foreign Affairs called for a “grand bargain” in which the Pakistani state trades a course correction on its western front with a more sustained international effort at resolving the Kashmir dispute with India. Former Pak president Pervez Musharraf justified abandoning the Taliban regime in September 2001 as a legitimate price Pakistan had to pay in order to keep up its support for militants in Kashmir.
But the outgoing US administration rightly found it difficult to accept such a trade-off, especially, after the brutal murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl which highlighted the fact that there are no walls that separate the terrorists operating in different parts of Pakistan.
Mr. President-elect, the foregoing, which I tried to keep as brief as I could, is meant to provide a background so that I could make a sincere request to you: In your administration's eagerness to deal with anti-American forces in Afghanistan/Pakistan please do not push anything on India regarding Kashmir.
Mr. Obama, American interests will be best served if your administration can get Pakistani military to forswear involvement in politics for all time to come. Once that step is taken in earnest, the policy of building alliances with or tolerating terrorists in Afghanistan, Kashmir and Pakistan itself would naturally come to an end.
Instead of achieving the above, if your advisers get launched on the so-called “grand bargain” trajectory, it will be like trying to address the surface rather than trying to hit the root cause. And, in the process the strong partnership which got built between US-India during the last four years can potentially get undone.
Mr. President-elect, India has unhappy memories of some of your foreign policy advisers — Anthony Lake, Strobe Talbott, Robert Einhorn and Richard Holbrooke. Please tell your State Dept folks to DELINK Kashmir from any US strategy on Afghanistan. It doesn't require much brain to understand that support to any terrorist elements, be it in Kashmir or in any part of the world by any govt (in this case Pakistan) is totally unacceptable.
What I am trying to say, if your policy advisers tell you that to incentivize Pakistan (read Pak military & ISI) to help US in winning against Taleban, US has to mediate and 'solve' Kashmir issue (in some way that would please Pak), there is nothing more foolish, illogical, unethical, unprincipled than this.
If YOU didn't subscribe to anything Bill Ayers purportedly said about radicalism, how can you let your judgement be clouded by any "grand bargain" strategy which predicates itself on pleasing one set of radical elements (i.e. the militants in Kashmir) to almost beg support from a govt (Pakistan) to serve US interests.
If you don't handle the Kashmir issue from moral, logical grounds you may end up screwing up an excellent alliance that got built up between US and India - an alliance which has far more strategic spin-offs for US than one could imagine.
My suggestion to you would be that before embarking on any US-Pak-Afghan policy that potentially impacts India, please have a chat with your running mate, Joe Biden. He will have a lot to contribute in finding a strategy that on one hand will get US its desired outcome, but at the same time it will not seek to bulldoze India in some uncomfortable situation which will have immense potential negative knock-on effect.
You may also like to consult Karl Inderfurth, one of your foreign policy advisers.
I hope you will handle India (and Kashmir issue) in a 'deliberate' and sensible manner. Please remember it takes a long time to build a mutually advantageous alliance; and it takes a far shorter time to weaken and/or destroy that alliance!
With warm regards.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)