Could Pakistan Dissolve Altogether?
Interview: Afghanistan scholar Thomas Barfield on Pashtun rebels, a nuclear Punjab, and how Islamabad played Americans for suckers.
Boston University anthropologist Thomas Barfield has been publishing relentlessly ever since the mid-1970s, when he wandered northern Afghanistan doing doctoral fieldwork. He has since emerged as one of America's foremost experts on the region, focusing on political development, provincial-state relations, and customary law. In 2006, Barfield, now president of the American Institute of Afghanistan Studies, received a prestigious Guggenheim Fellowship to complete his upcoming book on the changing concepts of political legitimacy in Afghanistan. I caught up with the professor to discuss the P-word—Pakistan—and its role in our current predicament. At the time of our interview, Pakistan's government had not yet signed its agreement with the Taliban that allowed for the imposition of strict Islamic law in six northwestern regions, including Swat.
Mother Jones: To what degree does future Afghan stability depend on reconciliation between India and Pakistan?
Thomas Barfield: The India/Pakistan relationship is probably central. Pakistan has from its inception defined itself in opposition to India, and that makes it difficult. But Kashmir needs to be reconciled. Pakistan could also dissolve: The four provinces have very little holding them together.
MJ: Dissolve into what?
TB: Four ministates or something, in which case your policy changes radically. If you're dealing with rump nuclear-armed Punjab and three separate, independent nations, then reconciliation almost becomes a moot point.
MJ: Can you make peace in Afghanistan without dealing with Kashmir?
TB: Yes, you can. Kashmir's a separate issue, and settling it would not necessarily stop the Pakistanis from meddling in Afghanistan—which they used to talk about as their fifth province.
MJ: And also an extension of their battle with India.
TB: They view everything as an extension of their battle with India. They bought our tanks and planes so that they could fight India, with which they have lost three wars. It's totally not in Pakistan's self-interest to do this, and yet they're utterly driven by it. But if you solve the India thing, I presume that would go a long way to providing regional peace.
MJ: What can the US do to facilitate this, given that India doesn't want outsiders involved in the Kashmir dispute?
TB: It's not clear Pakistan's military can survive without our subsidies—it's a bankrupt country. One of the things for us to tell Pakistan is that we may not want to get involved in this directly, but we want to see this problem solved. And in this the US is probably neutral, because there's no constituency in the United States that's keen on Kashmir one way or the other. Most people don't even know where it is.
MJ: Pakistan's army and ISI, its military intelligence service, basically made the Taliban what it is. Was this support driven by ideology or India strategy?
TB: Part of it was its India strategy, this "strategic depth" they talk about. The Pakistani belief was, "What if the Indians overran the plains? We would regroup in Afghanistan and drive them out." But one look at Afghanistan and you say, "Wait a minute, how are you going to move your equipment?" It's ridiculous. It's not strategic depth. It's nothing. The Pakistanis also have a paranoia—which they actually now might make true—that India is trying to surround them, since India has always had good relations with Afghanistan, and Afghanistan and Pakistan have always had bad relations.
MJ: How come?
TB: Afghanistan was the only state that voted against Pakistan's admission to the United Nations on the grounds that it was an illegitimate state, it shouldn't be allowed to exist. With Partition there were only two options: Join India or join Pakistan. The Afghans said there should be two more options, that the Northwest Frontier province and Baluchistan should be able to vote to become independent or join Afghanistan—they said people weren't given those options and therefore it was an unfair process. If you look at Afghan maps of Pakistan, they always include what they call Pashtunistan, which runs to the Indus River. As you can imagine, Pakistan is not real pleased to see maps like that, which give away half its territory. So there's been this hostility. And essentially, because India's been opposed to Pakistan, Afghanistan has had good relations with Delhi. But the big thing is that Afghans hold Pakistan responsible for most of the trouble in their country.
MJ: India has also been visibly doing good things in Afghanistan.
TB: Oh, a lot. When the truck bomb went off at the Indian Embassy last July in Kabul, the Indians saw that as a calling card from ISI saying, "Get out. This is our territory." And they responded by saying, "We're going to give Afghanistan another $400 million."
MJ: Wasn't Jalaluddin Haqqani the bomber?
TB: Yeah. But he's an Afghan who fights for the Taliban, and this wasn't a Taliban operation. This was a message from Islamabad to India. The bomb went off as India's military attaché was coming to work, so it wasn't just a bomb; it was an assassination specifically targeting one of their high military officials.
MJ: Does Pashtun nationalism play any role in Pakistan's military activities?
TB: Pashtuns are a small minority—something like 15 percent—so their nationalism is looked upon very critically. The government and military are dominated by people from the Punjab.
MJ: Right. In fact, many Pashtuns basically live on reservations, the tribal areas, that operate under a 1901 law.
TB: Yes, the Frontier Crimes Regulation Act. Some of the Pashtuns feel like they are a colony of Pakistan. They're not full citizens, and the act gives the Pakistani government the right to collective punishment, to burn down villages, to ban trade, and even to put whole tribes under interdict—even if they're not living in the area. So it's fairly draconian, and it comes directly out of British colonial rule.
MJ: So if the army isn't Pashtun, how does a smaller element like the ISI exert so much control?
TB: A lot of people in the ISI are Pashtuns because they had the language skills. During the Soviet War period, [Mohammad] Zia ul-Haq began Islamizing the army. Before, the army was fairly resolutely secular, but since the '80s you saw a greater and greater influence of Islamists in the army as well as the ISI. By the time they were helping the Taliban, some [army officials] were highly sympathetic to this idea of a Wahhabi-style Islamic state. Pakistan was formed as a state for Muslims separated off from India—it's name means "land of the religiously pure"—and it's always been like, "Well, are we Muslim enough?" All states founded as places to protect a religious group run into that problem. Israel has that problem with its right wing, and in Pakistan it's even stronger.
MJ: How has army support of the jihadis imperiled the Pakistani government?
TB: The easiest example: The jihadis took over Swat Valley, which is full of Pashtuns, but was under the direct rule of the government and always had been. It had become one of the more secular, progressive areas of the Pashtuns, because it was a resort. It had ski lodges, and was a big tourist place for foreigners in the '70s and '80s. Swat is only a couple hours drive from Islamabad. This is like rebels taking Fredericksburg and sending their representatives to Washington saying, "We want autonomy. Northern Virginia isn't good enough for us."
MJ: And Pakistan has basically bent over.
TB: Yes, it really has. They have trained their troops to fight conventional warfare on the plains with tanks, with missiles, against India. So in a place like Swat, where you've got guys with guns fighting in mountains, and who are experts on ambush, they have just trounced the Pakistan army. The army is able to take back the major roads, the major towns, but its people are not trained and they don't seem to have the stomach for taking these guys on in essentially a counterinsurgency.
MJ: Yet we've given the Pakistanis more than $10 billion, some $6 billion for the Federally Administered Tribal Areas and the border, ostensibly to fight the jihadis. Has Pakistan taken us for a ride?
TB: Oh sure. But they took us for a ride during the Soviet War, too. They feel they're experts at playing us for suckers. A lot of these problems were evident, three, four, even six years ago, but nobody, including the Bush administration, was particularly interested. All the attention has been on Iraq. So this gave the Pakistanis a lot of flexibility to cause mischief. As far as they were concerned, at some point the US was going to get out of there; their whole strategy was to keep the Taliban in reserve and keep their own options open. Now people are seeing that the whole region could go up. Pakistan has nuclear weapons. It has 173 million people. It's big. So the focus and the context—even the appointment of [US diplomat Richard] Holbrooke to be special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan—implies that both countries are part of the problem.
MJ: So what happens if Pakistan dissolves?
TB: There will probably be an independent Pashtun state, unlikely to join with Afghanistan, because for all the lip service Afghans give to Pashtunistan, they can count. If they were part of this state, they would be a minority, and that's probably not a good idea from their point of view. There could be an independent Baluchistan. That's Pakistan's major gas producing area, and there's been an insurgency there for a long time. Some people say Baluchistan might join with Sindh, the other major populated area. Sindh is mostly Shia, and they feel persecuted by these radical Sunnis. There's really a large number of Shias in Pakistan that these radical Sunnis consider to be heretics—they are mostly in the south. Also in the south, in Karachi, you have all the so-called Muhajirs, the people who left India to resettle in Pakistan. So effectively you'd get three or four states. The most powerful would still be the Punjab. That would be the one holding the nuclear arms—Islamabad, Lahore, that area.
MJ: Who would be in charge?
TB: The Punjabis. They see themselves as the dominant group in Pakistan. They're more moderate on the religious and political spectrums—as long as they can be in charge. The army that you see now is mostly Punjabi, so you'd have this large army overlooking this rump state with lots of nukes. The other thing to consider is the elites are highly modern and moderate, highly westernized: Could a social revolution break out in which the elites who have run the place since it was founded are displaced by an entirely different social class that is more radical—that doesn't have the same vested interests or education? The army has always stood to prevent that, so presumably if they would hold on to the army, the army would hold on to Punjab and prevent things from getting out of hand. But then the question would be, if it starts to fall apart like that, would India feel the need to make a preemptive strike to go after the nukes?
MJ: Yikes!
TB: Yes. They do not want to see it that way, because when people start planning three or four moves ahead and worrying about preempting this and that, things can get pretty dangerous pretty fast.
Page 1 of 1 
How about India?
Well this articles reads like India is doing all good and Pakistan is all bad. Surely Pakistan because of it's close ties to Taliban is in a bigger problem and the wounds are open and more visible.
But a slight surgery on history of the region(just last 3-4 decades) will expose Indian wounds as well. India has much worse problems going on in northern, eastern & southern corners, which they occasionally blame it to Pakistan and china.
The State of Punjab in India is one such example. For three decades Indian Punjab has seen human right violations, killing and atrocities by Indian government. A complete generation was wiped out by Indian Government in those three decades. So do in Kashmir, where India does not want to adhere to it's commitment given to people of Kashmir and United National for an independent plebiscite.
Recent Indian history is full of Hindu-Muslim riots, Hindu-Sikh riots and killing of huge number of non-Hindus.
Moreover if west Punjab goes free, nothing can stop east Punjab (in India).
So state of "Khalistan" or a united "Punjab" and "Kashmir" are two that will be ready to go on Northern borders of India.
On eastern borders, states sharing borders with China and Bangladesh like Mizoram, Bodoland, Meghalya, Nagaland are ready to go.
On southern side, may be a Tamil state which is hallmark of Dravidian civilization.
The present India is a collection of Independent states that British brought together for ease of administration.
However centrally ruled India, no longer want to see these states as more powerful. Hence the lack of integration between different parts of India. However like Pakistan, where Islam is integrating power same is true for some of the Hindu majority states of India. That's what some of the Hindu Nationalist parties do in India. They would like to see an official Hindu state overpowering every other religious minority that exist in India.
In crux, the forces that are holding multi-cultural India together are not much stronger than forces that are integrating Pakistan.
So if Pakistan dissolves, the whole South Asia will see changes.
Another Pakistani in Indian disguise
Another Pakistani in Indian disguise. If you have the courage come out with your real name and comment. Oopss sorry, you can't do that. You are trained to talk rather fight hidden behind mountains in disguise. People like you always complain about neighbors when their own house is on fire and is about to be left into ashes.
LOL to the purlander's
LOL to the purlander's wetdream, keep on dreaming pakistani while you country is turned to a giant rubble heap by taliban
Wishful thinking by some Pakistanis
1. East Punjab uniting with West Punjab? Are you kidding? I dont think Sikhs have forgotten the massacres they were subject to by Muslims during partition and vice-versa
2. There is no state called Bodoland in India
3. Tamil Nadu is firmly in India (I am a Tamil). No body wants an independent Tamil Nation. Perhaps you Pakis are confusing it with Tamil minorities in Sri Lanka
Pakistani wet dreams and nothing else. The Indian state is willing to fight insurgencies for a 1000 years if need be. It has staying power and can grind the opposition to dust over decades. Witness the Khalistanis in Punjab, terrorists in Kashmir, assorted insurgents in the north-east who have been fighting for the last 60 years and dont have anything to show for their efforts.
The only way Pakistan can avoid a break-up is if it dumps its blind hate of India and its religious bigotry and use of religion as an opium for the masses. Implement land reforms, give land to landless, break-up feudalism and monopolistic industrialists. A country that cannot provide sugar or flour to its citizens at less than 70 bucks a kilo is nothing but a plutocracy trying to rule over its dispossed pulling religion as a wool over their eyes. Pakistan has a lot to worry about. Hope Pakis worry about their own country, India will manage itself.
And the point Mr Singh is .. you have no idea about India !!!
-
tagged as:
- result
Funny Masquerading as Mr. Singh and stating things like "Tamil state which is hallmark of Dravidian civilization " , this is a 45 year old lie even the those made them then no longer believe in. You see India unlike Pakistan (from where I assume u are from) has ensured (in spite of linguistic states , caste based politics etc ..) equilibrium (or semblance of it) is restored back to a nationalistic view. All of India (incl. North-East ) has a symbiotic enough to know better & east punjab would throttle the non-sikh/hindu west punjab before they unify . In case you are not ware the Sikhs were formed as protectors of Hindus against the Islamic invaders !!
There seems to be an
-
tagged as:
- result
There seems to be an abundance of material on the "worst case scenarios" about Pakistan..There seems to be a pattern to some of these artciles.Create enough 'scare' and neutralise the pakistani state. The so called allies and the thugs fighting the pak army are in no way friends of this country.
Pakistan needs a policy change..get out of this war and take its territory back.
Pakistan cannot sacrifice itself for the benefit of those that want to fight their war in its territory.
Singh, you sound like one of
Singh, you sound like one of those sad, misbegotten Khalistanis. Wake up. India has has a Sikh prime minister for the last five years and perhaps for five more years. Your Khalistani dreams have evaporated ever since the ISI stopped doling out $$$ to your pals in Washington and London. Oh sure, India has had a myriad problems, but hell man, even Kashmiris don't want to touch Pakistan with a ten-foot pole now.
Could Pakistan Dissolve Altogether?
-
tagged as:
- solution
hi Everybody
Like everyone in the world, the civil society of Pakistan is much worried about the rising power of Taliban in our NWFP and the border area of Afghanistan. However, we can not reach on a fair solution until we will not analyze the whole situation fairly. My question is Who is responsible for the this situation? Who left us alone after the Soviet war in Afghanistan? Who create Taliban in this Area? Who brings the weapons and training to these Taliban's?
Please tell your peoples the whole truth and help us now to bring them (Taliban) back in their life's by providing the education and jobs
Pakistan is not going any where, but if you want to make the world peaceful helps us
Exceptionally clear and critical analysis
-
tagged as:
- solution
Other than Dr Barnett Rubin, you seem to have a very clear understanding of the situation there and the points made and raised are appreciated.
Seraiki people are worried
Punjabi has been ruling Pakistan ever since the murder of M. A. Jinnah. Seraiki who make 80% of Pakistan were divided among four provinces by British. Today you find them in Baluchistan, Punjab, Sindh and NWFP. They have been mistreated by the world since centuries. They were repressed by Sikhs, Hindus, Afghans and Britishers. They are waking up now. They are asking for a separate province for themselves and rulers in Pakistan are paying deaf ears. If they are not given a provincial status that they deserve, then they may opt for independent Seraikistan. I shall request western media to help us. We are a unique culture. We have a different language and we have the best fertile land in the region. No one deny us the basic right to have a separate identity. We don't like war but if the kind of repression continues we shall take arms to get our rights.
While it's true that most in
While it's true that most in the US may not be able to find Kashmir on a map, I am not sure why they shouldn't care one way or another. On the one hand, you have a vigorous pluralist, secular, multireligious, multi-ethnic democracy with a lot of economic potential and values that are not unlike that of the West, and on another you have a terrorist-jihadi failed Somalia in the making. Why in the world would one want to feed this jihadi terrorist state more territory and people to brutalize?
While it's true that most in ...
Bowman seems to attempt that the world turn a blind eye toward the powerful Hindu Right, the Nazi-like party that ruled at the center and rules in a few provinces.
Only a nincompoop can forget that India occupies Kashmir with 700,000 soldiers, and has defied the UN for 60 plus years in Occupied Kashmir.
In fact, the case of the Indian military occupation of Hyderabad is still active before the UN. India not only occupied that state but split it into several states.
Democracies don't officially carry out pogroms like India has done in order to kill of its Muslim population. Democracies don't empower people who destroy places of religious worship. India's Muslims live a holocaust of oppression and marginalization.
Perhaps this is Bowman's definition of democracy, a la Hitler and Mussolini, and of course India.
Small corrections
The party of right-wing Hindus, that you call Nazis, will be categorized as conservatives in the west, like Republicans in USA. The "nazi" right-wing Hindu party elevated a Muslim to the post of President and made the first serious moves since partition for peace with Pakistan.
Kashmir was primarily stoked with ISI funds and Pak insurgents. The valley quitened down after Indo-Pak border was tightened. Would be "freedom fighters" trying to sneak in into Kashmir under coverfire from Pak troops mostly get killed on border these days. Hence, they are now forced to take the sea route to India's vast and porous coastline and make their way across land to Kashmir.
Kashmiris in large numbers have voted in local and national elections. Separatist leaders who took political plunge lost badly, and have since talked about introspection of their agendas. Not even seperatists questioned the authenticity of elections in the valley.
Indian Muslims are in positions of powers at various levels of governments and are leaders and founders of big Indian buissness houses. There is no curbs on freedom of expression or on travel in and out of the country on Muslims or any other community.
Any visitor is free to travel across India and interact with its 150 million+ Muslim citizens.
You can keep your delusion and lies to yourself.
shift resources to you know where
-
tagged as:
- solution
Mother Jones,
Great interview - i think this whole thing confirms the importance of the US shifting resources to Aghanistan instead of squandering them in Iraq.
If we had more forces in the Afghanistan, if we were more engaged in that region since 9/11 instead of just moving more troops there now, maybe Pakistan wouldn't have the problems its having now.
Areg
Singh is delusional
Why would East Punjab secede from India? It is one of the most prosperous states of India and Punjabis and Sikhs are one of the wealthiest Indians.
Whatever you are smoking - is not doing you any good.
Pakistan, Afghanistan, India
AFGHANISTAN: the wrong strategy of supporting a minority rule over majority is destabilizing the region and increasing terrorism
When President Bush decided to invade Afghanistan to get Osama Binladen and to bring law and order to that country, he had support of the majority of the Americans and the rest of the world. To achieve our goals, we sought the support of the United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan, known to us as Northern Alliance, who with Russian, Indian and Iranian backing had been fighting a losing war for five years against the Taliban.
The U.S. mission in 2001 was a astounding success for the Northern Alliance and their allies who were able to recapture all the land they had lost and more. But for the U.S., it fell way short on its goal of capturing Osama Binladen and his deputy or restoring order to Afghanistan. Some even blame these allies for letting Osama Binladen slip away. Before the American invasion, the Taliban themselves were divided in their support of providing safe haven to Al Qaeda
According to various estimates, the Pashtuns comprise 40-70 percent of the Afghan population. There has been no official census of Afghanistan for decades. The Northern Alliance tries to downplay the overwhelming Pashtun majority by manipulating a low figure of 40% for Pashtuns, but realistically this number maybe closer to 70%. The current government has been selected bya Jirga, which is an archaic form of a more manipulated and less regulated caucus based on age. Technically until there is a census and a proper election there is no legitimate government of Afghanistan. The Taliban are overwhelmingly Pashtun, the ethnic group that forms the majority of
Afghanistan's diverse population and also inhabits the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and Balochistan in neighboring Pakistan.
According to CIA estimates (July 2008), the population of Afghanistan was 32,738,376[1]. The remaining Afghan population consists of Tajik, Hazara, Uzbek, Aimak, Turkmen and Baloch. Because of our policy to support the minority Northern Alliance over the majority Pashtuns, the resurgent Taliban can count on sympathy from fellow Pashtuns in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The
initial American goal seems to have changed to keeping Northern Alliance and their allies in power in Afghanistan, instead of the original mission of catching Binladen and bringing order to Afghanistan. The past eight years have shown this new mission is very difficult to achieve for the U.S.and its NATO allies because history has shown that it is impossible to have a minority rule over a majority. Few Pashtuns, like Karzai, who are allied with the Northern Alliance in the current set up, do not enjoy popular support of the Afghan Pashtun population. The wrong policies followed in Afghanistan have created a very volatile situation inside Pakistan who has been providing logistical support for the U.S. military operations in Afghanistan. The American alliance with the Northern Alliance makes the NATO mission even more difficult in Afghanistan and provides a recruitment tool for Al Qaeda from the disgruntled majority Pashtun population.
Another complication to this issue is the fact that according to UN agency for refugees there were 5 million Afghan refugees mostly Pashtuns[2] living in Pakistan and additionally 15 percent of Pakistani population is Pashtun of whom a large percentage serves in the Pakistani Army and live in the Pakistan-Afghanistan border areas. Unfortunately for the U.S., Karzai and his allies, in their
seven years rule of Afghanistan with American financial and military support, have failed to establish his acceptance amongst the majority Pashtun population. He has often blamed neighboring Pakistan, which continues to provide logistical and even military support for the American military, as a scapegoat for his incompetence.
Poppy cultivation and drug trade has increased several fold during Northern Alliance-Karzai rule. There have been allegations of Northern Alliance involvement in the drug trade.[3][4] Our goal of bringing order to Afghanistan by supporting the minority Northern Alliance rule is increasing extremism in Afghanistan and their nuclear armed neighbor. To win in Afghanistan, we need to establish more contacts with the Pashtun leadership and draw the support of the majority Pashtun population in Afghanistan. And at the same time, we need to start distancing ourselves from the Northern Alliance, because trying to do otherwise makes it difficult not only for Afghanistan but also brings turmoil to the whole region. This also requires reassessing the supporting role that India has been provided in Afghanistan, where Pakistan haw repeatedly pointed out the alarming number of Indian "consulates" in Afghanistan. The Indian presence creates another challenge for Pakistan which is already threatened from its eastern border with India. No American policymaker can overlook the fact that India, which holds on to Kashmir in violation of UN Security Council resolutions, can only perpetrate this status quo through continued destabilization attempts against Pakistan. Such a wticjhes brew does not benefit US interests in the region.
We need to encourage the Pashtun population including the refugees living overseas to register to vote and elect a legitimate government in Afghanistan that has the support of the majority population and last but not least we need an economic plan to rehabilitate the region. We are wasting our tax dollars and being irresponsible with the lives of young men and women in uniform by trying to support a illegitimate minority clique comprising corrupt drug lords who are being propped to rule over a majority population (this statement does not mean Pashtuns are not corrupt). However, we need a plan to bring is a representative government (which may not be exactly to our liking but given the ground realities there will surely cooperate with us).
NEED TO REDUCE TENSIONS IN THE REGION
The recent events in India bring more urgency to solve regional issues such as Kashmir[5]
and Afghanistan that help create tension. Although we do not have any control over Kashmir[6], we can use our influence in asking India to adhere to certain norms enunciated by the UN resolutions on Kashmir dating back to 1948. At the same time, the Indian leadership needs to start trying to solve their problems closer to home rather than throwing all the blame on Pakistan
who is also a victim of terrorism.
UNITED STATES ROLE IN NWFP AND THE REGION
Most Americans know more about this region through "Charlie Wilsons War" than our American media which has failed to bring the full picture to the American public as they provide the Northern Alliance point of view.
The US role in NWFP goes back to more than half a century ago when CIA used to carry out covert U-2 flights over the Soviet Union from Peshawar airbase . The then Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchevvery threatened the existence of Pakistan when American pilot Francis Gary Powers was shot down during his mission over the Soviet Union after he took off from Peshawar during the reign of military dictator Ayub Khan.
Had Pakistan been a democracy during the Cold War, they may not have allowed their country to become a frontline state against the Soviet Union or they may have insisted on a economic plan similar to the "Marshall Plan" after the end of the Cold War and prevented the setup of training camps to train a militia drawn from diverse cultures to fight against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan which may have prevented the growth of extremism in the region. During this war military dictator Zia ul Haq allowed his country to become a frontline state.. Pakistan had leftover headaches from being a frontline state during the Cold War, and especially the Reagan-supported "Jihad" against the Soviet occupation
During military dictator Musharaf's reign. Pakistan received about only $4 billion from the United States for the logistical support it provided for the counter-terrorism operations from 2002 to 2006, and for its own military operation mainly in Waziristan and other tribal areas along the Durand line, according to a report of the Asian Development Bank.
If the above matter negotiated by Musharaf was debated in the Pakistan National Assembly it would never have received the support for a fundamentally flawed policy of having minority Northern Alliance rule over a majority Pashtun population in Afghanistan. This has resulted in increased terrorism inside Pakistan. The overall amount negotiated is a fraction of the amount required to provide logistical support, guard the supply line and keep the army mobilized in NWFP against the Taliban and support social programs needed by a country of 170,000 million to serve as a front line state against terrorism.
Having a military dictatorship in Pakistan has served the short term goals of US policy planners by winning a war against the Soviet Union on the cheap but has hurt the long-term interests of both American and Pakistani people.
Besides the political and military solution mentioned above, to root out terrorism and undo the past mistakes the region may need a 100 billion dollar investment in education, infrastructure, industries and establishment of free trade zones
LR's commentary is right on
-
tagged as:
- result
LR knows more about the subject than TB !
RECOMMENDATIONS
-
tagged as:
- solution
Relationships between countries are made by people and not by governments. When we look at the example of Japan, China and South Korea with us we see there is no better relationship than a trade relationship between countries. Our military goals need to be supported by diplomatic, economic and commercial policy to reflect the ground reality and also have exit strategy. Our goals should look at American long-term interest rather than Iranian, Indian or Northern Alliance long-term interest. We are not in the region to get rid of Iranian foes on their Eastern border or to prop up their allies “The Northern Aliance” rule on majority Pashtuns in Afghanistan or to suppress Kashmiri Freedom movement for India. Following are my 5 recommendations to improve our relationships and remove the threats.
1. Create Free Trade Zones in North Western Pakistan that provide duty free access to European and North American markets for products and services from these Zones. Provide capital for equipment, machinery and raw materials for viable enterprises and entrepreneurs that invest in these Zones for projects that create employment. Provide tax incentives and also allow easier access to Capital for Companies or individuals wishing to invest in Pakistan thru EXIM Bank and OPIC. Remove quotas and tariff in US and EU on textile and textile products manufactured in Pakistan.
2. Invest in Education and Training. There is a shortage of vocational schools for job training. Assist infrastructure projects such as basic industry, power plants, schools, water and sanitation, transportation etc.
3. We need to abandon the policy of allowing 20% Tajik Minority (Northern Alliance) with token Pashtun Karzai in Afghanistan to rule over the majority 70% Pashtun population. To achieve this goal we need the inclusion of Pashtuns in the Government, Politics, Army, Police, and Security Forces etc. There has been no census in Afghanistan for the past three decades. The policy of having this minority rule over the majority is providing Pashtun recruits to extremism and also destabilizing Pakistan that has a 20% Pashtun population of its own of which a large percentage serve in Pakistani Armed forces..
4. Kashmir today remains the crux of the problem between India and Pakistan. We cannot convince Pakistanis to ignore their Eastern border when they have seen their larger Eastern neighbor gobble up smaller neighbors like Hyderabad, Goa, Junagarh and Kashmir and broken up Pakistan in 1971 into 2 parts thru military force. It was only after Pakistan got the nuclear deterrent that the two countries did not have war. There have been more than 100,000 civilian deaths in Indian Kashmir at the hands of Indian forces. Kashmiri Freedom movement is an indigenous freedom movement. We need Kashmir back on Richard Holdrooks agenda.
5. We need to differentiate between Sharia law and intolerant Taliban law that Hardcore Taliban try to promote as Sharia law also need to differentiate between Taliban and Al Qaida and Hardcore Taliban and Moderate ones.
Indian takeover of small
Indian takeover of small regions inside India are no longer debated even in those regions! Basically, "Kings" of the regions wanted to retain their kingdoms, against the wishes of their populations. The "Kings" were dethroned after short and swift military or police action. These regions are fully assimilated, and one has to read history to even know that they had been "forcefully" made of part of Indian Union.
Pakistan
For the last 60 years America and the west has used us and spat us out when done, and now they are moralizing about the state of affair. Having backed 4 dictators and continually corrupted Army, they give lectures on democracy and human rights. Currently, corrupt Pakistani elites are fighting against their own people, bombing them, blowing up houses like Israeli Army. Parts of North West looks like Gaza after the war. Yet still the West is not satisfied. There is persistent demand to do more. Had Pakistan not gone to war against its own people, Pakistan would have been peaceful. Only when west leaves Afghanistan, the peace will come to the region.
Pakistan stability
-
tagged as:
- solution
A few years ago, when India was ruled by a nationalist party, I wrote to India and Pakistan suggesting that Kashmir be recognized as a sovereign nation. I heard back only from the Indians who, at the time, roundly rejected the notion.
If Kashmir were independent and recognized globally as such, it should diffuse tensions between Pakistan and India.
Pakistan is West Pakistan and still run by landlocked Punjab
Pakistan is West Pakistan rump left over from 1971 mass killing and rape of Bengali people by Muslim Punjabi Pakistani Army in Bangladesh. The same Muslim Punjabis had raped and killed Hindu and Sikh Punjabis Rawandan style genocide during partition of Punjab in 1947. This fact about Muslim Punjabis needs to be investigated by academic of ethnic cleansing and genocide in the 20th century.
Muslim Punjabis today live in extreme fear of losing their British gifted colonies of Sindh, Baluchistan and NWFP. Impoverished Muslim Punjabis have enriched themselves by cheating Bengalis for 25 years, and now looting the resources of Sindh, Baluchistan and NWFP. These landlocked thieves will play any trick to suck in all the American and European aid to continue to run slave colonies.
One the colonies are freed Muslim Punjabis will be at the mercy of Hindu and Sikh Punjabis and South Indian administrators. They will go back to serving the Indians. They know there is no escape from that. They will do anything to prevent that happening.
Unless the Americans stop acting stupid and handing out free aid money to fatten the Pakistani Army nothing but misery will be the lot for the oppressed Balochis, Sindhis, Shias, Hindus, Christians of the region.
Fake "Land of the Pure Muslims"- Pakistan- must not be allowed to fester for the sake of peace between nations. Punjabis (mostly low caste Hindu converts) have played Islam with the idiotic Arabs. In the process given Islam and Muslims a very dirty name.
PS: Muslim Punjabis are divided along Hindu caste lines, shia-sunni, Ahmadiya (Quadani), North and South.
Pakistan could split up?
The disolution of Pakistan has been the subject of a few conspiracy theories and maps that have been circulating for decades.
Although the Punjabi power center has been able to hold it together by means of some colonial laws, it's military and civilian control of the FATA and Baluchistan has been weak because the government has not been providing services and links to the the whole. Also, those areas are under represented in congress/senate.
In the meanwhile, the Taliban movement seems to have spread from the Pukhtoon areas into other culture areas because they are addressing the complaints of the marginalized (poor, landless and urban unemployed) populations. This movement, based on traditional cultural values and religious orthodoxy could be quite comprehensive geographically except, perhaps, in the Shia areas. Pakistan, has not had a reform movement or revolution so there is a lot of pent-up pressure and that is being addressed in the Taliban movement. The conflict with India has always served the elites well, i.e., helped maintain a nominal national solidarity, as they have put off meeting the needs of the population.
Re:
1. His term "nuclear-armed Punjab" can be such a shocking reality...
2."They bought our tanks and planes..." Not that "we" have ever really disliked that.
3. "Pakistan's army and ISI, its military intelligence service, basically made the Taliban what it is". And who made them to be what they were?
It is amusing to note that our "leading expert" - also the self-appointed mouthpiece of the US government and the people, confused, as usual, together - has created that dim, grim picture of successive US governments being easily swindled. That seems to absolve "them" of any responsibility of meddling in Afghanistan during Cold War, fueling jihadists including that erstwhile He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named OBL (now in placid retirement given that Islam has so obviously conquered the world), ignoring Pakistan's nuclear ambitions and supporting - or dislodging - successive dictators.
Who does he take "us" for? "Suckers"?
This said, there is little doubt about ISI's involvement, *too*, in Afghani politics (not that earlier Afghani governments just sat back and let Pakistan have its way) and Punjab's dominance in Pakistan's affairs. Most importantly, there is hope within Punjab, with some of the people - the students, the youth, the laborers who are organizing themselves and are sensitive to State-organized oppression. These small organization need our attention (first of all) and measured support.
Good thanx site owner
thanx super porfeckt
my opinion
Nice airtical, i would like to tell all of my friends about it. By the way, i would like to introduce everyone of you a very nice website, it offers cheap air max trainers for men and women. Such as Air max 1, air max 2, air max 90, nike air max 2009+, air max 2010 new, nike air max TN, nike air ltd trainers, air max 95. Dunk SB shoes, nike shox shoes. You can find almost all the nike series there, in huge collection and varies colorways. They have Latest style and classic style. Though their price are low, don't worry about it's quality. They are realll ones!!! I have bought from them for so many times, and very satisfied with the their goods and service. Come on, you'll love it.
The best part: ".....TB:
The best part:
".....TB: It's not clear Pakistan's military can survive without our subsidies—it's a bankrupt country. .....
"....TB: Oh sure. But they took us for a ride during the Soviet War, too. They feel they're experts at playing us for suckers. A lot of these problems were evident, three, four, even six years ago, but nobody, including the Bush administration, was particularly interested. All the attention has been on Iraq. So this gave the Pakistanis a lot of flexibility to cause mischief. ....."
If only the paks had used
-
tagged as:
- solution
If only the paks had used the American aid for economic developments as opposed to building their military machinery against India things would've been a lot better now...oh well, die a slow and a painful death now.
Zombie Nation
Pakistan is not too far removed from a dystopian England post the rage virus in Danny Boyle's 28 days later. Once you are bitten by a Zombie you get the Wahhabi virus when you cease to be human and exist only as a vector for spreading the virus to healthy, sane specimens around. You are cold blooded and insane. You are inhuman. How do you deal with Zombies? Do you negotiate? No. You quarantine them, or you Nuke them. All.
