de-coupling from the USA strategy.

.
.
.
.
If the American administration wish to invade Pakistan, Pakistan would need to be under a dictatorship, a military dictatorship. Democracies never attack another Democracy. India , the USA on this rule could never attack Pakistan. The next best thing would be of course to say that Pakistan is not a fully functioning Democracy, in the present circumstances........or Pakistan needs more American "help". So it is clear where ALL is this vilification is going.

The best policy for Pakistanis is to rally around a civilian administration which is effective, and press the Pakistan military to deal with the Pakistan Taliban first right into the Swat Valley; dismantle the Kashmiri insurgency against India, and close down the 40 odd training camps based in Pakistan. Then wind-up the Afghan Taliban based in and around Quetta. Finally deny that "al-Qaeda" exists in Pakistan, or at all if you can.


____________________________________________________________

Obama Is Lying About Pakistan.

By Ahmed Quraishi.

Mr. Obama used a domestic event to ‘accidentally’ declare war on Pakistan. Now his team is trying to encourage the Pakistani military to seize power. The Americans destroyed Pakistan’s stability through the Benazir-Musharraf deal in 2007. They are doing it again. Here is the easiest way of telling the Americans to: Lay off, stop lecturing us on India, stop supporting separatism, and mend your ways in Afghanistan.

(Yes that was a shameful cynical statement by Obama about Pakistan, in light of conditions in Afghanistan, Iraq under American control, with Somalia. Though of course there is a certain amount of truth in what he said, but never the less he should not have said it.........I think if you accept $23 billion worth of begging money from America you should get used to hearing such lectures from Obama.)

There is not a single towering personality in the Pakistani landscape today, with enough credibility, strong personality and effective communication skills, to stand up and tell U.S. President Barack Obama: You are a liar.

(Indeed not. Why so Ahmed? I have been pondering this question for 30 years....its not easy. Is it a racial question? Are Pakistanis the type of people, with the tendency to exhibit the characteristics of certain types of races: an excessive amount of savagery and treachery towards ones own kind, and a subservient mentality towards Western countries such the USA, and UK. Yes, Yes, Yes Americans do this bad thing, that bad thing and the other against Pakistan, but ultimately a nation of 180 million strong people can surely take their destiny into their own hands. A nation like Pakistan, unlike Mexico, so far away from the meddling of America, and so close to India, an untried and unexplored FRIEND, and China...........and Iran.)

It is not difficult to respond to the entire American psy-ops on Pakistan, which are built on half-truths, disinformation and in some cases outright lies. (This is precisely what psy-ops is about) This campaign is successful mainly because of the broad influence of the media in setting the world news agenda.

(The Jews control the American media; Bill Clinton the Democrat's passed legislation in the 1990's, which helped big Jewish media groups further concentrate/consolidate their control of most of the American media, and the same is true of the UK media, and Europe..................that is why you get an uniform type of message and hype about Pakistan's "failed" situation. You are a media person so you should understand this, more than the average person.

You say they are successful, so are you saying you have succumbed to their propaganda? Are you saying they are successful, according to whom? By what measure of policies slavishly followed through by Pakistani administrations. What American policies have been slavishly followed through and obeyed by the Pakistan military yet again, against the interests of ordinary Pakistanis, covertly and overtly?

I have clearly stated that there is no Taliban threat to Pakistan, just a scare crow used by the Pakistan military to get back into power.............thus it is the actions of the Pakistan military within Pakistan which is endangering the Pakistani state, as they have since independence)

Before listing the exact points where Mr. Obama is lying, let me briefly sum up the existing situation.

AMERICA’S PLAYGROUND

In less than two years, the United States has successfully managed to drop from news headlines its failure to pacify Afghanistan. The focus of the Anglo-American media – American and British – has been locked on Pakistan. In order to justify this shift, multiple insurgencies and endless supply of money and weapons has trickled from U.S.-occupied Afghanistan into Pakistan to sustain a number of warlords inside Pakistan whom the American media calls ‘Taliban’ but they are actually nothing but hired mercenaries with sophisticated weapons who mostly did not even exist as recently as the year 2005.

( I have not heard of these foreign backed warlords, who are they? Baitullah Mehsud is easily accessible by the Pakistan media, where he gives numerous interviews to publicize his cause, and has no problems moving around FATA....and at most he has at his command a just a few thousand fighters lightly armed with ak-47, if that.........although there is talk of him being foreign backed, but all the indications are that he is an operative of the Pakistan military, out to scare ordinary Pakistanis and into the reassuring arms of the Pakistani military. Besides Mesud who else, lets name names, and the size of their forces, and from which camps in Afghanistan, and who specifically in Afghanistan is arming/training them.)

No other nation in the world would have tolerated half the arrogance that the Americans are showing Pakistan. But thanks to a mistake by former President Musharraf – sometime in late 2006 when he consented to allow the U.S. to manipulate domestic politics through direct engagement with Benazir Bhutto and other players – Washington was given a free hand to deal directly with individual players inside Pakistan and recruit supporters and proxies.

(But Pakistan has for the better part of well over half a century and never learns. Indeed it is the Pakistan military which has this love affair with America, and not so much the sidelined civilian politicians within Pakistan.

"Busharaf" made a lot of mistakes, not just one................he used to love giving personal interviews on the American media, and the ego massaging lime light. In Pakistan it is still not known what concessions he gave to the Americans after 2001, the American military bases in Pakistan, and the conditions of the nuclear weapons there.......the propagation of the 9/11 lies that "al-Qaeda' did it, and the handing over of innocent Afghans, Pakistanis and Arabs premised on that lie to be subsequently tortured, murdered, raped and humiliated based on what he knew was a lie. Busharaf as President of Pakistan, followed American dictates about sensitive Pakistan internal politics without questioning them as America's number one puppet in the country............Busharaf did not make one mistake, he made many that is why he is out of power after serving America for 9 years)

Today, there are many parties inside Pakistan that are pushing the U.S. agenda and very few of those who would come out and condemn how the U.S. media and officials are single-handedly tarnishing Pakistan’s image worldwide to justify a military intervention.

(The only people that tarnish Pakistan's image are Pakistanis. The larger than life criminal colorful politicians; the tin pot generals with their broken English. The Pakistan military through its history since independence has played a major role in that. It is not yesterdays problem but a cumulative problem over many decades. Some sections of the American Jewish media "help" with that long process........Ahmed just do a little self reflecting once in a while, it does no harm)

This is precisely why senior Pakistani military officers are gradually coming out of their self-imposed ban on public activity to counter this nasty American psy-ops. April, Chief of Army Staff Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, in the words of an official press release, “condemned pronouncements by outside powers raising doubts on the future of the Country,” a veiled reference to a spate of official U.S. statements and planted media reports predicting the collapse of the Pakistani state.Chief of Air Staff Air Chief Marshal Rao Qamar Suleman issued a statement saying that PAF “will continue to maintain its optimum operational readiness to undertake all types of missions against all internal and external threats … Pakistan Air Force is capable of providing instant support to Pak Army as and when directed by Government of Pakistan. To keep PAF at the highest state of Operational Readiness is my number one priority,” the Air Chief said in a public statement.

(Really it is naive to think by merely issuing statements that somehow mischievous foreigners with negative intentions will stop their propaganda against Pakistan. Pakistan is failed state number 9. Whilst America has contributed to this, of course, ultimately the responsibility of the mess falls on Pakistanis, its leaders and especially the Pakistan military who have ruled the country for most of Pakistan's history...........38 years military rule VS 24 years civilian rule...........After 1954 with the signing of the $1 billion aid package and the creation of CENTO, defacto the Pakistan military were running the country unofficially, after they killed Laiqat Ali Khan. 1954----1972, 1977---1988 after thy killed Zulfikar Bhutto, 1999---2008, and my guess is thy would have liked to done far worse against Sharif then they actually did.

The characteristics of a failed state for your benefit Ahmed and your friends in the Pakistan military from Wikipedia:

Social indicators

1. Demographic pressures: including the pressures deriving from high population density relative to food supply and other life-sustaining resources. The pressure from a population's settlement patterns and physical settings, including border disputes, ownership or occupancy of land, access to transportation outlets, control of religious or historical sites, and proximity to environmental hazards.
2. Massive movement of refugees and internally displaced peoples: forced uprooting of large communities as a result of random or targeted violence and/or repression, causing food shortages, disease, lack of clean water, land competition, and turmoil that can spiral into larger humanitarian and security problems, both within and between countries.
3. Legacy of vengeance-seeking group grievance: based on recent or past injustices, which could date back centuries. Including atrocities committed with impunity against communal groups and/or specific groups singled out by state authorities, or by dominant groups, for persecution or repression. Institutionalized political exclusion. Public scapegoating of groups believed to have acquired wealth, status or power as evidenced in the emergence of "hate" radio, pamphleteering and stereotypical or nationalistic political rhetoric.
4. Chronic and sustained human flight: both the "brain drain" of professionals, intellectuals and political dissidents and voluntary emigration of "the middle class." Growth of exile/expat communities are also used as part of this indicator.

Economic indicators

5. Uneven economic development along group lines: determined by group-based inequality, or perceived inequality, in education, jobs, and economic status. Also measured by group-based poverty levels, infant mortality rates, education levels.^[9]
6. Sharp and/or severe economic decline: measured by a progressive economic decline of the society as a whole (using: per capita income, GNP, debt, child mortality rates, poverty levels, business failures.) A sudden drop in commodity prices, trade revenue, foreign investment or debt payments. Collapse or devaluation of the national currency and a growth of hidden economies, including the drug trade, smuggling, and capital flight. Failure of the state to pay salaries of government employees and armed forces or to meet other financial obligations to its citizens, such as pension payments.

Political indicators

7. Criminalization and/or delegitimisation of the state: endemic corruption or profiteering by ruling elites and resistance to transparency, accountability and political representation. Includes any widespread loss of popular confidence in state institutions and processes.
8. Progressive deterioration of public services: a disappearance of basic state functions that serve the people, including failure to protect citizens from terrorism and violence and to provide essential services, such as health, education, sanitation, public transportation. Also using the state apparatus for agencies that serve the ruling elites, such as the security forces, presidential staff, central bank, diplomatic service, customs and collection agencies.
9. Widespread violation of human rights: an emergence of authoritarian, dictatorial or military rule in which constitutional and democratic institutions and processes are suspended or manipulated. Outbreaks of politically inspired (as opposed to criminal) violence against innocent civilians. A rising number of political prisoners or dissidents who are denied due process consistent with international norms and practices. Any widespread abuse of legal, political and social rights, including those of individuals, groups or cultural institutions (e.g., harassment of the press, politicization of the judiciary, internal use of military for political ends, public repression of political opponents, religious or cultural persecution.)
10. Security apparatus as ‘state within a state’: an emergence of elite or praetorian guards that operate with impunity. Emergence of state-sponsored or state-supported private militias that terrorize political opponents, suspected "enemies," or civilians seen to be sympathetic to the opposition. An "army within an army" that serves the interests of the dominant military or political clique. Emergence of rival militias, guerrilla forces or private armies in an armed struggle or protracted violent campaigns against state security forces.
11. Rise of factionalised elites: a fragmentation of ruling elites and state institutions along group lines. Use of aggressive nationalistic rhetoric by ruling elites, especially destructive forms of communal irredentism (e.g., "Greater Serbia") or communal solidarity (e.g., "ethnic cleansing", "defending the faith").
12. Intervention of other states or external factors: military or Para-military engagement in the internal affairs of the state at risk by outside armies, states, identity groups or entities that affect the internal balance of power or resolution of the conflict. Intervention by donors, especially if there is a tendency towards over-dependence on foreign aid or peacekeeping missions.

Now all this was not created by Obama who came to power a few days ago, or by America. These are fundamental weaknesses of the Pakistani state that ONLY righteous patriotic Pakistanis can tackle to make their country stronger. It is the inherent nature of predatory powers such as the USA or UK to "exploit" the weaknesses of Third World nations for their benefit............Afghanistan/ narcotics.................Iraq/free oil/destruction of Arab country which the Israelis historically feared........Somalia/strategic placed nation with vast untapped mineral potentials..............and so on. America and the UK dominated by Jews are fat greedy grasping bastards, with criminal intent, using their power with flowery diplomatic language who will never be satisfied by their own needs. But it is not about crying and crying why me? But making Pakistan stronger as a nation.

This involves the leading personalities within the nation taking a hard look at Pakistan's internal weaknesses, and trying to solve them. This is much harder and demanding than merely blaming ALL Pakistan's problems on the USA, the county which Pakistan turns to for begging, military hardware, military training, political direction and opinion.....you Ahmed convey the language of a 15 year old with your logic and expressions of frustration, living under the roof of an American big daddy. If Pakistan is so unhappy then the country should leave the American home. Your military having so many meetings with Mullen and the army of American officials who come to advise the country, again and again. The American military bases in Pakistan. The drone attacks by America against Pakistani civilians from Pakistani military bases in Baluchistan.

As to the Air Marshals comment, meaningless fodder of an automated response.)


And on 1 May, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee Gen. Tariq Majeed called a meeting of the military leadership and an official statement made sure to underscore that “the meeting took place against the backdrop of widespread propaganda unleashed by the western media about the safety of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons.The military statement was being nice. The propaganda was not unleashed by the ‘Western media’ but exclusively by the American media.

( I'll give the solution to the above problem for free:

1. Debunk the "al-Qaeda" myth, say OBL is dead, and there is no "al-Qaeda " in Pakistan.

2. Stop the Pakistan army using fundamentalist proxies in Pakistan, Afghanistan and India as an extension of its strategies.

3. Support good effective civilian governments in Pakistan, and marginalize the corrupt ones.

If the Pakistan army follows my advise, a great deal of the problems of the country will go away. No more threats of invasion from America, India or anybody else. The Pakistan military by its covert/overt conduct invite destabilization and threats to the country----this can be avoided only if the Pakistan military changes its ways. One or the other.)

This unusual series of public statements by the Pakistani military leadership was an indirect repudiation of the sheepish attitude of the Pakistani politicians who failed to reflect the will of the Pakistani people. Amazingly, while U.S. officials continued their propaganda about the imminent fall of Islamabad Pakistan, in the hands of unknown terrorists, not a single official from the elected government came out to clarify the position from a Pakistani perspective. The world continued to feed on U.S. propaganda and psy-ops for several days until the public statements from the Pakistani military set the record straight. That is when a couple of government officials, like President’s Advisor Dr. Babar Awan, released statements contradicting the U.S. propaganda.

(No you have been selective in what you are saying.....the civilian leadership have stated repeatedly that Pakistan's nuclear weapons are safe, and that Islamabad is also secure. However civilians politicians administration speeches have to be guided somewhat by what the military ultimately do in Pakistan)

Interestingly, even Mr. Nawaz Sharif, supposedly the opposition leader, refrained from criticizing the aggressive posturing toward Pakistan. Mr. Sharif, more vengeful than statesmanlike, is hoping these days that Washington will support his bid to become the next all-powerful President after the Americans ditch a weakened President Zardari.

Nawaz Sharif in power can be managed for the benefit of all; he won't work miracles but he will do better than Zardari.

(I think he will make a better PM with the requisite administration than Zardari........and that he should be given that chance sooner rather than later in 2013. I would like the present administration to fall through a vote of no confidence, where the ANP leave the coalition, or through the initiation of corruption probes into Zardari which encourages him to leave office sooner rather than later.........Zardari with his antics is clearly a failure, and never should have been President of the country.

The military coming back into power is not the solution, for Pakistan for sure. Once you have an illegitimate dictatorship in Pakistan, the Americans will have no problems attacking the country much more comprehensively----------that has been the whole strategy of backing Islamic fundamentalists since the 1970's in places such as Egypt, Syria, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and other Muslim countries usually through the military------once you DE-LEGITIMATE A COUNTRY YOU can mobilize the "coalition of the willing" against it:

The Fall of the Shah

Londonistan

The ISI

The fifth column of Islamic fundamentalism

Hamas Son of Israel

al-Qaeda, the global Renamo

Fake al-Qaeda

GWOT over 100 years

al-Qaeda tool of the West

Bernard Lewis and Samuel Huntington

The Great Game

Bernard Lewis

To prevent this covert plan since the 1970's Pakistan must have:

1. Effective democratically elected civilian governments.

2. The military must cease backing proxy fundamentalist groups.

3. Debunk the "al-Qaeda" myth, say OBL is dead, and there is no "al-Qaeda " in Pakistan.

4. Tackle the failed state weaknesses of Pakistan, and make the country a success story, which does not require American "liberation")

OBAMA’S LIES

Mr. Obama basically chose a domestic event – a press briefing on completing 100 days in office – to unveil what essentially amounts to a declaration of war against another country. The declaration was stage-managed to look accidental and not deliberate. Considering the serious nature of his pronouncements, there is no question these were well prepared in advance. This ‘accidental’ declaration of war should henceforth be taught in public relations classes as a classic lesson in how to deceive your public and voters and declare war without raising any alarm.

( I think America has legitimate concerns about Pakistan. Obama as President of that country has the right to make statements around that, but not to undermine the civilian government which he did. That was wrong. Its one thing for a blogger to criticize Zardari's government, quite another for an American President. If as a country you are benefiting from a $23 billion beggar money, from the USA mainly then you must remain silent and listen, OR not take any money at all)

Mr. Obama first made an astonishing remark, that he is concerned about the fate of the elected Pakistani government because it cannot provide services to the people. Ironically, this was a swipe at the fake democracy that itself helped erect a year ago with its direct intervention to bring Benazir Bhutto and later her husband Asif Zardari to power.

(But inherently true, as a failed state Pakistan does not provide the full services to its peoples as it should.............the security problems in Pakistan in large parts are the result of fundamental socio-economic problems within Pakistan and the actions of the Pakistan military....the fact that Zardari can't govern, everybody even in Pakistan knows this to be true.)

Now the U.S. President, no less, has taken it upon himself to criticize the ability of what he called the “civilian government”, as opposed to a military government, to provide for the people.

(If you take $23 billion beggar money from the USA, so you must listen to such shameful lectures)

Washington is trying to nudge the Pakistani military again to seize power. The Americans are doing it in subtle ways. One is Obama’s swipe. A second way is what Adm. Mike Mullen, the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, has done. He was allowed to join the panel of the U.S. Time magazine in choosing Gen. Kayani, the Pakistani army chief, to be among the top 2o most influential people in the world. To work up Gen. Kayani’s ego, Adm. Mullen wrote the following words:

“I don't remember all the details of my first meeting with General Ashfaq Kayani, the Pakistan army's Chief of Staff. (Quite a few since then) But I do remember thinking, Here is a man with a plan, a leader who knows where he wants to go. He seemed to understand the nature of the extremist threat inside Pakistan, recognized that his army wasn't ready to meet that threat and had already started working up solutions.”

(Yes rather obvious interference by the USA government officers in Pakistan's internal affairs. I hope Kiyani does not fall for it. The problems of Pakistan will not disappear if the Pakistan military take over. What the Pakistan military needs and what the country needs is Sharif to come to power through fresh fair elections, and the Pakistan military to work with his administrations and manage him for the betterment of Pakistan.....NOT creating unwarranted competition as to who is better at running Pakistan at this delicate juncture, through the games of America. Sharif can be managed as a national leader.)

The Americans are obviously hoping they can have Gen. Kayani in their pockets and use him to achieve their goals in the region. That is why President Obama in his ‘accidental’ speech on Pakistan shed these crocodile tears: "I'm more concerned that the civilian government there right now is very fragile.” And in another nudge for the Pakistani military, what President Obama’s top general for Pakistan and Afghanistan told an American television channel was even more damning. Fox News reported on Thursday that Commander U.S. Central Command Gen. David Petraeus has told officials the next two weeks were ‘critical to determining whether the Pakistani government will survive.’

(Again another uncalled for interference in Pakistan, and one which the Pakistan military should ignore. The Afghan Taliban didn't conquer Afghanistan after 7 years of hard fighting, numbering 50,000 with personnel embedded from the Pakistan military, logistics from Pakistan and finance from the Gulf.

There is absolutely no inconceivable chance that the 3,000 Swat Taliban could conquer the whole of Pakistan in two weeks. Unless the 800,000 Pakistan military backed by 300,000 paramilitary stood down completely on the orders of Mullen. If that were the case, then it would be much easier and less dangerous for the country if the Pakistan military just took over the country and ejected the Civilian government.......which has just now successfully begged $23 billion out of the USA, and the international community. One also does not think the international community gave $23 billion just so that the Pak military could take over the country and benefit from that huge amount of money. The Swat Taliban are Pakistan military proxies. )

But in what is sure to be one of the most hypocritical statements to ever come out from the mouth of the leader of the Free World, Mr. Obama said this: "We want to respect their sovereignty, but we also recognize that we have huge strategic interests -- huge national security interests -- in making sure that Pakistan is stable and that you don't end up having a nuclear-armed militant state."

(Its hypocritical BUT true, and only the Pakistan military can debunk this myth for Pakistan)

If Mr. Husain Haqqani, the Pakistani ambassador in Washington who basically is the overseer of the Bhutto-Musharraf deal that brought the present ‘democracy’ to Pakistan, has any feelings for his country, he should call an important press conference and tell the American people the following truths that their media and politicians are hiding from them:

• American Anti-Pakistanism: The most spectacular, anti-Pakistan media campaign ever against our country has been launched by the U.S. media and continues unabated, with the purpose of softening the international opinion for a possible military action against Pakistan. And there is no question that this campaign has some backing from official U.S. quarters as was the case in the propaganda that preceded the invasion of Iraq.(So long as Pakistan remains a democracy, it will be difficult for the USA to attack Pakistan dirctly...................whatever their intentions. In addition better relations with India might be good for Pakistan, so that the Eastern Border is secure)
  
• Stop Grooming & Training Separatists Inside Pakistan: With prodding from CIA, academic programs are being launched in the U.S.that advocate the breakup of Pakistan and the creation of smaller entities. This has to stop.(In a free world American Think Tanks and academic circles are free to advocate whatever they like. Pakistan, beggar Pakistan can hardly dictate to the Americans what a few Americans can do or think can they?)
  
• Terrorism Inside Pakistan Is Not The Story: America’s failure to bring peace to Afghanistan despite the passage of seven years on its direct occupation of the country. Terrorism in Pakistan is a result of the American failure in Afghanistan. We trusted the Americans. And what did they do? They let Osama bin Laden escape from Tora Bora, and then the Americans refused to listen to our advice and filled the puppet government in Kabul with the same people who helped Osama escape.( Actually it is if it is percieved that the Taliban as terrorists are about to take over Pakistan; the Pakistan military surrender to them on their terms; if they are lodged a few miles from Islamabad; if 2,000 people die in one year from their acts........and so on. The failures of Pakistan within the country, is the failure of the civilian administration along with the none cooperation of the military to deal with the Islamist problem......OBL was allowed to escape by America because the Americans need a continuation of the myth to justify its actions in Afghanistan, AND Pakistan. In maintaining this myth/lie the Pakistan military have aided the Americans, and justified their illegal presence in Afghanistan, and their subsequent actions in Pakistan.The question then is who in the Pakistan military has the balls to say that OBL is dead; "al-Qaeda" does not exist in Pakistan at least, it is irrelevant in Pakistan, and that the Pakistan Taliban can be easily manageable and can be easily defeated by the Pakistan military, without much affort.....this provides reassurance to the country and the international community. Peace terms, with Sharia Law which are dictated by the Swat Taliban does not.)
  
• Don’t Lecture Us On India: The United States and its sidekick, Britain, have decided that India will be their slave-soldier in Asia in the 21 century. They want India to fight China and stabilize Afghanistan. They now want Pakistan to accept Indian military and intelligence presence in Afghanistan, forget about Kashmir and the water disputes, and turn the Pakistani military into a little more than a local police force tasked with killing anyone who doesn’t like America’s occupation of Afghanistan.(Why not? Why can't the Americans lecture Pakistan? They have been doing it for the better part of 50 years.......and the Pakistan civilian and military leadership have been obeying such lectures....this is what Ayub Khan did, Yahya Khan, Zia ul Haq, and Busharaf.........so whats new? Why change traditions? In fact it is the civilian leaders of Pakistan who have shown some independence from the American Masters....credit to them. ..............................The only slave soldier in South Asia of the Americans and British have been the Pakistan military, hosting American military bases in Pakistan; taking billions $ worth of military aid; cooperation in GWOT and the maintenance of the "al-Qaeda" myth; handing over 650 people as 'al-Qaeda"; extensive military training programs with America; Cooperation in "Operation Cyclone", "Operation Greenbelt"------basically American operations where Pakistan played its part as slave soldiers; Pakistani military advisers under Brigadier Zia ul Haq, in Jordan which squashed the 1970 Palestinian uprising in that country; military advisers in Oman, Saudi, and the Gulf States............the backing of the Taliban at the behest of the Americans from 1994; the largest UN contribution compared to any other country in peace keeping ops as a USA certified Slave soldiers {Take a good look at the Pakistani military, how it conducts itself, how the officers talk, and tell me Ahmed honestly if that is the heritage of Allauddin Kilji, Babur, Akbar, Sher Shah or a Third Rate copy of the British colonial military from the 1930's, which not only looks like a colonial military but acts like one, waging its most vicious wars against its own people overtly or covertly}........On the other side of the coin Pakistan can't lecture the USA, if the USA decides to invite greater Indian participation in Afghanistan. Nothing Pakistan can do about that, especially if America wants to use India to invade Pakistan. However Pakistan can counter such a policy simply by winding down insurgency operations in Kashmir, and forgetting about it, closing the military bases which train the Kashmir insurgency; sign an FTA with India and legalise the LOC. This would be a better policy than simply complaining, "Oh Mr. USA why are you so nasty and mean to me? Why don't you consider my feelings?" again, again, again
  
  
• Its always the Civilian politicians fault, or the USA fault, or the Indians fault........but never the Pakistan military......."The Best military in the world"...right?)
  
• India IS Pakistan’s enemy until proven otherwise through actions and not words: Someone has to teach Mrs. Clinton, President Obama and their other team members some lessons in strategy. India continues to prove by actions that it is an enemy of Pakistan. This does not apply to the people of India but it certainly applies to their government and their intelligence services, their media, and their ‘non-state actors’. The world should know that India in 1972 launched a unilateral invasion of Pakistan exploiting a domestic political crisis and helped break up Pakistan. We have never done anything similar to India before that year. This naked aggression by India was never condemned by the so-called leaders of the free world and continues to be overlooked. India is portrayed as a responsible country despite having committed aggression against a smaller neighbor without provocation. Can the Americans guarantee India will not do this again?(We should not distort history, after all these years. Pakistan attacked India in 1965 illegally, and India was looking to get even, since they knew that East Pakistan was guarded by one weak division in the mid 1960's, and the local population were none too happy with Pakistani rule for justifiable reasons, related to unequal development, the Indians naturally after 1965 wanted to exploit that........if they didn't they would have been complete idiots (RE: Baluchistan, and NWFP.......East Pakistan scenario). In March 25th 1971 the Pakistani military started a genocidal war against the local people----as a result of the operations of the Pakistan military, about 10 million Bangadesh refugees flooded into India and then the internal matter of East Pakistan became India's concern, through the 10 million refugee issue, whom India had to care for. The Indians backed the Bangladesh liberation movement, training them, arming them, feeding them...and by december 1971 when the war ended there were anything...between 80,000---300,000 armed freedom fighters courtesy of India. By November 1971 the freedom fighters became very aggressive and pressed the Pakistan military, and slowly they were backed by Indian support units, liberating pockets of East Pakistan. On December the 3rd Pakistan attacked India unilaterally in the Western sector, to relieve pressure in the Eastern sector, thus initiating the war with India officially, and the war ended within 13 days.....All along the way it was Pakistani provocation and Indian response to that provocation. Even with the Pakistani provocation, India finally commited to attacking the East Pakistan forces with American approval)
  
• The Afghan Taliban Are Not A Threat To America: The Afghan Taliban have never operated outside their country and are attacking American and other occupation forces inside Afghanistan as a result of the occupation. Washington should stop deliberately confusing the world about the difference between the Afghan Taliban and al Qaeda. The al Qaeda is a terrorist organization that should be eliminated, and has considerably been eliminated.(No realistically not. The Afghan Taliban have not really made any real impact against the Occupation Forces in Afghanistan)
  
• Eliminating Afghan Taliban Is Not Pakistan’s Responsibility: It is America’s responsibility to bring the Pashtun in Afghanistan into the power structure and defuse tensions.(If the Afghan Taliban and Mulla Omer are headquatered in Quetta, and provided support by the Pakistan military, yes they are. America is in a neo-colonial narco-profit mission in Afghanistan which means you suppress the dominant group in a country, the Pashtuns, and bolster the position of the minority through the Northern Alliance....the Tajiks. Incidently the Jews who run America are also doing just that to the traditional dominant group in America through open border immigration, and flooding the country with Hispanics/Latino....The dominant group will be a minority in a few decades. Olla! Maniyana!)
  
• So-called Pakistani Taliban Are No Threat To America: Although money and weapons for these militants are coming from U.S-controlled Afghanistan, many of the recruits and fighters are Pakistanis and we will deal with them any way we deem fit. It is not for Washington to decide how we do this.(They are percieved as a threat by America if they seem like taking over Pakistan, with its nuke weapons...........then they are a threat to America theoretically. To counter that crucial image the Pakistan military need to cease making peace deals with the likes of the Swat Taliban and actually fight them, and roll them back...............As to the origins of the Swat Taliban and Mehsud's actual state backing, one can only summise that since the Pakistan military regularly negotiates with them, legitimates them by giving them concessions, surrenders to them by allowing them to take even more Pakistan territory, without a real fight; allow them to turn back whole units of the military when the Swat Taliban erect road blocks; allow them to run radio stations non-stop........then they can only do so with the tacit approval of the Pakistan military..........they must be Pakistan's military proxies, there can be no other logical explanation for this, absolutely nothing else you can spin Ahmed. The reason why many of them cover their faces........because they are either serving military or ex-military; Pashtuns are not noted for their shyness unless working on a covert mission for the Pakistan military)
  

Is this going to be another Vietnam?

.
.
.
.


. . . . I don't know is this really a good idea? Is Pakistan's fundamental national/failed state problems solvable through military avenues.................more American military advisers, more military aid......I never thought so, and I thought that was the implicit understanding of the current Washington regime with the emphasis on economic aid rather than security aid; the latter which the Bush junta emphasized to a great degree, with the ensuing mess in Pakistan.

No Pakistan most definitely does not need the Vietnam solution.

Pakistan does not need more American military trainers training them inside or outside Pakistan; this only increases the negative perception of the Pakistan military within Pakistan, as a tool of Washington.

What Pakistan needs, and the original and only mistake of America in South Vietnam, is in Pakistan's case honestly back competent uncorrupted populist civilian regimes in Islamabad. That is the winning ticket for success in Pakistan, and for America around the world in all Third World nations. The Papa Doc Duvalier, the General Noriega's and the Ferdinand Marcos SOB of America have got to be relegated, and age old racist foreign policy perceptions and modes ditched for American foreign policy to survive in the 21st century.

Also it is not a lack of numbers (800,000 Pakistan military unofficially, with 300,000 paramilitary), or a lack of equipment (2,000 artillery pieces, 2500 tanks, 450 jet fighters) or a lack of training (see the performance of some of the operations of the Pakistan military trained LeT, JeM against the Indian army) that results in the "failure" of the Pakistan military against the 3,000 Swat Taliban armed with AK-47, it is a simple lack of will.

On a more sinister level, but probably accurate given Pakistan's military history with their MO, is that the Swat Taliban are proxies of the Pakistan military, out to threaten and destabilize the civilian government and thus allow the military to get back into power.

In that light what Obama said last Friday (1/5/2009) was highly destabilizing for Pakistan, and shameful, as President of America in a major platform for him. Now I know its all the rage to show Jew sympathy whilst putting the boot in (This is being Jew clever), but ALL Pakistanis whether in the military or as civilians should be aware of such double dealing. The Democrat Party of America is the Jew party of America par excellence...80% of American Jews traditionally vote for the Party, and for this reason alone, and in relations to the Israeli 30 year goal of neutralizing Pakistan's nuclear bomb capabilities, Pakistanis must be wary of the intentions of the Obama regime towards the country, especially now.

They must not draw false naive assumptions of American intentions from the huge aid that Pakistan is being given right now........$7.5 billion annual economic aid, $7.6 billion IMF loan, $5.28 billion International assistance, and $ 3 billion military assistance----$23 billion........all this is NOTHING, NOTHING if the American's call you the most dangerous nation on earth, destabilize the country, and then use the pretext of Islamist are taking over Pakistan's nuke assets to invade the country, and eventual occupation..........which causes $300 billion worth of damage to Pakistan; the death of 8 million Pakistani civilians like Iraq; and 20 million Pakistani refugees in India like Iraqis in Syria and Jordan selling themselves for one Dinar to survive.

No more military assistance for the Pakistan military. Lets focus on the content of the Pakistan military.

Why are there so many beards in the Pakistan military?

Why are there so many beards in senior positions in the Pakistan military?



Why are there so many beards in senior positions in the Pakistan military, which are then sent for training in America?

From what type of background are the mullahs of the Pakistan military recruited from? Who are these mullahs?

Why did the Pakistan military surrender to the Swat Taliban, and then advise the Islamabad civilian government to negotiate with the Swat Taliban terrorists, which gave them legitimacy?



Why does Mullen keep visiting Pakistan so often?

When will the Americans end their illegal occupation of Afghanistan, and ease the problems on Pakistan by doing this?

For how long do the Americans intend to support failed regimes, and non-governance in Afghanistan, before they lecture Pakistan about the same?

How much drugs money profits do the Jew want to make through Afghanistan, before the Jew decides to call it a day?

Was the Vietnam war (1965-75) about controlling drugs trade for the Jew (successful), or about fighting Jewish Communism (unsuccessful)?

What fucking bright new ideas will the Jew come up with, and how do we discern what is a Jew policy, and "American foreign policy" ?


______________________________________________

Obama: ‘We Want to Respect Pakistan’s Sovereignty, But…’

US Eyes Expanded Intervention in Pakistan

by Jason Ditz of Antiwar.com

President Barack Obama had nothing but good things to say about Pakistan’s military, cheering them for recognizing the “misguided” concern with a prospective Indian invasion and recognizing, in his words, “that their biggest threat right now comes internally.”

But with regards to the nation’s civilian government, Obama was anything but supportive. While criticizing it as “very fragile” and incapable of delivering basic services, the US president declared “We want to respect their sovereignty, but we also recognize that we have huge strategic interests, huge national security interests in making sure that Pakistan is stable and that you don’t end up having a nuclear-armed militant state.”

While pressuring Congress to support “urgent” aid to Pakistan, the Obama Administration intends to significantly expand the nascent US military training program in the nation. Reportedly the president will discuss the matter with Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari during his visit next week, but senior officials say that Pakistan has already agreed in principle to the idea.

The United States started a small training program for Pakistan’s paramilitary Frontier Corps in October, though officials in February also confirmed a “secret task force” of over 70 military advisers were also dispatched to provide direct training and advisory functions.

Historically, growing US training commitments have been a prelude to more direct US military intervention. The US military was involved in training the South Vietnamese army in 1954, an escalating commitment in which the United States ultimately committed more than 500,000 ground troops to a bloody and ultimately failed war.

What the president’s somewhat ominous comments about wanting to respect Pakistan’s sovereignty will ultimately come to remains to be seen, but recent history certainly is not on the side of the United States in creating a “stable” nation where none exists.

Related Stories

• May 1, 2009 -- Hedging, US Woos Pakistani President’s Rival

An urgent de-construction of the "al-Qaeda" myth.

.
.
.
.


.


In an interview in late 2007, a month before her death Benazir Bhutto stated that Osama Bin Laden was dead, and that he had been killed by an unofficial ISI operative Omer Shaikh in late 2001. He was killed it is alleged so that he could no longer continue giving his alternative opinion of what happen in NY 9/11, which was that he as "al-Qaeda" did not do it, but rather it was the work of state entities within America with Israel. In his last interview to a Pakistani newspaper this is what he asserted.

Osama Bin Laden then disappeared for two years, and appeared again in late 2003 in videos, where he makes various ideological statements mainly against America and the West, in studio presentations. Some argue that these video presentations are fake, manufactured by elements of the West who wish to justify the continued Afghan war, and the GWOT in general, by implying that there is a global terror organization called "al-Qaeda", and that its leader is still directing his organization against America, Israel, the West and anybody else they don't happen to like at any particular time.

The CIA disbanded its unit looking for Osama Bin Laden in 2005.

Some argue that there is no such organization as "al-Qaeda", but that it is merely an intelligence front of Israel mainly and its false flag ops in the Greater Middle East, Europe and America...which are deemed necessary to further Israel's geo-strategic interests.

From my meager analysis, the Pakistani ISI/Military have played a major role in creating the "al-Qaeda" myth. Their deep involvement in "Operation Cyclone" where they trained 85,000 Afghan Mujaheddin, and 12,000 foreign Jehadis from the 1980's with the Americans, MOSSAD and the British, means that the Pakistani ISI/military first and foremost had to have developed a close relationship with "al-Qaeda" with its strength of 5,000 fighters as alleged by America or its real size of just a few dozen Arab friends of Osama Bin laden, who were his business and ideological partners, and who for his Western intelligence masters coordinated the foreign Arab fighters in Afghanistan through the ISI (AT best a liaison officer who also chipped in with funds).

The Pakistani military must have maintained liaison officers with Osama Bin Laden right into 2001, until his death, and they must know where he is.

In a wider sense in relation to the article below, it is good that Zardari has stated that Osama has passed away, and it would be good if ALL in Pakistan, political parties of all shades say the same too, including the Pakistan military.

There is absolutely no sense in creating a legend around Osama Bin Laden in Pakistan now. Especially where illiterate misguided people in the Frontier province lionize him, and place unwarranted faith in the man and his false messages of hope and salvation.......let us all in Pakistan from civilian politicians to the military in unison say that the man has passed away and this is the shared consensus of all in Pakistan.

As to his organization "al-Qaeda" again it should be stated by ALL in the top echelon that at a practical level that so called organization has no presence in Pakistan, save a few hundred foreign jehadi fighters rum left over from the 1980's hailing from various Arab countries, Chechnya, Uzbekistan and Chinese Sinkiang province.

How foolish it would be for the sake of milking a few more $ in the few $ billions, and few more $ worth of military aid, that the Pakistani military should continue to support the myth of "al-Qaeda' and in the process invite a devastating attack against Pakistan in the future from the neo-colonial forces of the USA, UK and Israel ALL of whom have stated that Pakistan is the most dangerous country in the world, and 'al-Qaeda' is based there, and its leader Osama Bin Laden is based there near the Hindu Kush. An attack against Pakistan that could result in damages worth 100's of billions of $.....and the loss of millions of lives.

Where is the rationality here in pursuit of solid national security? Does Pakistan require the permission of anybody to say such things? Zardari does not.


__________________________________________________


Zardari says Osama is dead: Pak media

By NDTV.


According to the reports emerging out of Pakistan are pointing towards the fact that one of the world's most wanted terrorists Osama bin Laden is dead.

Pakistani news channels are quoting President Asif Ali Zardari as saying that Osama is dead.

Zardari has said that Pakistani intelligence believes Osama is dead as there's no evidence to say that he is alive.

He has also ruled out the possibility of Pakistan's nuclear weapons falling into the hands of the Taliban or other radical Islamic groups, saying that the arsenal had been put under "extra security".

"Pakistan's nuclear installations are in safe hands and under extra security," Zardari said in an interview to foreign media.

The concerns over the safety of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal came about after Taliban's recent advance towards the federal capital, which sparked off fears in the US and other countries.

"I want to assure the world that the nuclear capability of Pakistan is under safe hands," he said.

Allaying fears about a possible threat to the security of Pakistan's nuclear weapons, Zardari said the country had a strong command and control system for its arsenal that was fully in place.

US Secretary State Hillary Clinton has said one of the prime American concerns, which have been raised with Islamabad and Pakistan's military, is the probabilities of Taliban advancing and wresting "keys to the nuclear arsenal of Pakistan".

The old problem of twisted logic.

.
.
.
.


According to military spokesman Major General Athar Abbas, its perfectly OK if about a few hundred armed fanatical fundamentalists hover less than a 100 miles in the vicinity of Islamabad. Absolutely nothing to worry about folkes because its normal you see in Pakistan, even as they threaten other areas in significant numbers, such as Mardan, Peshawar, Wah and Taxila (The last two places where all Pakistan's ordnance and armaments factories are located.)

According to Maj General Abbas its perfectly OK if the Swat Taliban kill a few people, loot property and cause people to flee in the course of defying the Islamabad government and Nisar-i-non-agreement, sticking a fore finger at all who oppose them.........because this is Pakistan, and accept it as the norm in Democratic Pakistan. Talk about selling Pakistan to the West!!!! This has the performance level of Iraqi Ambassador to the UN Muhammad al-Duri, in terms of reassuring the public, and protecting Iraq's image in 1991 for Saddam.

"Don't worry, be happy" its all under control, and there I might tend to agree with him, for to have such a laid back sanguine approach in such "interesting and intriguing" circumstances is reassuring enough and the indication that the Swat Taliban are indeed controlled proxies of the Pakistan military.............with what the Americans have been threatening recently, and the immidiate reaction of the Pakistani military with the Swat Taliban speaks volumes, and reinforces that Pakistani general perception/suspicion.

Using irregular fighters to carry out Pakistan military strategies is an old game that they have used since indepedence, both inside Pakistan and more overtly outside, against India and Afghanistan. It is the Pakistan military's old habit instituted through the British established ISI, "Mudra Doosh". They will require serious rehabilitation to ween them off it, because as stated so many times before, such actions always has negative blow back consequences in the long term for Pakistan's overall image.

After all do you want paranoic Israel, with America, and the UK in unison calling you the most dangerous nation on earth, and the epicenter of global terrorism? Following it up with false flag ops in the UK for example, and blaming them on innocent Pakistanis..............Major General Abbas over to you, "Its OK with me, as long as we can get back into power in Pakistan because thats all that matters to me. We can face down the might of the USA/UK/Israel, no problem just as we did India many times in 1947, 1965, 1971, 1999, and the Soviet Union, after all we are the best military in the world nobody can defeat us. ........................And besides I have a second home just outside Washington, stocks and shares in NYSE, so no problem yaar"

So with the Americans heckling, with some patriotic Pakistanis expressing outrage this has forced the Swat Taliban into withdrawing partially from some parts, but the threat still exists bidding their time, covertly guided by the Pakistan military. But now another arm of the Pakistan Taliban under Baitullah Mehsud, using the numbers game has stated that no less than 300 (movie) of his followers will threaten Pakistani cities with suicide bombers.

Clearly the Pakistan military are desperate to get back into power as national saviors yet again, before Nawaz Sharif develops an alternative forceful, populist narrative to the present Zardari failed regime------------Zardari has acquired a whopping $23 billion in foreign aid commitments thus far through his pleading, on his knees begging mixed with threats of dire consequences for the world if they don't deliver soon....and as Mr. 20% he will make maybe $4 billion from that.

Everybody in Pakistan understands, including his own party that he is no leader of anything. He is not a party leader, he is not a political leader, and he most certainly isn't a national leader, uniting the country around him.....he was always the "Mr. Fix it" in the background, wheeling and dealing....with no political base in his party, no ideological commitment, and the ensuing result is there for all to see in Pakistan:

A government which doesn't govern. Has Zardari enunciated any significant policies in relation to the most pressing issues facing Pakistan, and published those documents for all to see, scrutinise and criticise? Very basic function of government. If Zardari is too busy he can subcontract the numerous experts in his country, both within the public sector and private sector to do so for him.

A President who enjoys foreign trips even when serious events are taking place in his country.

A government with no serious plan of action, which clear strategies to solve the fundamental problems which Pakistan faces. Rather we have a President and government which reacts to yet another bad event, with glib sound bites.

The President in the circumstances seems to be the happiest man in Pakistan.

The $23 billion foreign aid will be wasted, and the situation in Pakistan will only get worse. Nawaz Sharif, and all the other civilian leaders across the board for their own sake must sideline Zardari's failed regime, and reinstate a new civilian one. In doing so it is logical that the ANP should withdraw from the present failed "non-government" coalition, since under the present governments watch the Pakistan Taliban with the help of the military are gaining control of ANP territory rather too easily, whilst ANP candidates are fleeing their seats of power, without a fight. This would be the logical thing to do for the ANP, for their self preservation. The ANP is being too polite with the Pakistan military backed Swat Taliban.

The Pakistan military don't like the ANP, because the Pakistan military have very basic simple perceptions of politics-----friend/foe; this has always been the case with the simple rather stupid Pakistan military, they have never learnt from their great failure in East Pakistan. Maybe the ANP should drop the Awami name tag, to help the Pakistan military understand them better!!! This mindset is never going to change in reality, so in the present circumstances rather than the ANP cling desperately onto a coalition government which is failing them, ceding more and more territory to the Pakistan military backed Taliban, the ANP should rigourously protest, and leave the present coalition. The ANP's passive polite surrender to the Pakistan military backed Swat Taliban will have dire conseqiuences for their party long term.

In doing so they earn respect and recognition as a party which stood up for their rights, and stood up for the rank and file of its followers and party members.

Ex-Raw chips in with his angle on the Swat scene.

.
.
.
Pak Taliban: From A Bunch Of Suicide Bombers To A Conventional Army

By B. Raman at SAAG.

1.Like the Neo Taliban of Afghanistan, the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) has evolved in less than a year from a bunch of suicide bombers to a conventional army capable of set-piece, stand and fight battles with the Pakistani Army and para-military forces. This conversion has been facilitated by the recruitment of a large number of retired Pashtun ex-servicemen living in the Pashtun tribal belt in the Federally-Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and in the Malakand Division of the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP). The Swat Valley and the Buner District, less than a hundred kms from Islamabad, which was occupied by the TTP earlier this week without any resistance from the local security forces, form part of the Malakand Division.

(Much of the Taliban in Afghanistan Pakistan is controlled by the Pakistan army, as proxies. If the TTP can fight set piece battles its because of the logistical and personnel support of the Pakistan military using it as a "Controlled Opposition" proxy for the Pakistan military's agenda.......to destabilize the Civilian government in Islamabad, and get back into power as national saviors of the day )

2. The agreement signed earlier this year by the coalition Government in the NWFP headed by the Awami National Party (ANP) with Sufi Mohammad of the Tehrik-e-Nifaz-a-Shariat-e-Mohammadi (TNSM), which is a constituent unit of the TTP, for the introduction of Sharia courts covers the entire Division, consisting of seven districts and not just Swat. Now that the agreement, despite strong criticism from abroad, has been got approved by Prime Minister Yousef Raza Gilani by the National Assembly and signed by President Asif Ali Zardari, the TNSM has lost no time in expanding its control to areas of the Malakand Division outside Swat. The occupation of the Buner district is the beginning. The occupation of the other districts will follow.

(Very foolish of the civilian government to negotiate and sign agreements with these types of people. It makes them look ineffective afterwards)

3. What should be of great concern to both India and the US is that the TTP, which was seen till recently as merely a collection of young suicide bombers with limited capability for territorial control and dominance through conventional forces, has started demonstrating that it has evolved into a conventional army, which can fight, occupy and administer territory. Thus, the TTP has evolved into a mirror image of the Neo Taliban. It shares with the Neo Taliban its objective of fighting for the defeat of the US-led NATO forces in Afghanistan. At the same time, it has its own independent agenda of expanding its territorial and ideological dominance to other areas of the Pashtun belt in the NWFP initially and then to non-Pashtun areas. The Neo Taliban does not approve of this independent agenda, but does not oppose it actively.

(I would hesitate to call a bunch of irregular insurgents numbering 3,000 with AK-47 an "army", that is on the thresh hold of taking over Pakistan, hardly!!!.........the Swat Taliban are "Controlled Opposition" proxies of the Pakistan military, and unless the Pakistan military have a serious need to reinvent themselves as bearded fundies who only fight as irregular soldiers against their own country and people, all of it from Lahore to Karachi, and abandon the entire basis of their present organization and professional ethos, then its very unlikely that the Swat Taliban will morph into occuppying the whole of Pakistan....which is hardly the case....what we are seeing with the Swat Taliban is a tactical move by the Pakistan military to destabilize the civilian government.........Thus the Swat Taliban can be activated or dismantled as and when the Pakistani military wish it to be the case.....From a rational civilian perspective this type of behavior is dangerous brinkmanship, but from the Pakistan's military perspectives it is business as usual........the Swat TTP is doing what it is doing because of orders from the Pakistan military)

4. The Pakistan Army headed by Gen. Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, its Chief of the Army Staff (COAS), has shown neither the will nor the inclination to counter the advance of the TTP and then roll it back. It is not Kayani’s worries about what could happen on the Indian border, which have come in the way of a vigorous response to the TTP’s military advance. It is his worries over the continuing loyalty of the Pashtun soldiers, who constitute about 20 per cent of the Army, and of the Frontier Corps and the Frontier Constabulary, which are responsible for his anxiety and keenness to make peace with the TTP. The Frontier Corps and the Frontier Constabulary consist predominantly of Pashtun soldiers recruited in the FATA and the NWFP, officered by deputationists from the Army. These units have been showing less and less inclination to fight the TTP. They have been either avoiding a confrontation with the TNSM and the TTP or in some cases just deserting and surrendering to the TTP units.

(So 80% of the Pakistani military is not Pashtun.........enough available personnel from the outside of the Frontier Province to quell the Swat Taliban, but why should they any way, if these groups are created controlled proxies by the Pakistan military and manned and often guided by Pakistani military personnel? It is true Pakistan has lost some men fighting the Taliban in FATA at the behest of American urgings and military assistance, but we do not know what are the true losses of the Pakistani military there? It is also very true that many of the Pashtun personnel of the Pakistan military are obviously not happy fighting their own kith and kin, whilst at the same time observing the Americans attack the same with drone attacks...........they can't be too happy with that, as wouldn't any self respecting people.

It is not fear which led to Kiyani seeking peace with the Swat Taliban, but because the Swat Taliban as Pakistani military proxies had achieved for the Pakistan army exactly what Kiyani wanted. The Pakistani military has never shown any disinclination to side with America and fight the Pashtuns with their ethnic sensibilities-------The Pakistan military is not as sophisticated, sensitive and nuanced as that....1971 East Pakistan, Baluchistan 1973--1977, and now NWFP FATA since 2004. The Pakistan military has never been shy of fighting its own people......this "great tradition" has not changed, even under Kiyani....It has killed more of its own people than any other military in the world.)

5. According to reliable sources in the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), it is pressure from an alarmed Kayani to reach an accommodation with the TNSM and the TTP, which set in motion the negotiations with Sufi Mohammad and the developments that have followed. The Army and the para-military forces have already conceded territorial control to the TTP in the FATA and in the Malakand Division of the NWFP. By re-locating his forces and by reducing the Army’s presence in these areas already under the domination of the TNSM and the TTP, Kayani is reportedly hoping to prevent an ingress of the Pakistani Taliban into other parts of the NWFP and beyond.

(So here is the indication that the Swat Taliban is "Controlled Opposition" proxies of the Pakistan military......it never made sense why the 800,000 Pakistan military, "The best in the world" backed by 300,000 paramilitary would surrender to 3,000 poorly armed irregular insurgents, unless.....)

6. The objectives of the TTP are presently limited to ideological unity of all Muslims in Pakistan based on the Sharia and the ethnic unity of all the Pashtuns in the Af-Pak region to wage a relentless jihad against the US-led NATO forces till they vacate Afghanistan. It has the motivation and intention to extend its ideological influence to non-Pashtun areas too, but is not yet in a position to establish territorial dominance in those areas. The Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) of Altaf Hussain apprehends that the TTP wants to set up a strong presence in Karachi, which has the largest Pashtun community in Pakistan after Peshawar.

(To quell Pashtun nationalism, and reinforce the state from the Pakistan military perspectives)

7. Confronted with the worsening ground situation in the NWFP and with the danger of a possible collapse of the strategy of President Barack Obama even before it was taken up for implementation, the US is acting like a cat on a hot tin roof. There have been understandable cries of alarm not only from Hillary Clinton, the Secretary of State, and Robert Gates, the Defence Secretary, but also from White House spokesmen. Cries of alarm and the preparation of yet another national intelligence estimate on Pakistan alone will not help. What is urgently required is a national intelligence estimate on US policy-making towards Pakistan, which has been leading it from one critical situation to another.

8. A study of the course of US policy-making would show how those Pakistani leaders who are toasted one day as frontline allies against extremism and terrorism turn out to be either accomplices of terrorism or capitulators to terrorists and extremists the next day. Pervez Musharraf belonged to the first category. Zardari belongs to the second. Despite nearly 60 years of close US interactions with the political and military leaderships in Pakistan, the US has not been able to acquire any enduring influence over policy-making circles in Islamabad.(!!!!!!!!!!!.......this is just basic shoddy analysis for a former senior intelligence officer, it misses the fundamental power play in Pakistan, but at least he is retired and no longer advising the Indian government..........The two most important players in Pakistani political life are the 2 A's... the Army and America. The USA is not some kind of innocent Pollyanna figure who is completely clueless about Pakistan,hardly) The US has very little to show in terms of changed policies in Islamabad in return for its unending pampering of successive regimes in Islamabad with the injection of more and more money and military equipment. The time has come to stop pampering, but there is a reluctance in the Obama Administration---as there was in the preceding Bush Administration--- to do so due to fears that a stoppage of US assistance and pampering may result in a failed state with the control of its nuclear arsenal falling into the hands of the jihadis.

(American interference in Pakistan as with its interference in many other Third World countries has been negative, since the 1950's:

The Americans weren't pampering Pakistan when they destabilized the Ayub Khan regime 1965-69. The Americans weren't pampering Pakistan when they toppled the Bhutto regime in 1977 using the military. The Americans weren't pampering Pakistan when they wiped out the entire top brass of the Pakistan military for pursuing the nuclear program against America's and Israel's wishes. The American's weren't pampering Pakistan when in 1990 they basically abandoned Pakistan with the Pressler Amendment.......and so on, the sheer amount of political interference, where prospective political figures have to have private one to one meetings with the American ambassador in Islamabad.)

9. Unfortunately, the situation in Pakistan has reached a stage where the outcome---ultimate jihadi control of the State and its nuclear arsenal--- may be the same whatever the US does----whether it continues pampering or stops doing so. It is a thankless dilemma. It is easy to criticize the US strategy or the lack of it, but difficult to suggest a viable alternative. The starting point of an alternative strategy has to be a cordon sanitaire around the areas already under the control of the TTP and a crash programme for the economic development of the Pashtun areas not yet controlled by the Taliban. Obama’s plans to spend billions of dollars in the areas of the FATA already under the control of Al Qaeda and the Taliban would produce no enduring results except to waste the US taxpayers’ money. This money should be better spent on immunizing those areas where the influence of the Taliban has not yet spread.

(Better still instead of giving money to the Pakistan central government, why not give a greater % of the money to state governments in all of Pakistan for development and to fight terrorism...that might be more effective)

10. An equally important point of the strategy should be to step up the US Predator strikes in the FATA and to extend them to Swat in order to keep the Al Qaeda and Taliban elements running for cover all the time and make it difficult for them to plan new strikes and get them executed.

( That would do great wonders for the fragile civilian government in Islamabad......The Obama administration did talk about attacking Baluchistan with drones but the idea was shelved, because of the implications on the weak civilian government.

If the Swat Taliban are proxies of the military, staffed by ex-Pakistan military and regulars, and directed by the Pakistan military against Pakistan, to regain power, operating inside Pakistan against Pakistan as a pose to American soldiers in Afghanistan, than an attack on such an entity would be severely received by the regular Pakistan military, America's main buddy in Pakistan. Drone attacks in FATA are carried out with the aid of the Pakistani army in FATA, and the facilitation of Pakistani military bases in Baluchistan for such a purpose)

11. The third point of the strategy should be to restore to the Intelligence Bureau of Pakistan its original role of primacy as the internal intelligence and internal security agency of Pakistan. Over the years, the IB has been reduced to the position of a powerless appendage of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and its top ranks militarized through the induction of serving and retired military officers. This has to be reversed.

(This sounds like a good idea. Have a domestic intelligence agency that is run by the Ministry of the Interior which is wholly civilian, non-military, and in addition have the ISI attached to the FM, and again shorn of its military component. The Core problem for Pakistan is the ISI, and its numerous misadventures to secure Pakistan's interests........usually ends up the other way. The ISI was created by the British in 1948, and operates as an annex of British and American intelligence, it certainly is not some free wheeling Third World agency with its own set of "great ideas". By doing such things, Pakistan's civilian governments can be strengthened against the schemes of the ISI and their foreign masters)

12. These are medium and long-term measures, which would take time to produce results. The questions requiring an immediate response is how to protect Pakistan from itself. How to stop the advance of the Taliban? How to confront it ideologically? For this purpose, the US needs objective allies in Pakistan. It has none so far. It has been working through opportunistic allies in the army and the political parties. They will accept all the money from the US, but will not produce results.

(To deal with the Taliban problem involves first and foremost dealing with the Pakistan military and its fundamental culture of political interference inside Pakistan since the creation of Pakistan, and its various misadventures abroad which have negative blow back effects there after without fail)

13. The objective allies have to be found in the Pashtun community. All the talk in Washington DC about their being good Taliban and bad Taliban is ridiculous. But there are good Pashtuns and bad Pashtuns. The US should urgently identify the good Pashtuns and encourage and help them to take up the fight against the Taliban ideologically. After the elections in Pakistan in March last year, I had pointed out that the ANP, which came to power in Peshawar, was a party of good Pashtuns and that the US should work through it, forgetting its past links with the Communists in Afghanistan and the erstwhile USSR. I was given to understand that a couple of ANP leaders did visit Washingtin DC, but beyond that nothing further was done. Now the ANP-led Government in Peshawar has conceded ideological victory to the TNSM in Swat. Despite this, the US should persist with cultivating it and other good Pashtun elements in parties such as the Pakhtoonkwa Milli Awami Party (PMAP) of Mehmood Khan Achakzai. They constitute the progressive component of the Pashtun community and they need to be strengthened and encouraged to counter the Taliban. The present US policy of depending on repeatedly failed elements in the Army and in the mainstream political parties is not working. The regional Pashtun forces have to be encouraged to take up the fight against the Taliban.

(I would certainly welcome greater USA emphasis on local state civilian politicians who are effective, rather than corrupt Pakistani politicians in the Central government, with the generals. However I would question whether American officials inherently prefer dealing with clean effective leaders in Pakistan, or the greasy corrupt ones with the military.........This is the main issue here between Pakistan and America, and fundamental American foreign policy in the region.

Since the Munro doctrine, and into the 1980's in the Reagan era America has always preferred their South American client state leaders as some what "Colorful"...........this is related to issues of racism, and domination......the "greasy diego" is corrupt and of a lower order, and as such deserves leaders of that caliber. In addition it was deemed that some how corrupt leaders are therefore due to their character more easily "managed' for American interests. All that changed in the 1990's, when increased South American emigration to the USA illegally, and South American narcotics flooding into the country necessitated a policy change. Since that time the USA has backed, or recognised ''cleaner" and more effective South American leaders who deliver for the common people, without feeling insecure or developing neurosis about them (Hugo Chavez not withstanding). The USA finally understood, after 170 years of the Munro Doctrine that what was good for South America could also be good for America. Since that time in the 1990's there has been a marked decline in negative American intervention in America's back yard.

However this change of policy by America should not be defined purely by American terms.............aggressive clean local nationalists leaders who were not corrupt, within South America, conscious of negative American involvement have also contributed to this change in relationship between the USA and the rest of Central and South America.

This is where we need a real change with Pakistan/America relations. Zardari backed into power by the USA/UK is proving to be an embarassment purely because of Zardari himself a small time crook who married big, and a few other lucky breaks, never the less a small time gangster when all is said and done................First and foremost America needs to ditch him immediately, and than coopt, better local Pakistani leaders from Pakistan.....its a nation of 180 million, with 20% from the population being Middle class, if they can bypass the traditional colonial era elite that most certainly will be helpful for Pakistan as a nation. Its a win win situation if America has the will to grasp it.)

14. The survival of Al Qaeda in the FATA and the rise and spread of the TTP are due to support from large sections of the Pashtun community. The resistance to them has to come from the Pashtun community. It cannot come from the likes of Zardari, Gilani and Kayani.

(Wrong again B Raman!!!!!!!! "al-Qaeda" does not exist, and the Taliban exist ONLY because of the good grace of the Pakistani military who think they can use it for certain objectives of theirs in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Some what romantic and naive to think that Third World insurgency movements are created purely through class oppression and peoples will to struggle. Somewhere along that romantic narrative state intervention and support, covert or overt turns such movements into a reality......the backing of the Pakistan military, in the case of the Taliban, without their backing they simply could not exist)

The dangerous double game by the Pakistan military.

.
.
.
.

Pak acts on US carrot and stick policy.

By Chidanand Rajghatta Times of India.


Word from the White House that Washington’s multi-billion dollar largesse to Islamabad is ''directly related to military security and the ability to confront extremists'' had an immediate salutary effect on Friday with Pakistan announcing its willingness to take on Taliban and the extremists mysteriously withdrawing from Buner district north of Islamabad. ( Watch )

(According to other sources, HERE the Swat Taliban haven't really left Buner, and what we have here is a sly game by the Pakistani military to hold out until the pressure from Washington recedes....."we are going to do this, that, and the other against the Swat Taliban"..................the Swat Taliban are "Control Opposition" proxies of the Pakistani military, so they are treating the American administration as naive suckers)

The anger and agitation in Washington over Pakistan’s abject and inexplicable ''capitulation'' to Talibanist forces rippled through cables, phone calls, memos, briefings, and hearings on Wednesday and Thursday. But the most authoritative word on the subject came from White House spokesman Robert Gibbs, who said the matter was deemed so serious that President Obama was personally involved in taking stock of the situation.

(The Swat Taliban are "Controlled Opposition" proxies of the Pakistani military, just like so many other armed Islamic groups based in Pakistan operating against Afghanistan, India, and against the nation of Pakistan itself, TTP.

Many of the rank and file of these groups are often filled with ex-military, AND the reason why a lot of the Swat Taliban hide their faces with masks.....

........All this started since 1947 when ex-military Pakistani nationals from the Punjab and Mehsudi Frontier tribals were used to attack Kashmir and make it part of Pakistan at the point of a gun under "Operation Gulmarg", and in the 1965 war under "Operation Gibralter" where again armed infiltrators were used support the Pakistani military's operations in that war. Then you had "Operation Searchlight" where the Pakistani military in East Pakistan used Razakers and al-Badr Islamic proxies as annex's of Pakistani military operations in the 1971 war. But in terms of sheer volume and time span with significant lingering after effects well past the time the operation was wound down in the late 1980's, "Operation Cyclone" 1979 onwards is the biggest of them all in terms of money spent, lives lost, and the political consequences of it afterwards........and finally "Operation Stop Nawaz Sharif Kargil"

The Pakistani military, more than any other military in the world, save the USA, have been obsessed and indoctrinated with the use of proxy irregular armed forces as an extension of Pakistani military operations. Such policy is strategically feasible possibly, and justified ONLY if in addition you have a first class conventional military to back up such irregular operations.....................The Pakistani military I am afraid is not first class, it is a post colonial shoddy Third class.

The current Swat Taliban operation by the Pakistan military is called "Operation reclaim power")

''The news over the past several days is very disturbing. You know that this President has called attention to the deterioration in this region for quite some time. We're extremely concerned about the situation and it's something that takes a lot of the President's time,'' Gibbs said at a White House briefing, endorsing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s ''candid'' remarks on the subject.

''That's why you've seen this administration propose increases in investments directly related to military security and the ability to confront extremists,'' he added pointedly, linking aid to action. Hours later, Pakistan got cracking.

(Giving more money to the Pakistan military is a waste of time, if we go by the experience of the last 55 years and how consistently the Pakistani military subsequently use that aid....against India; no good merely hoping otherwise)

The remarks were preceded by frantic action in Washington where there was palpable alarm over the prospect of Pakistan going under the extremist onslaught. President Obama convened a White House meeting on the subject with Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Richard Holbrooke, the administration's Af-Pak special representative in attendance. The president also brought the subject up in a separate session with congressional leaders.

Holbrooke meanwhile spoke by telephone to Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari and with Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi to convey Washington's message, while cabinet principals Hillary Clinton and Defense Secretary Robert Gates made strong public remarks urging Pakistan to recognize the danger and take appropriate action.

The message — that Pakistan risked losing credibility and U.S aid if it did not stand up to the Taliban — reached home immediately. In Islamabad, the government announced that a military operation against militants in Swat would begin within 48 hours.


Meanwhile, Army chief Pervez Ashraf Kiyani said the army ‘pause’ was aimed at giving reconciliation a chance and the militants must not take it as a concession. The army, he said, ''will not allow the militants to dictate terms to the government or impose their way of life on the civil society of Pakistan'' — a statement clearly aimed at contesting Hillary CLinton's charge that the Pakistani establishment was abdicating responsibility.

Soon after, a Taliban spokesman said militants had begun withdrawing from neighboring Buner district, whose occupation only 60 miles from Islamabad had caused panic stations in Washington. The scuttlebutt in the analysts’ community is that the Talibanists’ were withdrawing on the advice of the Pakistani military, whose proxies they are widely reported to be. Among regional experts, no discussion on the Pakistan army and its intelligence agency ISI is complete without mention of their historical ties with extremists.(See above)

There is been considerable speculation as to why the Pakistani military had ceded so much space to them and allowed them to come so dangerously close to the capital. One frequent explanation is that it is a deliberate ploy to alarm Washington into quickly loosening its purse-strings, and turn the heat on India to resume dialogue and make concessions.

(Or simply to reclaim power in Islamabad...."The Zardari government is ineffective, we the Pakistan military need to save the country again")

The tactic may have worked to some extent. Amid the flurry of crisis meetings, Special Representative Holbrooke and Deputy Secretary of State for Management and resources Jack Lew also met lawmakers to push forward with legislation that will allow the administration to funnel billions in civilian and military assistance to Pakistan, ostensibly to combat the extremists.

(The $7.6 billion IMF loan, the $7.5 billion USA economic aid, the $ 3 billion military aid, and the $5.28 billion international aid package will not save Pakistan from the corrupt Zardari administration or the worthless anti-state Pakistan military.......Vietnam 1963-75)

The India part may have to wait a little longer. At a Congressional hearing on Friday, Clinton told lawmakers that confidence building measures between New Delhi and Islamabad and Pakistan will not happen ''until the Indian elections are over'' and a new government is in place. There have already been a number of high-level discussions, she said, including between the U.S president and the Indian prime minister, on the sidelines of the G-20 summit, in London, ''raising the issue of how India can do more to tamp down any reaction, on any front, like Mumbai could have provoked.''

''We worked very hard, as did the prior administration, to prevent India from reacting. But we know that the insurgents and al Qaeda and their syndicate partners are pretty smart. They are not going to cease their attacks, inside India, because they are looking for exactly the kind of reaction that we all hope to prevent,'' Clinton said.

''So we do have a lot of work to do, with the Indian government, to make sure that they continue to exercise the kind of restraint they showed after Mumbai, which was remarkable, especially given the fact that it was the political season,'' she added.

Deobandi Busharaf after some lolly.

.
.
.
.
So much for Mr. Clean tirelessly working for the country. Its bad enough initiating fake wars with no planning, or any intention of winning against the "arch enemy", sacrificing the lives of 4,000 jawans in a humiliating defeat, but now we find that he is also a possible core puti wannabe Deobandi . "Praise be to Allah, and pass the dollar or in this case Krona".
______________________________________________________

Ex-air chief accuses Mush of 'kickbacks' in jet deal
By Times of India.


Former Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf has been accused by a former air force chief of “ruining” a $1.2 billion deal for acquiring surveillance aircraft from Sweden’s Saab firm for “possible kickbacks”.

Former Air Chief Marshal Saadat Kaleem has claimed that despite the Pakistan Air Force’s opposition, Musharraf put pressure on the force to modify a contract to reduce the number of surveillance aircraft to be purchased from Saab from six to four and to include two Chinese systems. The contract originally envisaged the purchase of six Saab airborne warning and surveillance systems and a Saab 2000 aircraft for VIP flights. Kaleem said Musharraf “personally exerted pressure on him” to modify the contract. Kaleem said he was opposed to this because of objections raised by PAF experts on technical grounds.