The Suppurating Mess That is Pakistan
July 26, 2010
David P. Goldman
If Pakistan's intelligence service continues to plot terrorist attacks with the Taliban in Afghanistan, as the mass of documents released yesterday by Wikileaks allege, who is responsible for covering this up for so many years? The answer, I argue in this morning's Asia Times Online, is everybody.
This raises the question: Who covered up a scandalous arrangement known to everyone with a casual acquaintance of the situation? The answer is the same as in Agatha Christie's 1934 mystery about murder on the Orient Express, that is, everybody: former United States president George W Bush and vice president Dick Cheney, current US President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden, India, China and Iran. They are all terrified of facing a failed state with nuclear weapons, and prefer a functioning but treacherous one.
As of 9:00 a.m., there was nary a mention of one of the year's biggest news stories on either National Review or the Commentary magazine website. Perhaps that is because the new documents put as much egg on the face of the previous Republican administration as on the present Democratic one. "What elephant in the parlor?," sadly, is not a full-credit answer.
It is hard to dismiss the documents as a fabrication: Who has time to forge 92,000 documents in a credible style imitation of American military-speak? And if the documents are genuine, it is hard to dismiss them as unimportant. Even for those of us with an extremely dour view of the Afghan War (and I took such a view in my May 2010 First Things essay, "The Morality of Self-Interest"), the contents are eye-popping. Certainly they reinforce my view that the nation-building strategy of the past Republican administration was a delusion. Social engineering doesn't work, whether attempted by the right or the left.
Everyone has a good reason to ignore the suppurating mess that is Pakistan:
To exit the Afghan quagmire in a less than humiliating fashion, the United States requires Pakistani help to persuade the Taliban not to take immediate advantage of the American departure and evoke Vietnam-era scenes of helicopters on the American Embassy roof. The politicians in Washington know they have lost and have conceded to the Taliban a role in a post-American Afghanistan. They can only hope that once the country plunges into chaos, the public will have moved onto other themes, much as it did after the Bill Clinton administration put Kosovo into the hands of a gang of dubious Albanians in 1998.
India does not want America to call Pakistan to account. In the worst case, Pakistan might choose to support the Taliban and other terrorist organizations—including Kashmiri irredentists—openly rather than covertly. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, of whom the Economist on July 25 wrote "the strength of his coalition depends largely on how weak he is as Prime Minister", does not want to confront Pakistan. If Pakistan's support for anti-Indian terrorism became undeniable, India would have to act, and action is the last thing the Congress party-led coalition in New Delhi wants to consider.
China has no interest in destabilization in Pakistan; on the contrary, Beijing lives in fear that radical Islamists in Pakistan might infect its own restive Uyghurs. And Iran, which shares the fractious Balochis with Pakistan on their common border, lives in terror that a destabilized Pakistan would free the Balochis to make trouble.
Balochis comprise little over 2% of Iran's population, but they have demonstrated their talent at bomb-making on several recent occasions, including the bombing this month of a Shi'ite mosque in southeastern Iran in which 28 people were killed and hundreds wounded. Iran has accused Pakistan of sponsoring Balochi terror attacks, but intelligence community sources in Washington insist that the Pakistanis would never be so reckless as to put bombs into Balochi hands.
With 170 million people—more than Russia—and a nuclear arsenal, Pakistan is too big to fail, that is, too big to fail without traumatic consequences for its neighbors. Whether it can be kept from failure is questionable. Half its people live on less than a dollar day, and half are illiterate. It is riven by religious differences—a seventh of Pakistanis are Shi'ite—as well as ethnic ones.
No one will accuse me of dovishness. But to continue to sacrifice American lives in Afghanistan under the circumstances seems stupid and immoral. It may be true that Afghanistan will be a breeding ground for terrorism when American troops leave, but Pakistan already is a breeding ground for terrorism. But there are other, cheaper ways to deal with the problem. Here's an idea: freeze travel between Pakistan and the United States (or subject prospective travelers to extreme scrutiny) until Pakistan roots out and punishes the elements of its military who help the Taliban kill Americans and their allies.
As for the threat that Pakistan may become a failed state: Pakistan already is a failed state. America's natural ally in the region is India.
David P. Goldman is a senior editor at First Things.
Comments:
7.26.2010 | 11:00am
joe smith says:
HYPOCRACY AND COWARDICE
If one of us gave $500 to, let's say, the Provisional IRA, the government would claim the right to throw us in prison. And whatever their faults, the Provos do not attack Americans. But the Government gives $500,000,000 to the Pak terrorists who financed the Taliban, September 11th, and the Mumbai massacre ! This is rank hypocracy and cowardice even for the scumbags in D.C.
Why did they tolerate the Paki regime getting nuclear weapons? the Pak regime sold nuclear technology to North Korea, and presumably to Iran. Why do the American pols tolerate this? It is insanity, treason, or both. Haven't they learned anything from the Neville Chamberlain debacle?
We should use smart weapons to destroy the Pak command and control centers, decapitate their "government"-which is nothing but a gang of thugs-and have India overrrun the country and mop up the taliban types.
If one of us gave $500 to, let's say, the Provisional IRA, the government would claim the right to throw us in prison. And whatever their faults, the Provos do not attack Americans. But the Government gives $500,000,000 to the Pak terrorists who financed the Taliban, September 11th, and the Mumbai massacre ! This is rank hypocracy and cowardice even for the scumbags in D.C.
Why did they tolerate the Paki regime getting nuclear weapons? the Pak regime sold nuclear technology to North Korea, and presumably to Iran. Why do the American pols tolerate this? It is insanity, treason, or both. Haven't they learned anything from the Neville Chamberlain debacle?
We should use smart weapons to destroy the Pak command and control centers, decapitate their "government"-which is nothing but a gang of thugs-and have India overrrun the country and mop up the taliban types.
7.26.2010 | 12:12pm
Njunaid says:
Joe Smith souds like Mr. Bush Junior, a Muscle Head with monsquito in the nostriles sending his brain hey wired. No brain activity has been detected so far to correct the past mistakes which caused these "unintended consequences". We have been involved in destabilization, nation building of the world to exploit its resources, period, and now it has caught up with us. No ones' fault but ours. Now, we have to use our brains like our "Founding Fathers" to get the situation in control, Period. If blaming others and Carpet Bombing could have helped, we would have won, already. Love the USA, not your misguided ego, dummy.
7.26.2010 | 1:02pm
Abelard Lindsey says:
The duplicity of our own government is providing financial support to a government that is killing our own soldiers in Afghanistan is unacceptable. The fact that the republic administration was as much a party to this duplicity as the current democratic administration should make clear that the soldier on the ground in Afghanistan has no friends or supporters from either party back in Washington D.C.
This is not the first time that U.S. soldiers have been back-stabbed by their government in the name of power politics. No wonder we are loosing the war in Afghanistan. The U.S. government needs to come clean about this and stop supporting Pakistan or they need to immediately withdraw our troops from Afghanistan so that Washington D.C. can play geo-political games to its heart's content.
No more American soldiers should be killed or permanently injured in this turkey shoot.
This is not the first time that U.S. soldiers have been back-stabbed by their government in the name of power politics. No wonder we are loosing the war in Afghanistan. The U.S. government needs to come clean about this and stop supporting Pakistan or they need to immediately withdraw our troops from Afghanistan so that Washington D.C. can play geo-political games to its heart's content.
No more American soldiers should be killed or permanently injured in this turkey shoot.
7.26.2010 | 1:29pm
Scott Wolfe says:
With all due respect, Mr. Goldman, why the alarmism? Haven't we known for some time that the Taliban in Afghanistan has been receiving some kind of help from within Pakistan? And it turns out that at least some of that help has been coming from the Pakistan intelligence service. I'm shocked! And the US Government has known about it for some time and dealt with it secretly. Shocked again! Frankly, I don't see an "cover up" or "scandal" here. But I do see quite a bit of naivete.
7.26.2010 | 1:45pm
Vasantha says:
India has been crying foul for at least three decades. India is prime target of Pakistan. Russia and Iran are the next targets. All three supported Northern Alliance of Ahmed Shah Massoud until his assassination by Taliban.
West's, particularly US support is what made Pakistan and their protege Taliban what they are. Until the break-up of Soviet, US actively aided and abetted Pakistani military and ISI to the detriment of Pakistan's civilian government. US wanted a country with a powerful military ruling over a hungry, uneducated, desperate populace. US not only trained guerrillas they also made sure they had unending supply of the same by encouraging Zia to disband schools and open madrassas. (Just what China has done to Burma and North Korea). After the fall of Soviets, US dimply ignored Pakistans terrorism against India as a 'gift' to Pakistan for all their help in destroying the Soviet.
US still has a soft -corner for Pakistan. Add to that that China has jumped into the fray. So Pakistan continues with temerity because they know that a super-power and emerging super-power both support it. Pakistan basically is like a mafia don. And US and China are like wealthy politicians who know they'll periodically need the mafia and therefore will do nothing but slap it's wrist.
An India is like an older brother whose younger sibling hates him so much that he's turned into a mafia don just to destroy him.
West's, particularly US support is what made Pakistan and their protege Taliban what they are. Until the break-up of Soviet, US actively aided and abetted Pakistani military and ISI to the detriment of Pakistan's civilian government. US wanted a country with a powerful military ruling over a hungry, uneducated, desperate populace. US not only trained guerrillas they also made sure they had unending supply of the same by encouraging Zia to disband schools and open madrassas. (Just what China has done to Burma and North Korea). After the fall of Soviets, US dimply ignored Pakistans terrorism against India as a 'gift' to Pakistan for all their help in destroying the Soviet.
US still has a soft -corner for Pakistan. Add to that that China has jumped into the fray. So Pakistan continues with temerity because they know that a super-power and emerging super-power both support it. Pakistan basically is like a mafia don. And US and China are like wealthy politicians who know they'll periodically need the mafia and therefore will do nothing but slap it's wrist.
An India is like an older brother whose younger sibling hates him so much that he's turned into a mafia don just to destroy him.
7.26.2010 | 2:20pm
Sean says:
I have seen the tombstone on Pakistan's grave and it reads,
"The worst ally anyone could ask for."
"The worst ally anyone could ask for."
7.26.2010 | 2:49pm
Abelard Lindsey says:
India needs a functional Pakistan to hold its 147 different ethnic groups together. If Pakistan comes apart at the seams, India will follow within 5-10 years. Also, the northern part of India, between Pakistan and Bangladesh, is nearly 50% Muslim. These people might come to identify with the Muslims in the remains of Pakistan over their non-Muslim neighbors.
I think Spengler's analysis is mostly correct. I disagree with him about the desirability of alliance with India. I think China is a better partner to work with in the Eurasian region than India. The Chinese are more rational and have a more functional society. There is no point to ally with a political entity that may be gone in 10 years. Dissolution of both India and Pakistan will be good in the long run, once the nukes are under control. A future South Asia (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh) will likely consist of 8-10 states. The more rational ones will become good trading partners with both China and the U.S.
The purpose of both China's and American foreign policy should be the creation of rational trading partners. The artificial political entities left over as legacies of colonial districts have to go away first, allowing the reconstitution of new political entities and boundaries that reflect the tribal identities of the various ethnic groups is a process that must occur sooner or later. The sooner, the better.
I think Spengler's analysis is mostly correct. I disagree with him about the desirability of alliance with India. I think China is a better partner to work with in the Eurasian region than India. The Chinese are more rational and have a more functional society. There is no point to ally with a political entity that may be gone in 10 years. Dissolution of both India and Pakistan will be good in the long run, once the nukes are under control. A future South Asia (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh) will likely consist of 8-10 states. The more rational ones will become good trading partners with both China and the U.S.
The purpose of both China's and American foreign policy should be the creation of rational trading partners. The artificial political entities left over as legacies of colonial districts have to go away first, allowing the reconstitution of new political entities and boundaries that reflect the tribal identities of the various ethnic groups is a process that must occur sooner or later. The sooner, the better.
7.26.2010 | 2:55pm
David Goldman says:
Mr. Wolfe,
I have been alarmed about this since 9/11, which is why I began writing the "Spengler" essays at Asia Times Online. Yes, we've known about it, but we turned a blind eye for raison d'etat -- a very bad raison in this case, I believe. What has changed is that someone with access to the documents (it seems likely from within the military) has hung the dirty bedsheets out on the White House clothesline.
I have been alarmed about this since 9/11, which is why I began writing the "Spengler" essays at Asia Times Online. Yes, we've known about it, but we turned a blind eye for raison d'etat -- a very bad raison in this case, I believe. What has changed is that someone with access to the documents (it seems likely from within the military) has hung the dirty bedsheets out on the White House clothesline.
7.26.2010 | 2:58pm
Bob G says:
Mr. Goldman is interesting, but does he recommend that we just leave? What about the consequences: the Taliban regains control and invites Al Queda back in to plot new atrocities against the U.S.? Pity the poor U.S. Government faced with a new attack!
How does Mr. Goldman propose to deal with that problem?
An earlier poster said we always knew that Pakistanis were helping the Taliban. Yes, but we didn't know that Pakistan's intelligence service was doing the Taliban's planning. That throws new light on everything. It does seem that we will have a very hard time achieving anything (except more US deaths) with our current policy. Maybe the way out is a new plebiscite in Afghanistan on whether the U.S. should just leave. If Aghanistans say yes, we'll have little choice.
How does Mr. Goldman propose to deal with that problem?
An earlier poster said we always knew that Pakistanis were helping the Taliban. Yes, but we didn't know that Pakistan's intelligence service was doing the Taliban's planning. That throws new light on everything. It does seem that we will have a very hard time achieving anything (except more US deaths) with our current policy. Maybe the way out is a new plebiscite in Afghanistan on whether the U.S. should just leave. If Aghanistans say yes, we'll have little choice.
7.26.2010 | 3:02pm
roger says:
Pakistan is a failed state for one major reason, it is islamist. It is a fact that all religous states are failed, thug states. They have to be as the ruling clergy have to terrorize the population to ensure that only the acceptable beliefs and practices are followed. Roman Catholic states are bad enough but the particular violent beliefs of islam will ensure their failure. Add to this the utter, total and complete corruption of the ruling classes of Pakistan and you have, as Mr Goldman says, a "suppurating mess".
Unfortunately India is an improvement only in comparison to Pakistan, it to, is a sewer. Go there, see the poverty and ignorance, what a great ally they would make!
The hubris of the Washington establishment has got the US into a complete quagmire in the Middle East and near Asia. The region is spiralling into nuclear war and we are likely to be the ones expected to pick up the pieces (with what I ask?).
For the benefit of Smith: The only difference between the Taliban and the provisional IRA is religion, the IRA is a catholic terrorist group and the Taliban are islamist.
Unfortunately India is an improvement only in comparison to Pakistan, it to, is a sewer. Go there, see the poverty and ignorance, what a great ally they would make!
The hubris of the Washington establishment has got the US into a complete quagmire in the Middle East and near Asia. The region is spiralling into nuclear war and we are likely to be the ones expected to pick up the pieces (with what I ask?).
For the benefit of Smith: The only difference between the Taliban and the provisional IRA is religion, the IRA is a catholic terrorist group and the Taliban are islamist.
7.26.2010 | 3:57pm
brettongarcia says:
Think for a second David: why did we cover it up?
Think about it for a second, David: do you really want to start emphasizing our differences with a nuclear-armed, potentially Muslim fundamentalist country?
Think about it for a second, David: do you really want to start emphasizing our differences with a nuclear-armed, potentially Muslim fundamentalist country?
7.26.2010 | 4:20pm
Warren Thompson says:
A "catholic terrorist group" would be universally dangerous, indeed. Yet it remains to be seen just how "catholic" [Catholic?] the IRA is ....
7.26.2010 | 5:20pm
glasater says:
Remind me again what was the problem with Pervez Musharraf?
I think GWB was wrong to tell him to "get rid of the uniform".
I think GWB was wrong to tell him to "get rid of the uniform".
7.26.2010 | 6:50pm
Barry Arrington says:
I hope Mr. Goldman and all of the commenters have been thinking "POCK--ee--ston" when they wrote Packistan. That's how we literati types pronounce the word to show off our, well, literati-ness.
7.26.2010 | 9:28pm
David Goldman says:
My longstanding proposal for Afghanistan is to bring the Indians in, and in force. The way to make Pakistan behave is to frighten it, and nothing frightens it more than the prospect of being encircled by India. See
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/KL24Ag01.html
We cannot fix the problem, but we can encircle and contain it.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/KL24Ag01.html
We cannot fix the problem, but we can encircle and contain it.
7.26.2010 | 9:55pm
Krakow says:
OK, but back to Iran. Do we attack at night or in the middle of the day? Guessing that it will take $100 billion per year and about a decade to defeat Iran.
7.26.2010 | 10:19pm
Gopalan says:
There is a comment here suggesting that India will break down if Pakistan will break. This is like suggesting that USA will break down into Northern Yankees and southern rebels as well as black states and hispanic states.
India is a functioning republic with different people living in it. Indian muslims are Indians first and are very patriotic. To suggest that they are not patriotic is a very uninformed notion. To some ewxtent Indian Christians (including Sonia Gandhi) are less patriotic than Indian Muslims.
Pakistan is destined to break down with or without outside help. India will help those people into SouthAsian community. China on the other hand is very high handed and undemocratic. In a long run, the entire South Asia along with Afghanisthan will become more stable than China and a natural ally of USA.
India is a functioning republic with different people living in it. Indian muslims are Indians first and are very patriotic. To suggest that they are not patriotic is a very uninformed notion. To some ewxtent Indian Christians (including Sonia Gandhi) are less patriotic than Indian Muslims.
Pakistan is destined to break down with or without outside help. India will help those people into SouthAsian community. China on the other hand is very high handed and undemocratic. In a long run, the entire South Asia along with Afghanisthan will become more stable than China and a natural ally of USA.
7.26.2010 | 10:32pm
pentamom says:
There's a post about the leaks on National Review's "The Corner" blog time-stamped 5:58 a.m. Since most of the rest of the site is dedicated to scheduled articles, I wonder what Mr. Goldman was looking for.
7.26.2010 | 10:37pm
Maria says:
Could it just be prophetic that this article came out on the day when The Church celebrated Feast of Sts Ann and Joachim - grandparents of Yeshua , parents of Mother Mary !
Latter had the grace to trust in an 'impossibilty' in human terms , unlike our grandparents Abraham and Sara .
History reveals plenty of the effects of both choices as well as the spectacular results when the Motherly role of Mariam was heeded upon - the miraculous intervention that converted the Aztec culture with its human sacrifices in Mexico , after her apparition as Lady of Guadalupe !
While it is good and reasonable for those responsible to plan political soultions to do so ( and the suggestion to curtail travel seems like a very good nonaggressive solution !) those in The Church can get busy hoping and asking for her Motherly intervention on all of humanity to be declared in more and more hearts with the hope that such can bring forth miracles to remove the dirt and darkness of idolatry and hatreds where it seems all so ingrained even !
Latter had the grace to trust in an 'impossibilty' in human terms , unlike our grandparents Abraham and Sara .
History reveals plenty of the effects of both choices as well as the spectacular results when the Motherly role of Mariam was heeded upon - the miraculous intervention that converted the Aztec culture with its human sacrifices in Mexico , after her apparition as Lady of Guadalupe !
While it is good and reasonable for those responsible to plan political soultions to do so ( and the suggestion to curtail travel seems like a very good nonaggressive solution !) those in The Church can get busy hoping and asking for her Motherly intervention on all of humanity to be declared in more and more hearts with the hope that such can bring forth miracles to remove the dirt and darkness of idolatry and hatreds where it seems all so ingrained even !
7.27.2010 | 4:18am
Ian says:
An article in today's London Times by Imran Khan: www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/article2660535.ece (subscription required) entitled: "Don’t blame Pakistan for the failure of the war" provides some interesting points that counter the anti-Pakistan views expressed here and elsewhere. It is a sobering thought that the West may be making things worse. Whether there is a better alternative is not easy to say but the Taliban are probably right in their assessment that to win they only have not to lose in the next 3 to 5 years.
7.27.2010 | 5:50am
Ed Snyder says:
IRT Abelard Lindsay's second comment, I'm not sure how China can be considered more rational, given their less-than-rational xenophobia; or how much we can trust them, since they have chosen to invest considerable resources in a drive to dominate the Western Pacific by driving us out. For more on that, read here:
http://bigpeace.com/jxenakis/2010/07/26/u-s-and-china-are-headed-for-a-generational-crisis-war/
But Mr. Lindsay does bring up a point that I hope Mr. Goldman will address. While I haven't heard anything about discontent among India's minorities in general, I think concern about the loyalties of the her substantial Muslim minority in the case of a full-scale conflict with Pakistan is apt. That situation, along with the ongoing bloody Maoist insurgency in the south central part of the country, make me wonder if India would be able to maintain the inner cohesion needed to contain Pakistan.
For the record, my sympathies are with India, and hope that an alliance with the U.S. would be fruitful for both our countries.
Vasantha, for what my opinion is worth (and that's what these comments are all about, right?), your comment is an excellent summary of how the Law of Unintended Consequences does much harm to innocent people whenever it goes into effect.
http://bigpeace.com/jxenakis/2010/07/26/u-s-and-china-are-headed-for-a-generational-crisis-war/
But Mr. Lindsay does bring up a point that I hope Mr. Goldman will address. While I haven't heard anything about discontent among India's minorities in general, I think concern about the loyalties of the her substantial Muslim minority in the case of a full-scale conflict with Pakistan is apt. That situation, along with the ongoing bloody Maoist insurgency in the south central part of the country, make me wonder if India would be able to maintain the inner cohesion needed to contain Pakistan.
For the record, my sympathies are with India, and hope that an alliance with the U.S. would be fruitful for both our countries.
Vasantha, for what my opinion is worth (and that's what these comments are all about, right?), your comment is an excellent summary of how the Law of Unintended Consequences does much harm to innocent people whenever it goes into effect.
7.27.2010 | 6:14am
Max says:
We'll never have the sack to do it under this adminstration (and we may not have the financial solvency to attempt it anyway) but there is only one solution: regime change in Iran coupled with cutting India loose to contain Pakistan. At a minium the travel moratorium will help with domestic safety, but it will only delay the inevitable: a bloody conflagration from Persia to the Indian subcontinent and likely China, coupled eventually with WMD terror in the west. As a second order effect, China may come to rue its mandated population control once the body once the body count starts rolling. I take no relish in writing any of this (I am currently in southeastern Afghanistan), but we are about to enter a very dark age. It is coming. As sure as God's vengeance.
7.27.2010 | 8:46am
roger says:
Mr Goldman,
With respect Sir, you vastly overrate Indian military capability. They got hammered in the 60s when they fought the Chinese and they have barely defeated Pakistan in the past. Pakistan has been a US "Ally" for some years now and has been equipped with some very powerful weapons, the next round between India and Pakistan may not turn out as you predict.
Another factor to include when dealing with Pakistan (and almost all other Islamic nations) is the mental result of the practice of arranged marriages. This very often results in inbreeding within families, for many generations, a result of this is widespread mental instability in the society. A symptom of this is the violent, sudden, explosions of uncontrollable and irrational rage that occur in islamic communities.
So, yes, perhaps as you suggest the way to control Pakistan is to frighten it, but at what point do they get frightened enough to light off the blue touch paper on their nukes.
Last question, which undoubtedly you will find naive and a bit stupid:
Why can't we (the US) just mind our own damn business?
With respect Sir, you vastly overrate Indian military capability. They got hammered in the 60s when they fought the Chinese and they have barely defeated Pakistan in the past. Pakistan has been a US "Ally" for some years now and has been equipped with some very powerful weapons, the next round between India and Pakistan may not turn out as you predict.
Another factor to include when dealing with Pakistan (and almost all other Islamic nations) is the mental result of the practice of arranged marriages. This very often results in inbreeding within families, for many generations, a result of this is widespread mental instability in the society. A symptom of this is the violent, sudden, explosions of uncontrollable and irrational rage that occur in islamic communities.
So, yes, perhaps as you suggest the way to control Pakistan is to frighten it, but at what point do they get frightened enough to light off the blue touch paper on their nukes.
Last question, which undoubtedly you will find naive and a bit stupid:
Why can't we (the US) just mind our own damn business?
7.27.2010 | 11:44am
Scott Wolfe says:
Mr. Goldman:
I agree that Pakistan has been a bad guy all along for many of the reasons noted by other commenters. But the truth is that it has given us some level of cooperation in dealing with the terrorists within its borders, and we have paid a monetary (and other) price for it. We have almost certainly made similar deals with other countries, and I don't think that any of us should be surprised by that. America needs to be involved in the world, and the people we deal with will not always have pure hearts.
Best regards.
I agree that Pakistan has been a bad guy all along for many of the reasons noted by other commenters. But the truth is that it has given us some level of cooperation in dealing with the terrorists within its borders, and we have paid a monetary (and other) price for it. We have almost certainly made similar deals with other countries, and I don't think that any of us should be surprised by that. America needs to be involved in the world, and the people we deal with will not always have pure hearts.
Best regards.
7.27.2010 | 4:34pm
MarcH says:
Mr. Goldman,
I’ve been an appreciative reader and student since 2002 but I think you significantly over-estimate the ability of the Indians to make a contribution to Afghan COIN operations – especially training of Afghan forces in the near or mid-term. It took the U.S. military 5 years to create and implement on the ground in Iraq a doctrine and structure for this sort of thing. I doubt that the Indian Army has any significant experience in fielding the whole constellation of units which the U.S. has created to embed and improve military, police and civilian government (the whole alphabet soup of MiTTs, PTTs, PRTs, etc.).
This reminds me of a related point I have wanted to make. To write that the “Surge” in Iraq was simply and essentially the temporary hire of the Sunni tribes from AQI is such an over-simplification that it becomes an error. The “Surge” was much more than that. It was never intended to re-create Iraq in our image. It set the conditions for Iraq to become (as I heard Sen. Joe Lieberman say) a “Jordan with oil wells”. If Iraq is now both disintegrating and moving into Iran’s column it is because, by 2009, influential Iraqis of all ethnicities and denominations finally got the message from our media and the 2008 presidential campaign that we really did intend to give up our hard won position there. They made the rational calculation that the interest of their communities was to look for a new “strong horse” to protect them (Iran, Turkey, Sunni extremists) and to distance themselves from us.
Respectfully,
MarcH
I’ve been an appreciative reader and student since 2002 but I think you significantly over-estimate the ability of the Indians to make a contribution to Afghan COIN operations – especially training of Afghan forces in the near or mid-term. It took the U.S. military 5 years to create and implement on the ground in Iraq a doctrine and structure for this sort of thing. I doubt that the Indian Army has any significant experience in fielding the whole constellation of units which the U.S. has created to embed and improve military, police and civilian government (the whole alphabet soup of MiTTs, PTTs, PRTs, etc.).
This reminds me of a related point I have wanted to make. To write that the “Surge” in Iraq was simply and essentially the temporary hire of the Sunni tribes from AQI is such an over-simplification that it becomes an error. The “Surge” was much more than that. It was never intended to re-create Iraq in our image. It set the conditions for Iraq to become (as I heard Sen. Joe Lieberman say) a “Jordan with oil wells”. If Iraq is now both disintegrating and moving into Iran’s column it is because, by 2009, influential Iraqis of all ethnicities and denominations finally got the message from our media and the 2008 presidential campaign that we really did intend to give up our hard won position there. They made the rational calculation that the interest of their communities was to look for a new “strong horse” to protect them (Iran, Turkey, Sunni extremists) and to distance themselves from us.
Respectfully,
MarcH
8.5.2010 | 6:38am
Help Pakistan says:
Due to heavey monsoon rains in Pakistan, about half of the Pakistan is under flood. Millions of people need help. They have no food and shelter. Please create awareness and try to help these needy people. You can give your suggestions to us at info@forumpakistan.com , your little help can save a life.
A message from http://www.forumpakistan.com , we request all the charity organization in the world to come in Pakistan and help in this hour of need.
Thanks.
A message from http://www.forumpakistan.com , we request all the charity organization in the world to come in Pakistan and help in this hour of need.
Thanks.
8.18.2010 | 6:18pm
Pakistan is a not what most of you think or believe after reading some articles or watching some tv news or surfing internet with the some comments which have no basis...
The major problems of Pakistan
1) Existence : most important thing for a living thing, human or a countary is its freedom-- Pakistan is separated from india in 1947 but some indians still can't accept it -- so pakistan spend alot for its military and nuclear bomb because pakistan need safety & freedom. Pakistan is secure now because bomb is there ... but i m sure pakistan 'll never use because non of the worlds nations have courage to attack a nuclear country and Pakistan is not going to attack anyone, anyway.....
2) Corruption : after freedom when Pakistan looked back the persons who were appointed to serve Pakistan... they were just corrupt... from a peon to Prime minister and even President... (?) i have a question here for superpowers if you have limited resources and your state administration is corrupt & u don't have a justice system .. will u be a develop countary today
The idea of abloshing pakistan is like a suiside for world
Pakisan is a developing countary with the strength of 62% of its populaion under 25 years of age ... the precious human power.
if there is no pakistan than where these about 50 million people ll go ... by any way some of them around thousands ll reach US, China, Uk, EU, Russia, India etc .. most of them ll have no jobs then some may do anything for living ... so
the world should try to establish them otherwise what you see on tv screens you may watch it live in your home-land... i hope that day ll never come
The major problems of Pakistan
1) Existence : most important thing for a living thing, human or a countary is its freedom-- Pakistan is separated from india in 1947 but some indians still can't accept it -- so pakistan spend alot for its military and nuclear bomb because pakistan need safety & freedom. Pakistan is secure now because bomb is there ... but i m sure pakistan 'll never use because non of the worlds nations have courage to attack a nuclear country and Pakistan is not going to attack anyone, anyway.....
2) Corruption : after freedom when Pakistan looked back the persons who were appointed to serve Pakistan... they were just corrupt... from a peon to Prime minister and even President... (?) i have a question here for superpowers if you have limited resources and your state administration is corrupt & u don't have a justice system .. will u be a develop countary today
The idea of abloshing pakistan is like a suiside for world
Pakisan is a developing countary with the strength of 62% of its populaion under 25 years of age ... the precious human power.
if there is no pakistan than where these about 50 million people ll go ... by any way some of them around thousands ll reach US, China, Uk, EU, Russia, India etc .. most of them ll have no jobs then some may do anything for living ... so
the world should try to establish them otherwise what you see on tv screens you may watch it live in your home-land... i hope that day ll never come
8.29.2010 | 10:44am
Shareiq says:
War are faught and won on logistics. Pakistan may have a cache of weapons, but doesn't have logistics to fight anything on a sustained basis. Much like USA can't win this afgan war, because logistics are so AGAINST such an event ever happening, as quickly as they would like or can afford. Since this forum is on Pakistan's mess, i won't go into defending India's military might, but it would suffice to say, Irrational assumptions are the root cause for defeat in most circumstances. USA has played Pakistan for far too long, it is only fair, they pay with their life and blood in the region. Pakistan was never a functioning state, right from its inception. It didn't manage to have its constitution till 1973, though it got independent along with India, which got it by 1950! So that's what needs to go into any analysis. Pakistan is a totally dysfunctional entity. It needs to be given more time to either settle down as a nation or even if it breaks up, it won't cause any real disruption, since it never was a single political functional entity every anyway. Russia and India are a lot wiser not to send their army or spend resources into AF-PAK. There is NOTHING redeeming about Pakistan, that holds any promise to the world community. Its loss would be like a short lived accident.
9.1.2010 | 9:38pm
Power2engineer says:
US politicians says that US army cannot cross Afghan-Pak border to hunt down Bin LaDin because Pakistan is sovereign country and US ally so we should seek Pak's cooperation in finding Bin La Din for us. Just as US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reiterated her statement that Pakistan government exactly knows where Bin Ladin is but Pakistan will not want to turn him over to US and thus kill an HEN LAYING GOLDEN EGGS in terms of billions of dollars in US aid.
Where as China may march in with 11000 troops in Pakistan occupied Kasmir. China has better influence and control on Pakistanis with spending only fraction of money with have spent on AF-PAK war and in Military and other aid to Pakistan.
The only place Pakistan is going to use these weapons is against India to fight yet another war for Kashmir.
Muslims never fight or Kill another Muslim to help another Non-muslims. Sooner We Americans understand this Islamic rules we will save American tax payers burden by cutting off wrongful aid to Pakistan.
Where as China may march in with 11000 troops in Pakistan occupied Kasmir. China has better influence and control on Pakistanis with spending only fraction of money with have spent on AF-PAK war and in Military and other aid to Pakistan.
The only place Pakistan is going to use these weapons is against India to fight yet another war for Kashmir.
Muslims never fight or Kill another Muslim to help another Non-muslims. Sooner We Americans understand this Islamic rules we will save American tax payers burden by cutting off wrongful aid to Pakistan.
5.21.2011 | 6:32am
rohan says:
The root of the problem is west's/America's ignorance about Islam & Muslim community. This may be due to their lack of exposure to Islamic forces & their teachings . India knows it too well as it has been suffering in the hands of brutal Islamic forces since last 900 yrs . The ancient Hindu/ Vedic India was one of the most learned , talented , scientific , glorious , prosperous, ethical & peaceful civilizations of the world , it has many firsts to its credit . Its only after Muslim invasion great Hindu kingdom started loosing its way. Muslims have an agenda to spread their religion & use Islam as a political tool to subdue the world , they can never tolerate non Muslims & can never be an ally to any un Islamic state , the sooner the west realizes this better it is. West's natural ally is India no doubt about that , yes India has its problems but considering the circumstances America's best hope lies with India . More over the ever increasing Muslim population in India should be a great concern to the west & rest of the world . As long as India remains a Hindu majority state , not only the region but the world will be at peace & India in time to come can serve the world positively . Last thing you would want is India ( a power in the making ) to become an Islamic super power ..
Of course, it could never happen, because the ACLU would howl and the US media would bombard the airwaves 24 hours a day with facile comparisons to detention of Japanese Americans in WWII, etc... You see, the USA's society is also travelling down a road, its wheels confined to very deep grooves from which it can not manuever.