@Majorlyprofound AWOL: Some Major Bearls Oph Wisdom and Fourth Coujin Commentary (courtesy Google cache)

@majorlyprofound Well traveled, highly ejjucated, critical thinker. Wimmens, Social Media and Thermodynamics expert. Strategic geopolitics analyst. Impressive Blog. Amsterdam, NY, London, FATA · http://majorlyprofound.wordpress.com/ Major/Dr./Eng/ @majorlyprofound has gone missing – his/her Twitter handle/ WordPress blog was removed on 8th August 2012. Going without an announcement makes his/her online disappearance a bit scary. Doesn’t matter whether it was a he or a she, Pakistani or belonging to some other Nationality, will always have a high regard for the intellect. Just hope he/she is safe & sound… His/her Twitter handle & WordPress blog was removed yesterday at the same time, it is highly possible that all traces of him/her could be removed from the web shortly, therefore have tried to save some of his goat droppings (Bearls Oph Wisdom and Fourth Coujin commentary) recovered from the Google cache in this blog post Every word that he/she wrote was hilarious, may god keep him/her in good health. I for one do not wish to know the real identity of majorlyprofound, just wish and hope that his/her writing continue and we get to read it online, in newspapers or in a book form. Here goes some of his/her goat droppings errrr major bearls oph wisdom… A Technical Analysis (in Layman Terms) of Laws of Physics Which Indicates Water Powered Car is Feasible AUGUST 2, 2012 It is due to Djinn Energy!! —-xxx—- Retired & Rogue Moojahid Non-State Actors That Nobody Knows About JULY 26, 2012 Heated arguments fly around as to whether Pakistan Government knew about Osama in Abbottabad, or if the Army and ISI knew and Government didnt, or whether retired and rogue faction of ISI did but Army, ISI and Government didnt, or if neither Government, nor Army nor ISI (legitimate & rogue) knew and only non-state actors did or if anybody knew at all. These arguments are frequently accompanied by denials and passionate assertions. Ditto for the (bad) Haqqani network. Are the (bad) Haqqanis in Pakistan? Do they get support? Do they get support only from “non state actors”? Do they get support from retired and rogue ISI? Do they get support from official ISI and army? Do they get support from the Government? Same story for drone attacks. And Mumbai attacks. And Saleem Shazad murder. And Benazir Murder. Bulk of our information about all these come exclusively from denials and pious assertions made with passion with victimhood thrown in. Since thinking about all these is a pain on the backside and I believe everything that the Government and Army says, I decided to not worry about Osama or Haqqani or drones and amuse myself with pious statements about Kargil.Where Northern Light Infantry fought and occupied Indian territory. Thanks to internet and all that, I pulled up a few articles from 1999. From here: If the Mujahideen(Islamic warriors) are forced to withdraw from Kargil-Drass, they will “head straight to Islamabad instead of Srinagar and it would lead to a civil war in the country,” Urdu daily Din quoted former director general of Inter-Services Intelligence General (retd) Hamid Gul as saying. From here: Pakistan has agreed to make an appeal to the `mujahideen’ to stop fighting in Kargil and vacate their positions after having achieved their objective of drawing international attention to the Kashmir dispute, Pakistan Foreign Office spokesman Tariq Altaf said last night. From here: Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif said the mujahideen had achieved the”basic purpose” of the occupation. ”By agreeing to vacate these peaks on our appeal, the mujahideen have created an opportunity that will, God-willing, lead to Kashmir’s liberation. And that opportunity is efforts for a solution of the Kashmir dispute through bilateral talks and the full attention, interest and pressure of world powers, for the success of these efforts,” he said. From here: “Basically the disengagement between the mujahideen and the Indian troops, as far as we can monitor, is going on smoothly,” Pakistan military spokesperson Brigadier Rashid Qureshi said. Qureshi said the reported remarks by Chief of Army Staff General Pervez Musharraf in an interview with the BBC on Friday that his troops had indeed crossed into the Indian side of Kashmir to fight – after weeks of Pakistani denials that its troops had been involved – had been taken out of context and “blown up out of all proportion”.He said Musharraf’s words did not amount to an admission of Indian and Western charges that Pakistani troops had taken part in the capture of strategic heights in Batalik, Drass and Kargil areas of Indian north Kashmir. From here: After his return from London on July 8, where he met Prime Minister Tony Blair, Sharif went into a meeting with Chief of the Army Staff Gen. Pervez Musharraf and other senior aides. The next day he presided over a meeting of the Defence Committee of the Cabinet (DCC), Pakistan’s highest decision-making body on security matters. The DCC “decided that Pakistan should appeal to the mujahideen to help resolve the Kargil situation”. Soon after the DCC meeting ended, Sharif met with leaders of the Jehad Council in the presence of Gen. Musharraf and made an “appeal” to them to “help resolve” the Kargil situation. An official statement issued after a Cabinet meeting on July 10 said: “The Cabinet noted that the mujahideen have responded positively to the appeal of the Government of Pakistan to help resolve the Kargil situation.” From here: Foreign Minister Sartaj Aziz has said that Kashmiri freedom fighters will be requested to vacate Kargil area inoccupied Kashmir only if India agrees to revert back to 1972 positions on the Line of Control when Simla agreement was signed.The Pakistani Foreign Minister, who arrived in London on Tuesday morning along with Prime Minister Mohammad Nawaz Sharif on a day-long visit enroute to Pakistan, told reporters that Pakistan has agreed to request and appeal to the freedom fighters to vacate Kargil area if India also agrees to vacate the areas that it occupied on the Line of Control after the signing of the Simla agreement in 1972. So there you go. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, Foreign Minister Sartaj Aziz, Defence Committee of Cabinet, Pakistan military spokesperson Brigadier Rashid Qureshi, Pakistan Foreign Office spokesman Tariq Altaf and Hamid Gul all agreed that non-state actor mujahideen had occupied Kargil and Pakistan was doing everything in their power to get them to vacate. Pakistan Government, Army, Foreign office, ISI (Legitimate, rogue, serving and retired) had nothing to do with it, just like in the Osama, Haqqani, Drone, Mumbai and Baluchistan issues. —-xxx—- You Might As Well Become a Hermit Because Pakistan-China Fraandship Puts Your Fraandships To Shame JUNE 8, 2012 Official Quotes about Pakistan-China fraandship Pakistan China Friendship is: Unique and Unprecedented (May, 2010) Pakistan China Friendship is: Taller Than Mountains and Deeper Than Oceans (Dec, 2010) Pakistan China Friendship is: Stronger than Steel (Dec, 2010) Pakistan China Friendship is: All-weather (May, 2011) Pakistan China Friendship is: A Lush Tree (July, 2011) Pakistan China Friendship is: Deeper Than the Seas and Sweeter Than Honey (March, 2012) Pakistan China Friendship is: The Stuff of Legends (Apr, 2012) Pakistan China Friendship is: In Our Blood (Apr, 2012) Pakistan China Friendship is: Beyond the Confines of Time Limits (June, 2012) Please post your own superlatives for Pakistan-China fraandship, which could be used for the next joint statement!! Some poems I wrote to inspire you: Taller than Mountain // Lush like a Tree // O dear China // You smell like Currency!! And some suggestions to get your creative juices flowing. Pakistan China Friendship is: Rounder than a Circle Pakistan China Friendship is: Odder than 5 Pakistan China Friendship is: 400% more than 100% Pakistan China Friendship is: Bigger than Infinity And lastly, this level of pheelings can only be produced by an orgasm. I wonder who is screwing who. —-xxx—- Bollywood Story JUNE 6, 2012 Yours sachly has been toying with writing a story for bollywood movie. The story goes as follows. A respectable judge with white (or dyed black) hair and horn rimmed glasses gets a case involving a petty criminal. The straightforward judge hates criminals and is a man of integrity who frequently stands up to authority. That is when the criminal starts humming a song. Judge recognizes the song and has a flashback…. Flashback: A Father is separated from his wiphe and son. Father is obsessed with his career as a judge. Son becomes a criminal. Then son is arrested for some crime and shows up in father’s court. Present day: Father is in turmoil, does not know whether to acquit his son or convict him impartially. Does some soul searching and lot of prayers. Next day he goes to court and declares that since he is responsible for his son becoming a criminal, he should be judged and the son should be set free. Everybody is shocked. That is when we discover (as unearthed by the Son’s girlfriend), that the evil politician-villian who the Father had convicted had influenced the son with bad company and alcohol to extract revenge on the father. The villian is caught, punished, thrashed and imprisoned. The father and son are set free. That is when the father asks for the son’s mother, who now has white hair and constantly prays. They meet. It is an emotional scene. They all sing the family song. The son’s girlfriend joins in. Everyone smiles. Disclaimer: Any resemblance to any person or persons, living or dead is purely coincidental. —-xxx—- Pakistan Has Lost the Records For Calculating the Money Lost on The Lost Cause of War on Terror JUNE 1, 2012 So the express tribune newspaper reports (I will not treat it as the final word. When it comes to Express Tribune, each article is like a Man’s labor of love: Never quite done and subject to change) Cost of war: Chapter on war on terror losses jettisoned Why you ask? Well the usual reasons that make sense Pakistan has formally abandoned the claim of suffering immensely from the ongoing war on terror, saying that this in fact “hurt the economy, rather than bringing about any benefit.” And therefore a section carrying details of losses the country has suffered due to the war on terror has been dropped from the latest edition of the Economic Survey of Pakistan. “For how long will we highlight the impact of the war on terrorism on the country,” argued finance minister Dr Abdul Hafeez Shaikh while justifying the decision to drop the special section, “Cost of War on Terror for Pakistan Economy”. The repeated emphasis has hurt investor sentiments, he added. Followed by the real reason According to last year’s economic survey, Pakistan has suffered almost $68 billion in cumulative losses over the past decade due to the ongoing war on terrorism. Finance ministry officials, however, said the $68 billion figure proved to be wrong during this year’s initial assessments. “We did not want to drastically revise this figure downward, as it might have raised the issue of the credibility of the country’s statistics”, official said. Notice the word “drastically”. I personally do not think the country’s credibility would have been affected in any manner, given that making up numbers is not totally alien for the finance ministry and I am not so sure that any credibility is left: Double-counting: GDP overestimated, may be slashed by 10% The size of the country’s economy will shrink by up to Rs2.5 trillion, or roughly 10%, after reports surfaced that the value of some goods and services were counted twice in calculation of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) for the last several years. The ‘correction’ has major implications, and places a question mark on authenticity of key economic indicators. The interesting phrase here is “For the last several years”. And before that: Finance secretary changed in wake of IMF report In its recent report on the state of the country’s economy, the IMF has unearthed that, in a bid to hide the real budget deficit, Pakistan’s expenditures were understated by Rs317 billion and revenues overstated by Rs215 billion. It is interesting to see someone being charged for it. Which in Pakistan’s context means (0) It is not an innocent mistake (1) Higher ups were involved and Finance secretary was just an escaped goat. And even before that: Lack of coordination costs Pakistan the IMF programme Two different sets of statistics about flood damages to the economy irritated the IMF staff that negotiated with Pakistani delegation, headed by Finance Minister Dr Abdul Hafeez Shaikh, in Washington. “The IMF staff was already perplexed by economic growth and inflation numbers in the aftermath of the floods, as different data came out of the finance ministry but the major blow came from none other than Prime Minister Syed Yousaf Raza Gilani,” a source said. I find it interesting that it has been passed of as a “Lack of coordination” which presumably means “Two different people made up two sets of figures and everyone is shocked that they didnt agree”. The urge to make up “ball park” figures is so irresistible that a sitting President has gone on to claim in an Op-ed: Talk to, not at, Pakistan We have hemorrhaged approximately $100 billion directly in the war effort and tens of billions more in lost foreign investment. Amount of Money Lost by Pakistan in War on Terror Turns out, that $100 billion was in fact not quite $100 billion but $68 billion and now it is not quite $68 billion. But one cannot blame the President for not being able to resist the urge to make up numbers. Yours truly’s fourth cousin too has fallen prey to that urge and over time has tweeted: 17 May: Pakistan has lost $200 Billion due to US not giving $200 Billion to Pakistan 1 May: Pakistan has lost $100 Billion due to Abbottabad raid because of money lost in not being able to charge US money for hunting Osama 26 Feb: Pakistan has lost 50.01billion $ in war on terror. The 0.01 Billion due to the cost of Sheikh Osama Shaheed house and its demolishun. 15 Nov 2011: Pakistan has lost more than 40 runs due to war on terror (comment on a Criket match) Seems they did not heed the advice my fourth cousin was hinting at: 27 Feb: When complaining about war on terror expenses, please to stick to one figure! Dont quote different numbers like Veena Malik’s age!! —-xxx—- Obama and Osama MAY 12, 2012 Yours sachly had been meaning to write this article for the first anniversary of the fake american operation which killed a clone of Sheikh Osama Shaheed, but as usual got caught up in other things. In the immediate aftermath of Osama’s killing effusive praise has been handed out to Barack Obama for (paraphrased) “His brave decision to give the go-ahead for the operation”. I am sure that this will be touted again in the articles that will be written on every anniversary of the operation and also during Obama’s re-election campaign, when it heats up. Courage is demonstrated in the face of danger and risk, which we will get to in a minute. Before that, let us analyze the possible outcomes of the operation. In the extreme, there were four possibilities Osama is in the compound and the forces kill or capture him Osama is in the compound and the forces are unable to kill or capture him and are thwarted by Osama’s bodyguards or by PAF or Pakistan army and suffer casualties. Osama is not in the compound, the forces ascertain this and get out safely (with egg on their faces). Osama is not in the compound and the forces suffer causalities in the hands of PAF or Pakistan Army during their ingress/exit. So of the four possible outcomes (obviously, not of equal probability) three end in disasters of various sizes and one of them is a success. Undeniably it is a difficult decision to make. As I had mentioned earlier the decision has not only been characterized as difficult (which it is) but also brave and courageous. As I had also mentioned before, courage is demonstrated in the face of danger and risk. Since Obama was only risking the lives of his soldiers, he should have been risking something else for him to be called courageous. A ready answer would be that Obama was risking his popularity and re-election chances. This is not really true. American public has valued bold (and reckless) decisions more than they have valued nuanced and considered decisions. There are a few cases in point: Jimmy Carter’s popularity had a measurable increase after Operation Eagle Claw which was a disaster by any measure. Conversely, George Bush senior’s popularity fell by 50 points over a year after the successful conclusion of operation desert storm. By contrast, George Bush junior’s popularity was high enough for him to win a re-election even though 9/11 happened in his watch and the war in Iraq was botched, Osama was not caught and there were no WMDs in Iraq*. So Obama’s popularity even in the face of a failed operation to kill or capture Osama was in no danger of falling. On the contrary, his acolytes could have even spun it as an example of his willingness to use force to protect American interests. So the impact of this operation on his popularity would most likely be positive and at worst not impact it at all. Apart from a risk to his conscience (which I honestly believe any leader of any state should not possess) he was not risking anything at all. As a passing note, any astute reader would not fail to notice that under every possible outcome, US-Pakistan relations would be gravely damaged. Obama was certainly not risking US-Pakistan relationship — the fact that it would nosedive after Operation Geronimo was a foregone conclusion. People who repeatedly bleat about “trust deficit between Pakistan and US” should spare a moment to think about this. _____________________________________ *All these numbers form USA Today historical presidential approval ratings website. —-xxx—- Yours Sachly Ko Lulz Kyon Ata Hai: Part 1 MAY 1, 2012 Yours sachly brings you for your enjoyment, news articles that should be read together for Lulz. Army has its eye on Nato supplies deal The bankrupt Pakistan Railways management has pulled off the mother of all deals with the NLC, while the army is working hard behind the scenes for an equally big deal with the United States. In the first week of February, railways signed a deal with the military-run National Logistics Cell (NLC) under which the cell will repair 30 railway locomotives of which 15 will be returned to the railways to use. The other 15 will be used by the NLC to carry freight booked by the NLC. What does the NLC get out of this deal? This was a question that proved hard to answer as the NLC and the ISPR never bothered to reply to any questions despite a weeklong wait. However, Dawn has learnt that the military is gearing up to earn big bucks from the transport of US/Nato/Isaf supplies via Pakistan’s land routes in the near future and this is what is behind the NLC deal with the railways. Pakistan Railways asked to justify controversial deals The National Bank of Pakistan (NBP) has asked Pakistan Railways (PR) to justify its deal with National Logistics Cell (NLC) for repairing 30 locomotives at Rs500 million while the Bank’s Balancing, Modernisation and Replacement (BMR) for 100 locomotives is worth Rs 6.1 billion. The News has reliably learnt that PR has two separate deals to repair 130 units from its aging fleet of locomotives. In the first deal, NLC has been asked to repair 30 locomotives at the cost of Rs500 million. After the repair, half of the repaired locomotives would be used by NLC and PR for freight purposes only. In the second deal, NBP is to arrange a financing facility of Rs6.1 billion for the BMR of 100 locomotives. Railways’ ancillary staff move to block Rs6.1 billion loan Cash-strapped railways got the Rs6.1 billion loan in January through its profitable ancillary PRACS. PRACS was chosen for the purpose as no bank and financial institution was ready to trust the loss-making railways. The employees, under the cover of PRACS Employees Association, are of the view that the loan will not be used for the repair of locomotives and may be misused by railway officials. The association represents lower as well as some high-ranking officers of PRACS. Pak Rail team arrives today to buy engines With the intention of acquiring locomotives from India to re-start its defunct train services, a three-member team of the Pakistan Railways Advisory and Consultancy Services Limited (PRACS), led by managing director Mohammed Junaid Quareshi, will arrive in the Capital for a two-day visit onThursday. As reported in the April 21 edition of the Hindustan Times, Pakistan has pitched an upgraded offer to buy or take on lease about 100 railway engines from India. So NLC wants locomotives repaired for cheap, Pakistan railways is taking a loan from a bank for four times that money to repair locomotives. The loan is taken out by an ancillary, the money will not be used to repair locomotives but for purchasing new ones from India, which will then be used to transport NATO supplies, which will earn money from the US for National Logistics Cell. Which makes me propose a new Headline: India to Fund Pakistan Army to Move Peace Process Forward Or better still Milo Minderbinder Runs Pakistan Railways —-xxx—- You Too Can Give Suggestions To Solve Siachen APRIL 17, 2012 1 COMMENT Do you feel like doing a strategic analysis of Siachen issue but cannot figure out where it is on the map? Do you feel like calling for solutions to Siachen but do not know the difference between Karakoram highway, Karakoram pass and Karakoram mountain range? Fikar not. Here is a map yours sachly made for you (click on it for a bigger map and opportunities for bigger strategic analysis) Siachen And here is information about the Karakoram pass ripped off from Wikipedia: The Karakoram Pass is a mountain pass between India and China in the Karakoram Range. It is the highest pass on the ancient caravan route between Leh in Ladakh and Yarkand in the Tarim Basin. ‘Karakoram’ literally means ‘Black Gravel’ in Turkic. The Karakoram pass falls on the boundary of territory controlled by India (Jammu and Kashmir region) and China (Xinjiang Autonomous Region). Now go forth and embellish your tweets with profound observations like ”India should withdraw to the Nubra valley, and Pakistan to Skardu”. Prospects for Peace APRIL 10, 2012 Without addressing the internal deficiencies of Pakistan — The various autonomous terror groups which enjoy various degrees of popular and official support, an over-ambitious Judiciary which is reluctant to convict terrorists, an Army which manufactures and uses the pretext of external threats in its power struggle with the civilians, and an intelligence agency addicted to using terror as an instrument of its policy and whose objectives do not align with the long term interests of the state — Pakistan government neither has the credibility nor the capability to deliver on its side of the bargain on any negotiated settlement for peace. Permanent peace with India, US and the world is impossible without demonstrated commitment to stick to Pakistan’s end of the bargain: Any deals which rely on empty promises, platitudes, talking points1, negotiating skill, goodwill, large heartedness, symbolic gestures and nuisance value might buy short-term normalization and a few dollars but will neither achieve permanent peace nor economic prosperity. What it will achieve repeatedly though is a steady employment, fame, importance and travel to exotic location for “track-2” participants. But then, short-term normalization might be the exactly what the various players (Zardari, Army, ISI, track-2 participants) are shooting for at this time to cater to their own short-term needs. A Background India’s GDP in 2010 was $1.73 Trillion. Pakistan’s GDP was $0.176 Trillion. In other words, Pakistan’s entire GDP is about the same as a rounding error in India’s GDP, and the gap is widening. This huge disparity in economic strength has begun to translate into military and diplomatic might. India has won the largest mining contract in Afghanistan worth Billions2. It is inevitable that deals like these will translate to economic and political clout in Afghanistan. This is how Indians will take over Pakistan’s backyard — not by constructing dozens of consulates and training hundreds of RAW agents as some armchair analysts stuck in 80’s Jihadi mindset suggest. This influence is not limited to countries poorer than Pakistan: India-China’s trade volume today is more than a third of Pakistan’s GDP, larger than all of Pakistan’s external debt and is growing fast. It is inevitable that over time, the “all weather friendship” becomes seasonal, starts placing demands and charging its pound of flesh. Pakistan’s relevance, clout and friends in the region are shrinking. Pakistan economy has internal ramifications as well. If the Army stays out of politics (and if ballots are not stuffed), elections will be fought and won based on the economy. If tomorrow the PPP is able wipe out gas and electricity shortages and reduce the price of petrol, its victory in the next elections is guaranteed. On the other hand, prices of essential commodities will be a central plank of PML-N’s election pitch. With relations souring with the USA and the consequent reduction in IMF’s enthusiasm in giving out loans, dole outs are not a steady guarantee. This leaves only the option of trade to bolster Pakistan’s economy. Improving trade relations with India shows the political acumen of Zardari. The economy will be bolstered (electricity and fuel deals, export potential). By removing India as an existential threat, the Army’s relevance and eventually their stranglehold over the country will be weakened. Quasi-normal relations with India will also mean blunting the appeal of players like PTI and Difa-e-Pakistan. Zardari’s visit to India should be seen in this light (and as a lesser objective, bolstering Bilawal’s credentials as a PPP leader and Pakistan’s external face). So will Pakistan-India relationship permanently and irreversibly improve? Unfortunately no. The Terror Angle From India’s (and the World’s) perspective, Pakistan’s relevance primarily stems from one aspect: Its nuisance value. Pakistan is relevant to NATO because of its propensity and willingness to shut down NATO logistics routes. Pakistan is relevant to the US because it shelters the Taliban hierarchy and either through collusion or by benign neglect aids Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Pakistan is relevant to India because of its ability to export terror. Beyond this, Pakistan contribution to the global scheme of things are few, if any. Any permanent normalization of relationship with India (and indeed the US) would need to eventually address the terror aspect. Even if Pakistan’s foreign office relies on Indian “large heartedness” and promises of future action to gain concessions, this relationship will be built on a shaky foundation. The next terror attack in India and the consequent domestic compulsions will leave the Indian government no option but to break off contacts and retaliate, resetting the relationship. In recent times, this happened after the attack on India’s Parliament (when BJP was in power), and again after the Mumbai attacks (when Congress party was in power), showing that this is not a party-specific thing in India, but is rather driven by public opinion and political compulsions. Too Many Jihadis…. There is great reluctance in Pakistan to give up terror as a leverage, because as noted before, it is the only leverage Pakistan has over the world. Even if the Government decides to give up terrorism as a leverage as part of a grand bargain, it cannot: Irrational violence has been decentralized in Pakistan and accountability for abetting terrorism has been willfully destroyed. There are simply too many power centers perpetrating irrational and un-coordinated violence in Pakistan: The Army (responsible for Kargil intrusions), ISI and the various Jihadi Groups (responsible for Mumbai attacks), the Judiciary3, the Taliban (Responsible for attacks on India’s embassy in Kabul) each acting with various degrees of autonomy, with opaque objectives under partial control. Mumbai attacks are a case in point: They were probably perpetrated by the intelligence agencies to flare-up India-Pakistan hostility and reduce the pressure on the Army to fight in the west. Whether this decision was taken while considering the impact on Government’s push to improve relations with India or Army’s preparedness to counter Indian mobilization is not known. In many aspects, this resembles the Kargil intrusions, which was perpetrated without considering the Government’s efforts at normalization and the diplomatic and economic strength of the country, ultimately resulting in Pakistan’s military defeat, an economic catastrophe, a coup and a significant erosion of Pakistan’s credibility and position on the Kashmir issue. …with too little accountability In addition to the decentralization of violence, Pakistan willfully lacks any chain of accountability for abetting terror. This lack of chain of accountability has served Pakistan well: In other countries, the government would have been held accountable for sheltering Osama Bin Laden. However in Pakistan, extraordinary evidence is needed to show that the Government (and not one of the several “non-state actors” or “rogue elements” or “retired ISI officers” or “banned groups” or “Intelligence agents acting on its own”) was responsible for sheltering Osama Bin Laden. While lack of accountability and decentralization of rogue behaviour is useful for deception and perfidy, it weakens credibility and shuts the scope for negotiated settlement based on accountability. In other words, Zardari cannot credibly promise to rein in the terror groups and even if he does, he cannot deliver. Gilani protests the bounty on Hafiz Saeed, because Gilani cannot touch Hafiz Saeed even if he wanted to. If the Government cannot deliver, it is inevitable that some group perpetuates another terror attack on India leading to renewed hostility between India and Pakistan. This is probably neither lost on India nor on Pakistan and both might still embrace after offering some platitudes at the altar of peace — for the short term. ___________________________________________ 1“Pakistan itself is a victim of terrorism”, “not talking will strengthen the hands of extremists”, “South Asia is a nuclear flashpoint”… 2To get a perspective, this deal is worth more than the entire money promised by the Kerry-Lugar bill and IMF support program put together. 3A Judge once famously asked why the UN ban should be enforced on Hafiz Saeed, in his view, India had not adhered to the UN resolutions on Kashmir. —-xxx—- I Hate Apes NOVEMBER 16, 2011 13 COMMENTS Yours sachly tried his hand at writing a Sci-Fi short story and thought that it would be interesting to blog the background as a blog post. This blog post is about the the basic structural conflict between (some) religion(s) and science and wish to explain this using the theory of evolution as an example. The Structure of Proselytizing Religions Religions which successfully challenge the status-quo, eventually do so by strength of arms. But before they do so, they acquire enough converts to be a viable force. Achieving this critical mass of converts is not easy because the new religion should upend an existing religion with wide-spread adoption, a large clerical hierarchy and possibly backed by royal support and money (like how Christianity challenged Judaism). New religions acquire this critical momentum by finding a way to be popular with the masses and a way to retain the new converts. The successful ones which have done so, have structural properties of being conclusive and separative. They are “conclusive” in the sense that they provide a book or a set of books which conclusively informs the reader everything they need to know about the religion: For example, the Bible or the Koran. The book typically has a conclusive answer for every question of faith. This has the advantage of (a) efficient dissemination across cultures and vast distances and (b) keeping the religion simple. If one cannot answer the question “What are the central tenets of your religion” in a short and meaningful way or transmit it across vast distances, one cannot hope to spread the religion! Hinduism never met any success at being transmitted, because it is simply too complicated and there is no conclusive authority on what Hinduism really is. They are “separative” in the sense that they express a separate, or a distinct identity. For example, one cannot be a Christian and a Muslim at the same time. Once converted, the convert should adhere to his new identity to the exclusion of any other identities. For example: you either adhere to the tenets of Christianity in totality or you are a heretic. Religions which are not separative, risk being absorbed into a bigger and more flexible religion. Somewhat like how Hinduism successfully subsumed Buddhism, because Buddhism did not require its adherents to discard all other beliefs. Being conclusive and separative has two side effects: Nothing can be added to the religion without violating the requirement of a separate identity (For example. Ahmedis and Mormons, who tried to add things are heretics. Now you know why mullahs freak out about the Ahmedis) and nothing can be subtracted from the religion without violating tenets of the conclusive book. In fact, it goes a step further: If the book claims to be a divine revelation with everything in the book being stated as true, infallible and immutable, subtracting from the book brings the whole edifice crashing down and therefore, is a heresy. The Structure of Science Whereas conclusiveness and separativeness cause religions to stay constant, science is all about change. New theories are constantly proposed and validated and old ones discarded. In this context, it is important to understand the concept of a theory. The word “theory” is colloquially used to refer to a hypothesis or a conjecture or as my fourth cousin says: something pulled from one’s musharraf. Whereas in Science, a “theory” refers to our understanding of truth, which is strongly substantiated through multiple experiments and for which no counter-examples have been found so far (despite trying very hard). What then is the difference between a “Law” (like the second law of thermodynamics) and a “Theory” (like the atomic theory of matter)? Isn’t one stronger than the other? Actually no. Law vs Theory The word “Law” is used to codify an empirical observation which is believed to be universally true. Like for example “hot things cool”. Hot things have cooled for eons. Cups of coffee cool. Hot coals cool. Stars cool. We haven’t yet observed an instance of a hot object becoming hotter. So it is safe to codify it as (paraphrased) “Hot stuff cools” and call it “The second law of thermodynamics”. Note that Laws require evidence too and Laws require a lack of counter-examples. On the other hand theories explain how the laws work. “Why do hot things cool?” Hot things cool because all stuff is made of atoms and atoms like to hit each other transferring their energy to slower moving atoms. The “all stuff is made of atoms” is the “Atomic theory of matter” and has been substantiated through numerous experiments. We are yet to find a counter-example. Theories need strong evidence supporting them and require that there be no counter-examples. So “a theory” in the scientific sense is not a conjecture and is certainly not pulled from the musharraf. A Law and a Theory are equally strong, they are just instruments to codify different aspects of our knowledge. Note that the concept of counter-examples is very critical and is more subtle than most people realize. Because: Exceptions Justify The Rule (Law/Theory) Which does not mean that if we find a counter-example, that somehow strengthens the law or theory. Which would be bizarre. What it really means is that strong theories and laws, allow scope for counter-examples. For example, “Earth is spherical and you can dispute this theory by sending up a satellite to photograph it, and if it turns out to be flat, the theory is disproved” is a good theory. The reason being that there is a reasonable scope to challenge the theory by sending up a rocket. On the other hand “Earth is flat, but becomes spherical every time someone tries to verify this claim” is not a good theory, because there is no scope to disprove this theory. So more ways to challenge a theory automatically translates into a stronger theory if these challenges are defeated. On the other hand, only a weak theory tries to disallow challenges. In short, Exceptions justify the rule. The Theory of Evolution By now you probably know the news. Humans evolved from Apes. Note that it is a theory in the scientific sense that (a) It is not a conjecture (b) Multiple supporting evidence like fossil records and endogenous retroviral segments (more on this later) in human and chimpanzee DNA have been found (c) The theory allowed many challenges, all of which have been successfully met. Why is this incompatible with religion (eg Christianity)? Because it challenges a tenet in a conclusive book. Not only that, it challenges a central tenet in the conclusive book. One of the questions any new religion has to answer is “What if I believe in everything you say, just not your God?” or in other words “What if I do everything that the Bible asks me to, but just don’t believe in Jesus? Do I still get to go to heaven?” Christian theology has answered it through the principle of Sola gratia or by grace alone. The explanation being that: Everyone goes to Hell. Because Adam and Eve committed a sin against God and this sin has been passed from father to his children through the semen and therefore everyone, including a child, has inherited this sin and is automatically destined to hell (Note that this is why it is important that Jesus was born to a Virgin. He was sinless. The sin was not transmitted to him). Only a belief in Jesus will earn enough grace from him to spare you from hell. Therefore, actions and faith go hand in hand in securing heaven. Now you see the problem with the theory of Evolution! If Humans evolved, there is no Adam and Eve, there is no Original sin and there is no Sola gratia and everyone gets to go to heaven even without believing in Jesus! More seriously, a central tenet of a book that claims to be infallible and immutable is demonstrably false, thereby making the entire book suspect! The Challenges But what of the typical challenges? “Evolution is just a theory not a law” Which is nothing but scientific gibberish as we have already seen before. “God put fossil records in there to test our faith” Which in fact weakens creationism instead of strengthening it due to “exceptions justify the rule” principle. “Literal interpretation of the Book should be avoided” Negates the conclusiveness and separativeness principles of the religion. So how do we resolve this conflict? It is a tough question indeed. Rate this: FILED UNDER UNCATEGORIZED A Thought Provoking Article OCTOBER 31, 2011 12 COMMENTS In the crowded field of “South Asian Analysts”, many of whom have excellent credentials — like managing to be born in Pakistan or better still, having managed to visit Pakistan within the past five years — how does one get noticed? By writing thought provoking articles of course! And “thought provoking” gentle readers, is synonymous with “contrarian”. Or for the clueless, “thought provoking” means to vehemently disagree with accepted wisdom. But “thought provoking” articles should be written with care. What you disagree with doesn’t matter as much as when you disagree with it: Timing is everything! “So how long should I wait, and what should I wait for” you ask? Fikar not. The wait is usually a couple of weeks and the incident can be one of: Ahmedis getting massacred, Shias getting shot, Interior minister declaring that he will kill Blasphemers with his own bare hands, MNAs going underground for proposing amendments to Blasphemy laws, murderers getting garlanded or Judges running away to Saudi Arabia (you get the idea). That is the right opportunity for you to bust out your column “Why Pakistan is still largely a moderate country”. Many have done this, and many more will do this in the future. To save time and effort for everyone, I present for your gentle consideration: The “Pakistan is a moderate country” column generator!! The formula itself is very simple: Riveting opening sentence, intriguing provocation of thought, religious mumbo jumbo, meaningless statistics, blame Zia, guilt out the west, demand money, cashmere or both. So here it goes. The opening sentence should be riveting (choose one) Pakistan is A country usually mentioned in the same breath as the Taliban. Viewed synonymously with Osama Bin Laden. Thought of as a cesspit of Blasphemy laws, Coups, Nuclear weapons and Jihadis Most people will be tempted to end the article right here. But dont!! Brave analyst, you should plod on!! Don’t forget that we aren’t stating facts, we are disagreeing with them! The second sentence should turn the premise around and be thought provoking (choose one): But could it be That Pakistan is in fact a moderate, secular democracy founded on rule of law? That the problems commonly associated with Pakistan started only as recently as 1947? Nothing but propaganda by Zionist-RAW-CIA controlled western press? That the problems facing Pakistan are completely misconstrued? Now these two sentences set up the right platform to stake your credentials as a Pakistani. “But I don’t know anything about the core cultural zeitgeist of the country!” you say? Not to worry. Nobody reading your column does either. The trick is to act confident and informed (choose one): The religious violence in Pakistan is perpetrated by a small minority of Wahhabis while the bulk of the country follows the Berelvi sect of Islam known for its tolerance and plurality (Please DO NOT mention that Qadri was a Berelvi). Most people visit the graves of mystic saints who were clean shaven. The call for prayers co-exist with vibrant cultural scenes in Karachi, with girls in tight jeans under their shuttlecock burkhas, art festivals, book readings (inside well fortified, double cavity searched British consulate, but it is best not mentioned here). Next is the time for some statistics (choose one) The so-called conservative Pakistanis: Overwhelmingly vote for secular parties with less than 10% voting for religious parties. Where are my choices you ask? YOU MORON!! YOU DONT HAVE A CHOICE!! THIS STATISTIC SHOULD BE MENTIONED IN EVERY ARTICLE ARGUING THAT PAKISTAN IS MODERATE!! Now that we are past statistics, go on to blame Zia (choose one): It was Zia who: Started a process of Islamization of the society Declared Ahmedis to be non-Muslims* Stopped PTV anchors from dressing up stylishly in sarees Next is guilt trip! And Zia was co-opted by the west for their Jihad against the Soviets. (To be mentioned in every article) The next is the clincher So what should the west do? They should support the fledgling democracy in Pakistan with adequate economic support. Strike a grand bargain involving Cashmere for peace in Afghanistan to demonstrate their seriousness among ordinary Pakistanis. Encourage close economic linkages with the west through a liberal visa regime, relaxed trade quotas and co-operation in the nuclear field. (Choose ALL of them). So putting it all together, here is an example of “Pakistan is a moderate country” column I put together: Pakistan is a country usually mentioned in the same breath as the Taliban. But could it be that Pakistan is in fact a moderate, secular democracy founded on rule of law? The religious violence in Pakistan is perpetrated by a small minority of Wahhabis while the bulk of the country follows the Berelvi sect of Islam known for its tolerance and plurality. The so-called conservative Pakistanis overwhelmingly vote for secular parties with less than 10% voting for religious parties. It was Zia who started a process of Islamization of the society. And Zia was co-opted by the west for their Jihad against the Soviets. For a safe and secure future of the world, the west should support the fledgling democracy in Pakistan with adequate economic support. Strike a grand bargain involving Cashmere for peace in Afghanistan to demonstrate their seriousness among ordinary Pakistanis and encourage close economic linkages with the west through a liberal visa regime, relaxed trade quotas and co-operation in the nuclear field. Please submit your “Pakistan is a moderate country” in western press!! ________________________________________ *It was actually ZAB who declared Ahmedis to be non-muslims, but remember that we are disagreeing with facts here, not stating them! Rate this: FILED UNDER UNCATEGORIZED Pakistan and Indonesia are Different Countries OCTOBER 28, 2011 16 COMMENTS The perceptive Sadanand Dhume in his article “A Model for Pakistan’s Revival” draws parallels between Pakistan and Indonesia, and uses the dramatic transformation of Indonesia as a reason for optimism and the way forward in South Asia. Dhume cites the current stability and prosperity in Indonesia and points out: Consider the parallels between yesterday’s Indonesia and today’s Pakistan. Sukarno’s Indonesia was the region’s problem child: unhappy with its borders, tilted toward an authoritarian power (China), and infested by a totalitarian ideology (communism). Today Islamabad pursues so-called strategic depth in Afghanistan and won’t quite abandon obsolete ambitions in Indian Kashmir. It leans toward “all-weather friend” China even as its economy stagnates and radical Islam eats away at society and the state. While at first look the similarities are uncanny, the example cited is not remarkable: If one wants to cite examples of poorly governed countries with poor economies turning around, there is South Korea. If you want the example of a Muslim country which turned its economy around, it could be Saudi Arabia in the 60s and 70s. An example of a Muslim country without oil achieving this feat could be Turkey. Essentially what I am arguing is that such a parallel between Pakistan and Indonesia does not quite capture the very basis of all that ails Pakistan: Her identity which will cause a perpetual instability in the eastern border and her geography which will cause a perpetual instability in her western border. On the subject of Identity: Commentators who wish to explain Pakistan’s seemingly irrational behavior—Supporting the destabilization of Afghanistan and her affinity towards China*—frequently attribute it to Pakistan’s security anxieties vis-a-vis India. This is not an accurate explanation: Nuclear bombs and ballistic missiles have ruled out India-Pakistan wars of the magnitude which cleaved Bangladesh away from Pakistan. Therefore, possibility of conflicts which challenge the existence of Pakistan itself is ruled out and in this sense the conflict has stabilized. Then why does Pakistan still pursue avenues which give it strategic advantage over India? The only possible explanation would be the pursuit of India’s defeat rather than the pursuit of any guarantees of Pakistan’s survival. This is because: Pakistan views herself as the ideological progeny of the Mughal empire, with an unfinished agenda of conquering the subcontinent. Abandoning this endeavour would mean accepting the eventual supremacy of India (simply due to her demographics and geographical area) which would be interpreted (in Pakistan) as the defeat of the religion itself. This is unthinkable. Furthermore, abandoning this identity of Pakistan is unthinkable. This is the first “circular” conundrum. This is essentially what sets the India-Pakistan conflict apart from seemingly similar conflicts, and can end only with the ideological collapse of one of the adversaries — in this sense it resembles the US-Soviet cold-war conflict (which ended with the collapse of the USSR) than the Turkey-Greece or Egypt-Israel conflict (where the adversaries realized the futility of conflict and the economic advantages of peace). This is the first objection that I have towards Dhume’s prescription: Convincing Pakistan of the benefits of peace and working with her to de-radicalize her society and re-structure the economy to bring stability, would have as much success as attempting to talk the Soviet Union out of the Cold-war, by convincing the Soviet Union to abandon communism. The “Convincing Pakistan of the benefits of peace” part is an order of magnitude harder than what US has achieved in Indonesia and elsewhere. In the pursuit of this “Convincing” strategy, US has failed in an even more dangerous way: She has armed Pakistan (to address the “insecurity vis-a-vis India” thesis), which will eventually serve as a catalyst for more conflict (due to the “defeat of India” pursuit) rather than less conflict. The second part of Pakistan’s problem is her Geography. The land that is Pakistan today, has neither been a viable entity nor had peace with Afghanistan except during periods of economic linkages and power projection from the Gangetic Plain. Astute observers of history will not fail to notice the fact that: Peace between Pakistan and a strong Afghanistan is possible only with a strong Pakistan-India military alliance. In the absence of this alliance, peace is possible only with a destabilized Afghanistan. However an Afghanistan under perpetual Pakistani hegemony is possible only with strong economy in Pakistan, which is impossible without strong economic linkages with India. This is the second “circular” conundrum. Ergo, Pakistan is not Indonesia. Therefore, any solution to create stability in the region will not have “Sell the idea of economic prosperity to Pakistan” as the first step. If anything, Pakistan is the Gordian Knot, which can be cut only by a revolution inside Pakistan first — that too a revolution of the good kind. But this is no reason to abandon optimism. Being the optimist that yours sachly is, I will wait till the region collapses into a rubble and then rebuilds itself into a stable and viable entity. ___________________________________ *Pakistan shares no common grounds or linkages with China on the basis of race, religion, values or geography (except of course the tiny strip of a perilous highway). The single point of convergence with China is the shared hostility towards India. Even there, both countries disagree about the magnitude of hostility. While China is content with an India that cannot drain her resources through economic and territorial challenges, Pakistan wishes to bet her very survival towards besting India. Rate this: FILED UNDER UNCATEGORIZED Among The Believers by Naipaul – A Review (Part 1 of 3) SEPTEMBER 19, 2011 18 COMMENTS The latest controversy surrounding VS Naipaul’s statement about women writers re-kindled my interest in his works. I read his book “Among the believers–An Islamic Journey”. It is a travelogue of Naipaul’s travel (in 1979) through Islamic countries. Not Saudi Arabia, but the countries of the “converted peoples”. The countries which are separated from Arabia either through heresy (Iran, with its Shiite beliefs) or through distance — Pakistan, Malaysia and Indonesia. In these travels Naipaul talks to a cross section of the society: people from drivers, students, guides, government officials to people of power like Ayatollah Khalkhali and Anwar Ibrahim (during his student politics days). Naipaul then synthesizes his experiences into a commentary on the history of the people, their faith, the impact of their faith on their way of life. This book written in the early 80′s offers a perceptive and prescient analysis of the impact of Islam on the politics and society of these countries. This review is divided into three parts. The first two parts are about Naipaul’s impressions of Islam: Its effect on the culture and attitude of the people and the politics and society of these countries. The third part is about Naipaul’s impressions of Pakistan.Naipaul comes across as a man with a sharp sense of observation and intellect and a sharper tongue. His analysis of the role of Islam in the countries he visits is brutal and honest. The first of the two recurring themes of his work (the second theme in the second review) is: The Lack of Solutions in Political Islam Naipaul’s most vehement opinions about Islam have to do with (his) perceived misuse of Islam by a set of aggrieved people and the lack of solutions in Islam to address the very grievances of these people, which made them turn to religion in the first place. For example, in Iran, what started off as a revolution triggered by the injustices of the Shah, quickly took on an Islamic fervor. Naipaul is pessimistic about the ability of this fervor to carry the civilization forward. About Ayatollah Khomeini, Naipaul says He was the kind of man who, without political doctrine, only with resentments, had made the Iranian revolution This theme of lack of political solutions in Islam and the adoption of Islam by aggrieved people is their search for solutions (which do not exist in Islam) to their grievances pervades Naipaul’s keen commentary. About the Islamic fervor in the “born again” Muslims in Malaysia, Naipaul observes The new men of the villages, who feel they have already lost so much, find their path blocked at every turn. Money, development, education have awakened them only to the knowledge that the world is not like their village, that the world is not their own. Their rage—the rage of pastoral people with limited skills, limited money, and a limited grasp of the world—is comprehensive. Now they have a weapon: Islam. It is their way of getting even with the world. It serves their grief, their feeling of inadequacy, their social rage and racial hate. This Islam is more than the old religion of their village. The Islam the missionaries bring is a religion of impending change and triumph; it comes as part of a world movement. In Readings in Islam, a local missionary magazine, it can be read that the West, in the eyes even of its philosophers, is eating itself up with its materialism and greed. The true believer, with his thoughts on the afterlife, lives for higher ideals. For a nonbeliever, with no faith in the afterlife, life is a round of pleasure. Thus Naipaul attributes the fervor of the “born again” Muslims as their attempt at satiating their rage at the perceived inequities due to their inability to deal with the modern times. He also comments on the use of Islam by the Malays as a tool to look down upon the Chinese–who through their hard work and entrepreneurial skills outstrip the Malays in education and business. Malays perceive the Chinese to be unclean, due to their animist beliefs and pork eating. But of Malays he says If the Chinese convert to Islam, the Malays would become Buddhists But Islam has offered no solution to social inequities or injustices in Iran. During Naipaul’s trip, the Kurds were massacred, the communists brutally suppressed. The very acts of suppression and brutality for which the Shah was despised are now justified in the name of Islam. Malays, in their search for equality, have built a framework of race-based discrimination rooted in Islam. Pakistan, in its search for identity and a paradise for Muslims was under military rule with mobs attacking newspapers, jailed journalists and the brutal massacre of the Balochs. The lack of political solution in Islam, Naipaul deems as a intrinsic structural flaw in the religion itself: Religion, which filled men’s days with rituals and ceremonies of worship, which preached the afterlife, at the same time gave men the sharpest sense of worldly injustice and made that part of religion. This late-twentieth-century Islam appeared to raise political issues. But it had the flaw of its origins—the flaw that ran right through Islamic history: to the political issues it raised it offered no political or practical solution. It offered only the faith. It offered only the Prophet, who would settle everything—but who had ceased to exist. This political Islam was rage, anarchy. Naipaul further argues that contrary to the contention of the Islamic fundamentalists, there is no scope for Islam prescribing an institutionalized method of cratering to people’s political and social needs while taking their civilization forward. Because: The Islamic fundamentalist wish is to work back to such a whole, for them a God-given whole, but with the tool of faith alone—belief, religious practices and rituals. It is like a wish—with intellect suppressed or limited, the historical sense falsified—to work back from the abstract to the concrete, and to set up the tribal walls again. It is to seek to re-create something like a tribal or a city-state that—except in theological fantasy—never was. The Koran is not the statute book of a settled golden age; it is the mystical or oracular record of an extended upheaval, widening out from the Prophet to his tribe to Arabia. Thus, his conclusion is two-fold: Islam was used by aggrieved people who do not know where to look for solutions, and Islam, in an intrinsic and structural way, provides no political solution to these people This conclusion cannot be dismissed as shallow opinions of a man who is hostile to Islam and ignorant of its key tenets, but rather can be countered (if at all) only by equally keen and perceptive arguments. Next: Naipaul’s observation of the relationship of Islam with the West. Rate this: FILED UNDER UNCATEGORIZED Herps Fueled Thoughts – 1 JULY 28, 2011 5 COMMENTS Hina Rabbani Khar’s appointment as the foreign minister was met by a collective “meh”. Intelligentsia were quick to point out her privileged entry into politics and lament the lack of choices. Some wrote articles arguing why a woman in a position of power need not yield dividends for betterment of women as a whole in Pakistan. Indian media’s fawning over her has changed all that, and suddenly she is a poster girl for woman power — one who can carry her Birkin bag and Pakistan’s position on Kashmir with equal grace. One has to admire Indian media’s ability to grant legitimacy to Pakistani public figures. The last time it was in full display in Agra in 2001, it shored up Musharraf’s fortune and Pakistan had to live with him for the next seven years. Indian media with its short attention span, will move on to the next headline-worthy news item. Maybe IPL, next fast unto death or the telecom scam. Pakistan on the other hand, will be stuck with the same FM with her new found legitimacy whose only notable achievement so far, like Musharraf before her, is impressing a bunch of fawning Indian journalists. Rate this: FILED UNDER UNCATEGORIZED Lone Wolf is Lonely JULY 23, 2011 13 COMMENTS So one Mr Walid Zafar Teets: @WeeZieInc When a Muslim commits terror, every Muslim in the world somehow shares responsibility. When it’s a white Christian, he’s always a lone wolf. Which is representative of many teets on teetar, made yours sachly 400% agree and wallow in deep sadness at the loneliness of the lone wolf unfortunate enough to be born in a cold Scandinavian country. Such loneliness will never happen in warmer places inhabited by purer people where every one will definitely share responsibility. Off the top of my head I can assert that: The interior minister of Norway is unlikely to insinuate that an Israeli weapon was used and take care of the image of his own people. The Bresident oph Norway probably wont deny on Larry King that the shooter was a Norwegian and stand up for his rights. I soch this is becase Larry King show ended. Also the President is bigoted. I also soch that the killer probably wont be garlanded by the lawyers. The barbaric Norwegian bolis will probably never leak myoojic videos oph him in Jail. The equally barbaric Norwegian army wont have the guts to sign beace treaties with the Christian right. Neither are they large hearted enough to promulgate rule oph Pible in Norwegian provinces. Norwegian people are probably lazy. The society probably wont rise up and demand his release. The killer probably wont be getting any stipend in Jail from the Norwegian government either. Nor will he get any subbort from the Judges. Norwegian jingos will probably overly gloriphy the victims and not take a balanced view. With so little subbort phrom the political leadership of Norway, the Norwegian Police, the Norwegian Army, the Norwegian Government, it Lawyers, Judges and the Society at large, the killer is probably very lonely. This will never happen in Pakistan where every one — irrespective of whether they are Politicians, Army, Police, Lawyers, Judges or just common ordinary Pakistanis — will pitch in and make sure that the killer doesn’t feel lonely at all. The citizens would all collectively ensure that the killer is very well taken care of, and the responsibilities of his legal, economic and social well being will be somehow be shared equally by everyone*. Another one of many reasons why the west is so corrupt and under decline and one of the many proofs of our collective sense of shared responsibility which makes us all united and unfailingly stand up for one of our own. Proud to say that there are no wolves that are lonely among the pure. *Except for the mythical silent majority, which like the Himalayan Yeti has never been seen at all. Which means either it never existed, is probably dead or hiding with fear in a cave somewhere. Rate this: FILED UNDER UNCATEGORIZED A Comprehensive Analysis of Aatish Taseer Episode JULY 22, 2011 7 COMMENTS Note to everone except Ejaz Haider: Go and get a life. Dont grab your AK and express OUTRAGE for every teeny column written by random semi-popular people from across the border. Note to Ejaz Haider: Please try harder to impress us with your reading list. Rate this: FILED UNDER UNCATEGORIZED Pasha Conquers Washington–A Quick Note JULY 17, 2011 5 COMMENTS There have been a spate of articles recently in the press, following Gen Ahmad Shuja Pasha’s visit to the US, which yours sachly will summarize for your convenience: US is convinced that it cannot win without Pakistan’s assistance in Afghanistan, and therefore invited Pasha to the US. US agreed to resume aid, apologized profusely for its actions, promised take Pakistan’s sensitivities into account and assured that it would give Pakistan a larger say in the future of Afghanistan. Large hearted Pasha gracefully accepted this offer, and issued a few ultimatums and warnings which made all of American civilian and security staff tremble and sweat. They gave him and the people of Pakistan a pony as a parting gift. Which just goes on to prove my hypothesis: Pasha personally carried reports of progress made by the ISI to determine if any members of the ISI/Armed forces were complicit in hiding Osama Bin Laden. US made a few more demands and stated that further progress in this investigation is the litmus test for resumption of military aid. Following the visit, ISPR planted a few articles to cast ISI in a positive light. In case you missed the conclusion: THERE IS NO PONY. Rate this: FILED UNDER UNCATEGORIZED On the Importance of Pakistan-US Relationship JULY 12, 2011 3 COMMENTS I have been reading the various articles and analysis about the recent suspension of US military aid to Pakistan. The narrative of most of the articles seem to converge along the lines of: U.S.-Pakistan relationship is so vital for success in Afghanistan, stability of Pakistan and defeat of terror that I cannot imagine why U.S. would be so short sighed and not value this relationship. All of which makes eminent sense to me, but I am more than a bit annoyed (could you tell?). The reason is simple: Let us, for a minute assume that the relationship is valuable to the U.S., to Pakistan and to the rest of the world. Let me jog your memories by randomly picking out – from the top of my head – instances which reflect the value Pakistan places in this relationship*. Pakistan halted NATO convoys for several days, leading to several tankers being set on fire Pakistan establishment did the Raymond Davis drama for an extended period of time Gilani and Kayani are rumored to have advised Karzai to ditch the U.S. and throw in his lot with China Pasha had his famous outburst against U.S. in the assembly GHQ released a strongly worded statement exhorting U.S. to re-allocate aid to the civilians The establishment instigated much drama over conditions in the Kerry-Lugar act Not a week goes by without some section of Pakistan rioting against some incident involving the US (Aafiya anyone?) some section of the establishment releasing vaguely threatening statements, some section of columnists, analysts and ex-diplomats playing the China card and so on. If Pakistan has dispensed with the practice of haranguing in private and crossed the Rubicon to using public threats, instigated anti-Americanism and coercion in its dealing with the U.S., why the surprise at the reciprocity from the U.S.? Why does it come as a surprise that the U.S. does not value its relationship with Pakistan and fundamentally hates Pakistan as much as Pakistan hates the U.S.? If it is not a surprise, then why the strong tone of indignation all these articles? *I am charitably ignoring the shady role played by the agencies vis-à-vis OBL, Mullah Baradar, SSS affair since there is “no proof” of this. Rate this: FILED UNDER UNCATEGORIZED Will Suspension of US Aid Hurt Pakistan More or Hurt US More? JULY 12, 2011 5 COMMENTS After reading insightful analysis by Pakistani commentators and analysts, I have created a quick poll to analyze the intricate nuances of the suspension of US aid to Pakistan to understand why US suspending aid to Pakistan is a bad idea and the likely consequences of this action. Will Suspension of American Aid Hurt Pakistan or Will it Hurt the US? It will hurt Amreeka because Pakistan will stop supplies to Afghanistan It will hurt Amreeka because Pakistan will become fraands with China It will hurt Amreeka because Pakistan will stop phyting against moojahids It will hurt Amreeka because Pakistan has nuclear bum It will hurt India because it affects strategic stability in the subcontinent VoteView ResultsPolldaddy.com Rate this: FILED UNDER UNCATEGORIZED Will Suspension of US Aid Hurt Pakistan More or Hurt US More? JULY 12, 2011 5 COMMENTS After reading insightful analysis by Pakistani commentators and analysts, I have created a quick poll to analyze the intricate nuances of the suspension of US aid to Pakistan to understand why US suspending aid to Pakistan is a bad idea and the likely consequences of this action. Rate this: FILED UNDER UNCATEGORIZED Pakistan’s Security Posture is Untenable MAY 16, 2011 10 COMMENTS Pakistan has decided that its security is dependent on a destabilized (and pliable) Afghanistan on its western border and an India tied up through covert warfare on its eastern border. Pakistan has had to fight Afghanistan, US and India to achieve this. Pakistan has relied on a three-pronged strategy: sub conventional warfare, denials and deterrence in this fight. Pakistan has fought Sub conventional warfare through (a) the Taliban proxies in the west and (b) and in the east, through the various so-called “non-state actors” derived from groups such as Lashkar-e-tayyiba which enjoy state patronage. It has maintained Deniability by disassociating itself from these armed proxies. Pakistan skillfully employs its diplomats, myriad media personalities and “analysts” who trot out denials ranging from the respectable to the bizarre. For example, in the Osama Bin Laden case, one has a variety of denials to choose: From ambassador Haqqani’s articulate denials of complicity, to Prime Minister Gilani’s ludicrous assertion that the failure belongs to the world, to the conspiratorial Mirza Aslam Beg’s theory that the operation was staged and a look alike was killed!!* The third prong is Deterrence from retaliation for pursuing sub conventional warfare. To deter conventional retaliation from India, Pakistan uses a mixture of nuclear threats and conventional counter attacks and to deter retaliation from the US, Pakistan uses the threat of cutting off NATO supplies, ceasing co-operation and increased anti-Americanism among its population. I wish to argue that this security posture is untenable. The current security posture seems to be based more on spite than on deliberate strategy and is likely to fail with disastrous consequences because Pakistan has failed to understand a simple fact: adversaries have options. Much has been written about the costs incurred by Pakistan in terms of human capital, security and economy. My argument is not along these lines and more along the structural aspects of this strategy. Using terror as a security strategy is flawed because: 1. There is no end-game: Due to the denials that Pakistan is indulging in covert warfare, negotiations cannot be a solution (which would require Pakistan to take responsibility for its proxies, either LeT vis-à-vis India or the Haqqani faction vis-à-vis Afghanistan). The only conclusion of this approach of subconventional warfare-deniability-deterrence is the defeat of the adversary through force. Be it US in Afghanistan or India in Kashmir and elsewhere. This is unlikely to happen. The adversaries have strong national will backed by a sense of morality, and no incentive to accept defeat. Surrendering Kashmir is not an option for India, since India will calculate the costs of losing access to its waters and a possibility that the conflict will not end with Kashmir. Surrendering Afghanistan is not an option for the US, since attacks originating from Afghanistan have a potential to shape domestic politics in the US. Under such a context, Pakistan will be forced to continue this indefinitely and forced to escalate, which it cannot because: 2. Escalation defeats the strategy: Any escalation, either of the form of spectacular attacks in Mumbai or arresting American operatives for example, leads to a breakdown of deniability and could invite retaliation. The Mumbai attacks trial in India have conclusively proven that Pakistani attackers were involved. The upcoming trial of Rana (involving Headley) in Chicago might uncover even more uncomfortable truths. A similar situation arose when it was revealed that Raymond Davis was accosted by armed intelligence agents and not a couple of random bystanders as was reported first. This breakdown in deniability can be used by the adversary to escalate, leaving Pakistan with no option because 3. The adversaries enjoy flexibility in their response: Pakistan seems to have forgotten that her adversaries are intelligent, adaptive and backed up enormous economic and military resources. India is fighting back by choosing not to fight. Without raising tensions, they have embarked on an arms build-up spree, developed a cold start strategy backed up by ballistic missile defense. This is aimed at eliciting arms build up by Pakistan and ultimately bankrupting Pakistan (one can notice parallels to Regan’s SDI approach). The Americans are following an approach through technology and coercion. Pakistani declarations of its inability to fight in the tribal areas led to the Americans employing drones. Which has had a backlash inside Pakistan. Furthermore through the OBL raid, Americans have simultaneously struck at the credibility of the civilians and the myth of capability of the armed forces gavely injuring the deniability part of the strategy and demonstrating that Pakistani threat to shut down the NATO supply routes are hollow. This loss in credibility combined with the fact that keeping the economic lifeline of Pakistan alive requires negotiations and goodwill from the international community means that Pakistan has been boxed into a corner and American leverage over Pakistan has increased many fold. Make no mistake: the Americans are following a strategy of feigning friendship while indulging in warfare – as a reply to Pakistan’s strategy of feigning friendship while indulging in warfare**. While Pakistan measures its short-term success through body counts, India and US are charting a path to their successes by running Pakistan to the ground. The same sub conventional warfare-deniability-deterrence approach was tried out in Kargil and failed spectacularly due to the same reasons of lack of endgame, asymmetric escalation by India and the flexibility of response that India enjoyed. Pakistan could not obtain a negotiated withdrawal (because that would imply that Pakistan would have accept responsibility for the intrusion) and counted on an Indian surrender (and were not prepared for their will to fight). Indian escalation could not be matched by Pakistani escalation, due to the danger of loss of deniability. Ultimately India prevailed through strength of arms through Artillery and Airforce and thoroughly discredited Pakistani denials by going on a diplomatic offensive***. Though the conflicts themselves were dissimilar, the current conflict is following the well-charted Kargil route. A bloody nose in the Kargil conflict**** led to a decade of military rule, erosion of Pakistan’s economic base, steeper economic divisions and radicalization. A bloody nose in the current conflict will prove to be much more costly and might very well be fatal to Pakistan. * This despite Al-Qaeda’s acceptance that OBL is dead, the historic closed door briefing given by the armed forces to the Parliament and the possibility that US might find incriminating evidence from among the materials seized in the compound! ** Hence Pasha’s protestations about why US is not a reliable ally and noises about violation of sovereignty. Also, commentators seem to have missed the most significant aspect of the OBL raid: The fact that a successful operation would thoroughly humiliate and discredit Pakistani armed forces at home and abroad, could not have been overlooked by the US. In fact, this could have been one of the primary objectives of this raid. *** People with long memories will recall that in the aftermath of the Kargil war, (and before 9/11) similar loss of credibility ruined Pakistan’s economy. 9/11 was a fortuitous windfall. **** The defeat in Kagil was predictably sold off through stories ranging from a victory to denials that Pakistan was ever involved. Rate this: FILED UNDER UNCATEGORIZED Post OBL Raid–Quick Notes MAY 7, 2011 11 COMMENTS Pakistan’s Sovereignty US has stationed RADAR evading helicopters in Afghanistan. Since Taliban does not have RADAR, it wont be a stretch to guess whey they plan to fly these to. This raid is not the last. Probably was not the first. I find it impossible to believe that they did not go on a “test run” at night to see if they would be caught. Did the Army help? The sooner everyone gets over the delusion that the Army and ISI helped as an institution the better. The resulting loss of honor & dignity is strong enough to fracture the Army. The chief must be an idiot to do this. Trying to palm off the blame to PAF chief and civilian leaders are an indication that the Army is trying to get over this humiliation. Here is a sanity check: Nobody even had a coherent statement to make 3 days after. What next in the Army/ISI? Expect a witch hunt. The top brass must conclusively prove to the people of Pakistan that incompetence is punished. Expect a few heads to roll. More importantly, the top brass must conclusively prove to the radicalized middle and lower rungs that they were not hand in glove with the US. Not addressing this issue is a huge threat to the cohesion of the Army. Expect a few more heads to roll. If the Army and ISI did not help with this operation, by now they suspect that there are CIA moles inside. Expect still more heads to roll. It would be interesting to scan newspapers over the next several months to see how many Army/ISI operatives get bumped off. So who helped? I find it impossible to believe that CIA has not penetrated the ISI. They have had 10 years to cultivate mid-level ISI operatives, who probably are high level ISI operatives now. The repetition of the “courier” story is a red-herring. Someone from within the Armed forces ratted about RADAR installations and operating procedures. Someone from within the ISI ratted out a list of “off limits” houses. If you truly believe Americans zeroed in on the OBL compound, set up a observation house near OBL compound (and therefore, near PMA Kakul) without getting caught, evaded RADARs in the middle of the night and snatched OBL AND there are no rodents inside Army/ISI — I have a Minar in Lahore that I wish to sell you. If you believe Army & ISI helped, I will throw in a big Mosque in Islamabad for free. Rate this: FILED UNDER UNCATEGORIZED Jardari Stole My Oped MAY 3, 2011 2 COMMENTS On this momentous occashun when Sheikh Osama has become Shaheed, I had written an op-ed for western newsbapers. Those of you who are regulars in this blog and are readers of my tweets know my strategic stance on various issues of strategic geopolitics pertinent to the strategy of Pakistan’s strategic interests. Todin, I wake up and what do I see? My column reproduced almost verbatim (with a few words changed here and there) with Jardari taking complete credit (Like how Wajid Shamsul Hasan took credit for the operashun which caught Bin Laden) for it!! Jardari’s (stolen I might hasten to add) Washington Post op-ed is here. I am reproducing the draft of my piece so you yourself can make up your mind: Pakistan wont Part with Some Parts of the Whole Part of the Operashun Before the people of the United States, Britain, Spain, Indonesia, Afghanistan, Turkey, Yemen, Kenya, Tanzania, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Algeria and ofcourse Dagestan (those countries who can benefit from solushun to Cashmere issue) complain about terroijam originating from Pakistan, they should all realize that Pakistan itself victim of Pakistan-trained terrorists. Although the events of Sunday were not a joint operashun, Pakistan helped capture Bin Laden by not being unhelpful in capturing Bin Laden (at this time). One should realize that Pakistan’s terror toll bigger than the terror toll of all countries in NATO put together. Before terror victims complain to me about being victims of terror groups sheltered in Pakistan, they should realize I too am victim of terror groups sheltered in Pakistan. Some in the U.S. press have suggested that Pakistan lacked vitality in its pursuit of terrorism, but such allegashuns only serve to strengthen the hands of extremists. Before going NUTS at the inevitable protests marches in support of Bin Laden that will surely follow, I wish to remind you that religious parties win less than 0.001% of support in Pakistan, (the rest 99.999% oph support goes directly to Murderers who sing in Jail cells and Rapists who walk away free, like this one time when nobody stood up to condole Salman Taseer in the Nashunal assembly and the 0.001% oph beepuls who did, are now in hiding. But I digress). Asking uncomfortable questions will only destabilize democrajy in Pakistan and lead to further radicalizashun of South Asia and Central Asia. I will now quote Benajir because I never really figured out what the Quaid said about Pakistan in the constituent assembly. Now blease to go read Jardari’s Washington Post op-ed is here and see for yourself!! Rate this: FILED UNDER UNCATEGORIZED An Observation – I APRIL 14, 2011 9 COMMENTS As a departure from regular programming, here is a note: Pakistan is overplaying its hand. As a background, It is customary for Pakistan’s “establishment” to react vehemently when one of three things happen: 1. The establishment perceives that their relevance and power in Pakistan (in relation to the civvies) is being eroded: The last time this happened was when the US, in a not so subtle way, tried to set up a framework for strengthening the civilian set-up by tying the aid money under the Kerry-Lugar bill to conditions such as (i) Not having coups (ii) Transparency in disbursement and expenditure (iii) Progress along the democracy front etc. The KL bill was greeted by shrill debates in the media, manufactured outrage and public mobilized through the usual “establishment channels” to make the displeasure of the establishment known. 2. Vital surrogates in Afghanistan are attacked: An example of this was when NATO helicopters attacked terrorists of the Haqqani faction in the Kurram agency. Pakistan perceives that the Haqqani faction best serves its interests in Afghanistan. Pakistan’s desire to control Afghanistan is a primary national security objective – even though it is cloaked in the “acceptable” language of keeping India out, the fact remains that the gravest threat to Pakistan’s territorial integrity arises from Pashtun nationalism, which is a far greater threat to the unity of Pakistan than even the unrest in Balochistan. Ofcourse Pashtun nationalism in border areas could easily be exploited by India which could strike grand bargain with the Pashuns along the lines of Bangladesh-Mukti Bahini. Pakistan retaliated to the attacks in Kurram by blocking NATO convoys and subsequent attacks on the tankers with tens of tankers set on fire. 3. Vital surrogates fighting India are attacked: The latest Raymond Davis spat arose due to CIA’s unilateral expansion of its activities to include the surveillance and penetration of Lashkar-e-Tayyiba. This CIA action is most likely due to a realization of three things (i) Western cities are just as vulnerable as Mumbai to commando-style attacks. This problem would be much worse if there are multiple commando-style attacks* (ii) The full extent of the complicity of official agencies in the funding and training of LeT has become apparent due to the confession of David Headley (Dawood Gilani). The CIA probably realizes that Pakistan’s security apparatus will not move against the LeT (iii) LeT is increasingly becoming a potent threat in Afghanistan, with the attacks on Indian embassy in Kabul traced to LeT operatives. Pakistan retaliated by arresting Davis, and demanding the withdrawal of CIA operatives in Pakistan whose primary brief is to keep tabs on “other” terrorist organizations. Pakistan’s strategy seems to be three fold. It is a mixture of (1) Drastic and audacious steps such as blocking NATO convoys and arresting CIA agents. This is done for short term advantages and signaling to the Pakistani public that the Army/ISI do and can stand up to the US. Pakistan’s assessment is that these drastic steps would work due to American compulsions in fighting the Afghan war (2) Gaining the initiative in the civilian discourse by whipping up passions through shrill TV anchors and columnists. This was evident in the KL bill, where swathes of protestors had no idea or were misinformed as to what the real issues were! As part of this strategy, Pakistan is increasingly trying to convert the LeT into a Hezbollah-type organization with charity and political wings thereby deeply embedded into the civil society itself (3) Vastly expanding the nuclear arsenal to guarantee that American drone attacks (and other intensive attacks like air-strikes and cruise missile strikes) do not happen in the heartland against Army and Army-surrogate establishments. The danger** in these assessments and strategy is two fold 1. Pakistan has no short-term and definitely no long-term leverage against the US: Pakistani economy is unviable. This gives rise to several pressure-points that the Americans can exploit vis-à-vis IMF an the world bank. Combined with the unrest in the middle east and sluggish economy in Europe and the natural disaster in Japan, Pakistan has very few allies to turn to. Even China is short of cash after increasing social spending. In any case Chinese money will come with far greater cost (and social unrest like the recent Reko Diq fiasco) than American money. In the best case scenario, Americans will meddle increasingly in the political and economic setup of Pakistan, trying to install a pliant civilian and army leadership. In the worst case, Americans will assassinate key Army and political figures. If one thinks this is a fantastic proposition, one needs to take a fresh look at the Zia case. 2. Pakistan usually misreads democratic governments with disastrous effect: This happened with India in 1965 (where Shastri was considered to be a “short dark man in a dhoti with no will to fight”) in 1971 where obliviousness to popular displeasure against Pakistan in Bangladesh was followed by a thorough misreading of US & Chinese support and Indian will to fight, in 1998 where International mood and Indian will to fight in Kargil was misread. Many more examples come to mind. In the current context, Pakistan has misread American domestic compulsions. The greatest danger to Pakistan today is a terror attack in the US being traced to Pakistani soil***. A successful attempt will drive the American public opinion against Pakistan and to prevent democrats from looking weak on national security Obama will be forced to retaliate militarily. Frequent spats such as the spat over Raymond Davis is not winning Pakistan any friends among the US public in a time when Obama is due for re-election. Terror attacks originating from Pakistan certainly will not win any. In any case, the Afghanistan and Pakistan “problem” is due for a thorough “examination” in the upcoming presidential debates preceding the elections in 2012. Pakistan should also realize that the Americans are innovative as well. The drone attacks have started primarily as a result of Pakistan’s unwillingness or inability to take on militants in the border areas. This is deeply embarrassing to Pakistan and a far bigger headache than joint operations in the region. Last but not least, Pakistan seems to forget that the money, media and muscle available with the Americans is far in excess of what Pakistan and her allies have and it is best to not test American patience and goodwill or to stretch Pakistan’s luck till the next terror attack on US soil. *Spectacular terror attacks against India are invariably replicated in the west. This includes the IC 814 hijack where the very same people were connected to the 9/11 hijack as well. **I will not go into the dangers of the society getting radicalized as exemplified by the recent Salman Taseer and Bhatti case. That is a separate thread. ***This nearly happened with the failed times-square bombing attempt of Faisal Shahzad (the son of an Air Vice Marshal!!) Rate this: FILED UNDER UNCATEGORIZED Thorough Brosecution Of Mumbai Attackers in Pakistan APRIL 5, 2011 18 COMMENTS Gautam Gambhir’s recent statement that the Indian cricket world lota victory was dedicated to the 26/11 victims rightfully raised outrage in Pakistan. Before heaping blame on Pakistan for Pakistan-trained terrorists who commit terror acts in India, Indians should realize that Pakistan too is a victim of Pakistan-trained terrorists. In any case, viewing India-Pakistan relationship through the one-dimensional lens of terror is quite unfair to the world’s foremost front-line ally against terror. Pakistan has time and again tried to rescue India-Pakistan relationship from falling prey to 26/11 issue by first insisting that Kasab was not Pakistani, then by insisting that the terror attack was planned in a ship in international waters and finally when Indians nitpicked based on confessions of Kasab, insisting that the terrorists were non-state actors and terror did not have a nationality. When the Indians complained that the terror organization responsible for 26/11 attack was registered in Pakistan, Pakistan went the extra mile to declare the LeT as a charity organization. Despite all this, Indians insisted in Judicial action, indulged in state-sponsored tree-terrorism, sent pages and pages of dossiers and defamed Pakistan. Pakistan reciprocated positively even for this grave dossier provocation. Nowhere in the world have terrorists been dragged through the courts for such extended period of time with such meticulous prosecution. Consider the chronology: March 4, 2009: The trial starts!! AK Phyrr!! (in camera of course) May 24, 2009: How can there be a trial without a judge, hain ji? (not our fault) July 18, 2009: Chargesheet filed!! (Going to Sharm-al-Sheikh, have to show brogress!!) July 25, 2009: Case adjourned for 1 month (Back from Sharm-al-Sheikh!!) Aug 29, 2009: Adjourned for 1 month (Still digesting the food eaten at Sharm-Al-Sheikh!!) Sep 26, 2009: Adjourned again (Still digesting) Oct 3, 2009: Adjourned again (digesting…) Oct 21, 2009: Judge wants to leave the case for “unavoidable reasons” (400% sure it is a gastric problem) New judge, many adjournments, case put off till accused plea for acquittal is considered (I yam no judicial exbert, but isnt this what the case is about?) fast forward to Feb 13, 2010 Feb 13, 2010: Case adjourned because the judge is “busy” Feb 20, 2010 to Apr 19, 2010 (heated debate whether Kasab is an absconder, a fugitive or a proclaimed offender) Adjourned till July 03, 2010 to find out whether Yindia will send Kasab to Pakistan (Riddal: Blease to guess Yindia’s answer) July 24, 2010: Judge didn’t show up for work July 31, 2010: Judgement on Lakhvi’s bail plea reserved till August 7 (“reserving” is a judicial activity 400% distinct from “adjourning”) Aug 28, 2010: Reserved judgement is adjourned till Sep 18. (Did I naat tell you “reserving” is different from “adjourning” hain ji?) Nov 13, 2010: Pakistan has determined that Yindia will not hand over Kasab (then what happened on July 03, 2010 you pooch? Just making 400% sure) Dec 17, 2010: Defence lawyer has fake degree. Case adjourned.(imagine how long the case would have dragged on if he had a real degree!!) Jan 8, 2011: Adjourned Jan 22, 2011: Adjourned Feb 5, 2011: NOT ADJOURNED!!! (heh heh, just kidding. Also adjourned) Feb 17, 2011: Take a guess!! Feb 26, 2011: Guess again if you made a mistake last time!! March 05, 2011: One more chance!! March 26, 2011: Last chance for guessing!! As you can dekho, even before examining a single witness over 2 years, look at the thoroughness of Pakistani Judiciary! Then why do Indians complain? Pakistanis have chosen to move on and forget the trauma to the national Image the 26/11 has caused and tried hard to forget. Maybe the tiny hearted Indians should take a clue from large hearted Pakistanis and move on too. Regular statements to the media about the 180 odd killed in Mumbai will only serve to keep their memories alive. In conclusion, what I am trying to say is…. (artecal adjourned till later) Rate this: FILED UNDER UNCATEGORIZED Everything You Wanted To Know About Raymond Davis (But Were Afraid To Ask) FEBRUARY 22, 2011 11 COMMENTS Raymond Davis works for the CIA. CIA is an organization in the USA. USA pays all of Pakistan’s bills. Or, in the words of our taller than mountain, deeper than ocean friends: Confucius say “He who should check his balls often, cannot hold head high with dignity” Rate this: FILED UNDER UNCATEGORIZED Cultural Concepts of South Asia–Part I FEBRUARY 20, 2011 14 COMMENTS For the benefit of the Goras who might find it strange to get to terms with Pakistani South Asian cultural concepts, Yours sachly has produced a quick cheat sheet of terms & concepts. These are very useful when reading blog posts, listening to diplomats, "analysts", talking heads and the all too pervasive columnists you would come across in newspapers (Which about covers 99% of the Pakistani population). But first things first: South Asian Indians are Indians and Pakistanis when caught in tight situations (like in Airports) are Indians too. In other circumstances they are South Asians. Being "South Asian" offers many advantages. Such as an overwhelming numerical advantage. Example: When faced with the question “Is radicalization a problem”? South Asians can reply with a straight face "Only 170 million, or less than 10% of the South Asians are radicalized". Which sounds entirely reasonable. Glorious Victory When Side A attacks Side B, and everyone in Side B is dead, save for one man with one leg, one eye and no arms who stands up and yells "Death to the Kuffars", Side B is judged to have won a resounding Glorious Victory. Because Side A is (non bious and) powerful, Side B is (bious and) not powerful, Side B always wins a Glorious Victory. Other equivalent concepts: Hezbollah Victory, Kargil Victory (We internationalized the Cashmere issue), 1965 Victory (celebrated to this day), Simla Accord Victory (as claimed by ZAB), Baglihar Dam Victory, and the recent Talks with India Victory (as claimed by Shah Mahmood Qureshi). My strategic forecast: Kishenganga Victory will be added to the list of Glorious Victories soon. 99% Solution to Cashmere issue When someone gets booted from position of power, it is frequently used as a tagline to demonstrate they did useful and audacious things. Claimed by Benazir, Musharraf, Sartaz Aziz and everyone who was ever kicked out of position of power in Pakistan at various times. Usage: “Cashmere issue was solved 99.999% under my tenure and we were hours away from signing the agreement” (with subtle subtext that India signed away all of Cashmere, retreated from Siachen, gave away Sir Creek and resolved not to build any dams at all. Because we won a Glorious Victory in the battlefield and the negotiating table) Please Note: It is a tactical mistake to claim that electricity problem, employment or the economy of Pakistan was 99.999% solved. Because that would just be plain absurd and ludicrous. Free Aafia!! When an issue is raked up provide a local advantage (such as raising the Aafia issue as a warning to threaten the political ambitions of Musharraf, who handed over Aafia in the first place) and ultimately ends up consuming scarce resources (such as the millions of dollars spent by the government of Pakistan for mounting her legal defense while the IDPs of Swat get loads of….Malaria) while becoming a huge headache, it is called Free Aafia!! Recently Seen in: Raymond Davis and all other Honor & Dignity related issues. Silent Majority Himalayan yeti. Nobody has seen it, but it is rumored to be big and powerful. Rate this: FILED UNDER UNCATEGORIZED Islamic Emirate of Whatever-istan and its Liberal Extremists FEBRUARY 18, 2011 11 COMMENTS R U A Muslim?! Is by far the most frequent question that yours sachly’s fourth cousin gets on Twitter. This and the latest happenings in Egypt (speculating about the direction its politics would take) has prompted me to write this hurried blog post about two interlinked thoughts I had. Islamic Emirate of….. So what is wrong in being a proud MUSLIM living in a country that proudly declares itself to be ISLAMIC? Nothing actually. But the devil is in the details… In any society, our understanding of complex concepts evolves over time (as an example, science comes readily to mind). In this vein, our understanding of ethics and the social consensus of morality progresses over time. So it stands to reason that the current understanding of ethics and morality of any society draws from its cultural heritage. Religion usually dominates this cultural heritage. So to recognize this fact and to declare that a country’s zeitgeist evolved from its religious heritage is quite natural. And then you have Pakistan. Where, what seems to be lost is the crucial distinction between a country whose heritage is rooted in a particular set of beliefs and a country whose sole reason for existence is for the benefit of people who carry particular set of beliefs. This distinction is crucial and makes all the difference. The former is an acknowledgement of a fact, and the latter designates a particular subset of people as beneficiaries. If we accept the current consensus that Pakistan is formed for the benefit of Muslims (notwithstanding what the Qaid might or might not have said according to selective interpretation of history), we are immediately faced with a question "Who is a Muslim?". Obviously everyone in Pakistan is not a Muslim and ergo, the country cannot benefit everyone! So as a first cut approximation, let us declare Ahmedis to be not Muslims. Let us be so proud about this discovery that let us stick it into the constitution. They don’t get to enjoy the benefits of being in Pakistan (or equivalently, the benefits bestowed by a country upon its citizens). Obviously Hindus are not Muslims. They don’t get to be the President or the Prime Minister. Next we are faced with a tricky question: "Are Shias Muslim too?" Maybe not. That was easy. How about Barelvis? When compared to Deobandis, Barelvis seem to be a little confused….. The social consensus converges around three points This country is for the benefit of the Muslims My subgroup, (with more and more stringent set of conditions to determine membership) is Muslim, others are not Ergo, take stuff away from people outside the subgroup So the country spends its time in diligently making the conditions to get into the beneficiary list more and more stringent while taking away more and more from people who don’t make it into the list. This activity of drawing up a list and judging who are in the list dominates the social discourse and sucks out the intellectual energy of people. Who then explain everything with: So and so cannot be a true Muslim because…. This ladies and gentlemen, is why Islamic Emirate/Republic of Whateveristan will forever be F’ed up and whose future will be more F’ed up than the present. Liberal Extremists In the glorious tradition of “truth is somewhere in the middle” (so earth is neither spherical nor flat), under Musharraf(please correct me here, maybe this existed even earlier) we saw a new phenomenon: It suddenly dawned upon the talking heads that religious extremists should become more tolerant and liberal extremists should start respecting culture. So somehow they are equal and two sides of the same coin. This has been hammered into our heads again and again. My first reaction was Liberal Extremists?! Whoa!! Please leave my goats alone!! please. please. please. Later, I wanted to make a list of all kinds of extremists that I would be scared of Buddhist Extremists: Not so much. They probably will gather as a group, go silent, sit under a tree, start meditating and give cryptic answers about the impermanence of human life and other worldly things. Pacifist Extremists: Probably will start weeping on seeing my leather shoes. Not scared. …and the list goes on. So you see, the operating word is not "extremist" it is what precedes it. Liberal extremists probably would have strong opinions about how individual liberty and social justice may be merged. A religious extremist (of certain kinds) probably will strap a suicide vest and blow you up while you are busy buying tomatoes in a Lahore market. I don’t know about you, but I would prefer being lectured than being blown up. It goes further. So what is the difference between religious (of certain kinds) extremists and religious (of certain other kinds) extremists? Well if a Buddhist extremist were to pull out an AK to propagate his beliefs, that would clearly be absurd. After all it is clear that the Buddhist religion is built around the central concept of rejection of violence. How about a Liberal extremist pulling out a gun? That is absurd too. And how about religious (of the Pakistani kind) extremist? Most people think that it is quite normal and justified. So don’t fear the ‘extremist’. Fear the word that precedes it. Rate this: FILED UNDER UNCATEGORIZED How to make your own Ejaz Haider (at home) FEBRUARY 14, 2011 14 COMMENTS So everyone loves an Ejaz Haider! But it ij not availabal every din and can become costly (due to subscripshuns). I too love columns of Ejaz Haider and after careful reading, I think I have reverse engineered the recibe!! The secret is simbal. The recipe has 5 major combonents: Demand Money–Act as if terrorism is normal–Show bravado–High sounding grabagic nonsense—Toilet/Adult jokes. To beepuls who are afraid about cooking their own Ejaz Haider column, I am providing this ready to make recipe!! Ejaz Haider Column Generator!! A. Sentence one: Choose one phrom each category: (Demanding money) 1. Not giving Pakistan money 2. Asking Pakistan to do too much 3. Expecting Pakistan to serve US interest for the money Will only 1. Strengthen hands of extremists 2. Compel the Army to take over 3. Weaken democracy 4. Put region into Chaos B. Sentence two: Choose one phrom each category: (Acting as if terrorism is normal) Terrorism is a reaction which is justified because 1. Every country has done it 2. It is how weaker countries challenge the stronger 3. Oppressed people have no recourse 4. It is the leverage of the weaker against the stronger in any case 1. US has indulged in it 2. India has indulged in it 3. Pakistan has indulged in it in the past several times 4. It is one of the 5 tools of statecraft C. Sentence three: Choose one (Bravado) 1. Pakistan is here to stay 2. US cannot achieve strategic goals without Pakistan 3. India cannot pacify Kashmir without Pakistan D. Sentence four: Choose one from each category: (High sounding nonsense) 1. The normative interpretation of inter-state relations 2. The consensus understanding of the spirit of Magna carta 3. An informed reading of Carl von Clausewitz will indicate to an enlightened reader the nature of 1. Temporal-spatial nature of geo strategic relationship 2. Inter- and intra state transactions of state actors 3. Game theoretic achievement of Nash equilibrium E. Sentence five: Insert your own toilet humor/male anatomy jokes here: Here ij what I generated!! Expecting Pakistan to serve US interest for the money will only put region into chaos. Terrorism is a reaction which is justified because it is the leverage of the weaker against the stronger, in any case it is one of the 5 tools of statecraft. US cannot achieve strategic goals without Pakistan. An informed reading of Carl von Clausewitz will indicate to an enlightened reader the nature of game theoretic achievement of Nash equilibrium. There is a long glorious erection of flagpole outside my window. Tee heee. –Ejaz Haider. As you can see, the number of variashuns are infinite!! Taking time to explore all of them will assure your career as an analyst and strategic thinker!! Post your own columns and variashuns!! ---xxx----- A Laymard’s Guide to the Siachen Problem APRIL 13, 2012 The origins of the Siachen problem can be traced to the Simla agreement of 1972. That agreement demarcating the Line of Control between India and Pakistan did not demarcate where the line of control went and simply stated that it went “North”. This left a great strategic ambiguity as to whether “North” meant North or if it really meant East, thus creating confusion as to whether Siachen Glacier belonged to Pakistan or India. Even in the presence of this ambiguity, there was relative peace between 1971 and 1979, when Pakistan was busy with coups and hangings. After taking charge in 1978 through a peaceful coup, Zia-ul-Haq wanted to repair the image of Pakistan army severely dented in the 1971 war. To make up for losing 57,000sq miles of East Pakistan, Zia wanted to capture the 1000sq miles of Siachen, where there was no deployment of either Indian or Pakistani soldiers (Siachen is a icy waste where not a single blade of grass grows just like Aksai Chin, which also has nothing except strategically important passes connecting Tibet). Pakistan started giving licenses for mountaineering expeditions for tourists. In accordance with the tradition of gracious subcontinental hospitality, each of these expeditions were accompanied by representatives from Pakistan army and supplied by helicopter. Coincidentally, the terrain and logistics routes were also mapped. Simultaneously, the Indians were playing cricket in Antarctica to practice getting acclamatised to the cold. But an all out war on Siachen would have to wait. The reasons were two fold: (1) The treacherous Indians, in a display of ungentlemanly behaviour, had attacked across the international border as a retaliation for Pakistan attacking across the line of control in 1965. Indians did not limit the war to the line of control respecting the strategy drawn up by Pakistan’s generals to keep the war limited. So any war on Siachen had the potential to flare up as a major border war (2) Pakistan did not do very well in a major border war and could win only a silver medal after coming in second in that competition. 1984 brought the Nuclear test at Lop Nor in China. Co-incidentally, for presumably unrelated reasons, Pakistan gained the confidence that a conflict along the undemarcated line of control would not flare up into a larger border war. Preparations were made for another mountaineering expedition into Siachen by buying Arctic gear from a shop in London, which was unfortunately run by a RAW agent, who promptly informed the Indians. This set off a race to Siachen, where Indian soldiers and Pakistani soldiers trekked to Siachen, but Indians beat the Pakistanis by 4 days. Yes, all of 4 days. A war followed. In those heights, fighting consisted of not dying in the cold air or lack of oxygen and the side which did not freeze to death won. Indians with their short, dark bodies required less food and oxygen, (each Pakistani soldier on the other hand, needed the food and oxygen of atleast 8 Indian soldiers) survived longer and won. The Indians advanced all the way upto the Saltoro ridge west of Siachen glacier and occupied the 3 major passes into the glacier — Sia La, Gyong La and Bilafond La — thus completely cutting off all approaches to the glacier and and making it impossible for the Pakistan army to even reach Siachen. Which leads to current status of Siachen problem where India has all of Siachen and Pakistan has a problem with it. Several attempts were made to dislodge the Indian Army, the most ferocious in 1987 by the then Brig. Gen. Pervez Musharraf who had raised a SSG unit in Khaplu for mountain warfare. The attack proved futile and led to a huge loss of life on the Pakistani side and in a subsequent counter-attack Indians captured even more territory. Musharraf subsequently turned his attention to Gilgit and won a major war against the Pakistani Shias in Chitral, killing hundreds. Buoyed by this victory, Musharraf returned for a major assault in 1989 on Siachen but it fared even worse than the 1987 assault. Readers would know that Mushrraf would later go on to become COAS and to complement his bigger rank, distinguish himself by losing in a bigger way in Kargil, but would eventually win in the 1999 war in Islamabad. The Islamabad war consisted of an assault by the forces commanded by General Musharraf on the forces commanded by Ameer-Ul-Momineen Nawaz Sharif. That short war involved precise military maneuvers to capture PTV headquarters, an assault on the airport, capturing all the roads leading to the Parliament and the eventual capture of the Parliament itself, leading to the unconditional surrender of all Senators, MNAs, the Judiciary and the Constitution. Losing against India but winning against Pakistan seems to be Musharraf’s speciality, but I got ahead of myself. Subsequent intermittent attacks till the mid 90’s were futile as well, which led to one logical conclusion: Siachen could not be won by attacking Siachen, Indian supply routes to Siachen would have to be cut much further south, somewhere along the demarcated line of control. But this war had to wait. A war across demarcated Line of Control (as opposed to war across the actual ground position line or AGPL) had the potential to flare up as a major war across the international border and … well you get the idea. 1998 brought the nuclear tests by India as well as Pakistan. Co-incidentally, for presumably unrelated reasons, Pakistan gained the confidence that a conflict along the demarcated line of control would not flare up into a larger border war. (The Lop Nor tests only gave the confidence that conflict along the undemarcated line of control would not flare up into a larger border war. This has to do with deep strategic reasons involving just having a nuclear bomb vs having a weaponized nuclear bomb). A mountaineering expedition of Mujahideen who were fighting for freedom against Indian oppression in Kashmir occupied the Indian positions in Kargil during the winter* and threatened the Indian supply lines to Siachen, leading Musharraf to brag (actual quote) ‘I have a Stinger on every peak…we shall walk into Siachen to mop up hundreds of dead Indians in the cold’ While the freedom fighters had full moral, political and diplomatic support from Pakistan army, they had only weak artillery support and worse, they committed a major blunder of not securing complete air support. Thus they were ultimately beaten back, mainly due to Indian air and artillery attacks. Ten years later in 2009 after Musharraf was sent packing, it was discovered by COAS Kayani that they were not Mujahideen at all but belonged to the Northern Light Infantry. Why they called themselves Mujahideen and how exactly they were oppressed by India in Kashmir is a mystery to many to this day. Air Commodore Kaiser Tufail has a few thoughts for everyone vis-a-vis the importance of air support in Kargil while freedom-fighting and you can read it in his blog, but I digress. Subsequent events of 9/11, a bad economy, Americans in the region, and military build up by both India and Pakistan meant that Siachen issue could not be solved by military adventures, leaving no option but to solve it using talks. Which leads us to the present day: Pakistan should convince India that Siachen is taking a heavy toll on both sides, consuming valuable money and resources, which could be better spent on Ballistic missiles, Artillery and Nuclear bombs which both India and Pakistan desperately need. Repeated attacks aimed at recapturing Siachen has caused casualties on both sides. The men fighting a futile war in Siachen could be redeployed to fight a futile war elsewhere — in Balochistan, Swat or even Gilgit where the Shia problem still persists. But the talks are at a deadlock: To withdraw from Siachen, India has started to place demands that Pakistan should validate the Actual Ground Position line agreeing that North is in fact North, and not East**. This is unacceptable to Pakistan, especially because if North is in fact East, the Karakoram pass connecting to Tibet falls under Pakistan’s claim. But if the North is in fact North, then all attempts by Musharraf would have gone in vain. More importantly, the all weather friends may not be pleased that Pakistan gave away a pass into Tibet to India. So in many ways, Siachen is about the territorial integrity of China, about which there can be no compromise by Pakistan. So the conflict endures in the face of obstinacy by both sides, where Pakistan’s principled position stands as firm as the mountains and Indian’s hearts are as cold as the Siachen glacier. This problem can only be solved in some non-rocky non-icy place — the warm sandy beaches of Thailand by track-2 participants. __________________ * Before Kargil it used to be the case that Indian and Pakistani soldiers retreated to warm base camps during winter. Now thanks to Kargil, they man their posts in the cold all year round, even in winter. On the positive side, the soldiers report that Siachen does not feel much more cold and miserable when compared to the Kargil heights in winter. ** This demand is meaningless. Even after agreeing where the Line of Control was, the NLI/Freedom Fighters/Mujahideen occupied Indian camps in Kargil. So it is absurd to assume that agreeing on AGPL in Siachen is a guarantee against NLI/Freedom Fighters/Mujahideen occupying the Saltoro ridge. So why make this demand anyway? —-xxx—- Another Lone Wolf In The Making APRIL 5, 2012 Pakistan used to be good friends with North Korea. Benazir Bhutto visited North Korea in 1993, whose GDP at that time was about $6 Billion. So presumably it was for economic co-operation and trade. The enduring friendship, which was presumably based on shared cultural heritage was taller than the tallest missiles: When bluntly warned by Japanese foreign minister that Japan would support an IMF loan to Pakistan to rescue an economy in shambles (Hey, don’t give all the credit for a broken economy to Zardari) only if they stopped importing missiles from North Korea, Sartaz Aziz firmly reassured the Japanese that he knew of no such thing. Sartaz Aziz also announced a firm commitment to sign the CTBT to the Japanese, but the signing ceremony was held up in some procedural issues after the IMF loans were approved — but I digress. So when it emerged that Nuclear centrifuges were exported from Pakistan to North Korea, transported in military C-130 planes (about 135 loads), the only possible explanation could be that AQ Khan acted alone without the military or the civilian leadership (who were busy fighting the war on terror and hunting Osama Bin Laden) having any knowledge about it. The foreign minister did not know about it, the Prime minister was ignorant, the Army leadership had no clue and the intelligence agencies who were supposed to provide counter-espionage against the nuclear program was roundly outwitted. AQ Khan single-handedly loaded the planes by himself, flew them to North Korea, and returned it back in the same place before the next morning (after filling petrol so that nobody noticed). Being a Pakistani patriot committed to the defence of Pakistan and all that, he was promptly pardoned after a televised apology on National television. That brings me to another Pakistani patriot committed to the defence of Pakistan. Professor Hafiz Saeed. Turns out Professor Saeed is quite friendly with the other set of patriots, the Army, and was a guest of honor of the X corps commander for an Iftar party. He is quite friendly with the Judiciary too, which ordered the Government to pay him a stipend during his house arrest. His friendship with the retired ISI folk is well known, so is his popularity with the leader of the Tsunami, who regularly sends his representatives to share a dias with him. When it turned out that a top Al Qaeda leader, Abu Zubaydah was captured in Faisalabad in a Lashkar-e-Tayyiba safehouse, the US National Counterterrorism Center observed: Abu Zubaydah was captured at an LT safehouse in Faisalabad, suggesting that some LT members assist the group. This, taken along with the recent news trickling out about Osama’s five safe houses and two government hospital-born children, and a $10 million reward for (capturing/interviewing/convicting/complaining about) the good Professor, one cant help but speculate that the Lashkar had some hand in arranging Osama bin Laden’s hospitality. Which leads to only one possible explanation: Professor Hafiz Saeed acted alone, without any knowledge of the Civilian, military or Intelligence leadership (who were busy fighting the war on terror and hunting Osama Bin Laden) in assisting Al Qaeda in various ways, including possibly arranging for safe houses for Osama Bin Laden all by himself. Army generals did not bring it up during their Iftar conversations, politicians had no idea and Intelligence was outwitted. Which leads to only one possible course of action reserved for great Pakistani patriots: Televised apology by Hafiz Saeed and a Presidential pardon for his sins —-xxx—- How to Become A Strategic Analyst Like Yours Sachly MARCH 26, 2012 I am pleased to see a new generation of Pakistani analysts: The twenty-somethings whose western education makes them credible in Pakistan and whose Pakistani heritage and once-a-year visit to Pakistan makes them extremely credible in the west. I am also pleased to note that this generation is diligent in not letting scholarship get in the way of creativity. While they have no doubt realized that any good analysis of Pakistan is like a piece of modern art — its beauty should be appreciated, without searching for meaning — some seem to lack the vocabulary that should be mandatory in any article written by Pakistanis which discusses Pakistan. For their benefit, I am presenting a few such phrases and their semantic deconstruction: South Asia: Indians are Indians, and Pakistanis are Indians too. Especially in tight situations involving airports in foreign countries. In most other situations, Indians and Pakistanis are “South Asians”. Being a South Asian confers three type of advantages. The first advantage is that credit can be earned by association. This is useful while reporting positive news like: “A lady of South Asian origin wins the Governorship of South Carolina” and “As usual, South Asian children sweep spelling-bee championships.”. The second advantage is that blame can be spread over a larger geographic area. This is particularly useful while discussing terror groups. Examples include “South Asian terrorist group suspected of attacking Mumbai” and the“South Asian terrorist who tried to attack Times square” or our very own Ambassador Hussain Haqqani’s scholarly study: “The Ideologies of South Asian Jihadi Groups”. Of course, one wouldn’t want to go into divisive details like the exact nationality of these organizations and individuals! That would just make you petty minded and someone who is against unity and peace. If you did want to go into details, usually substituting “Indian” in positive news articles and “Pakistani” in embarrassing ones would usually serve the purpose. The third and the most significant advantage is numerical. This includes a vast South Asian market for “South Asian” artists and an equally vast room to wriggle out of uncomfortable questions. For example, when posed the question “Is radicalization a problem?” South Asians can reply with a straight face “Only 170 million, or about 10% of the South Asians are radicalized”. Which sounds entirely reasonable and makes me proud of being a South Asian. While we are on the subject of radicalization, a subject of interest is the set of issues which are likely to radicalize Pakistani extremists. It is important to keep in mind that a good analyst does not complicate issues with deep analysis of ideologies, supporters and funding of extremists organizations and instead speaks with authority derived from having lived in Pakistan, which brings us to issues which: Will Only Strengthen the Hands of Extremists: The exact issue which will strengthen the hands of the extremists depends on the current hot topic in the media and should strangely align with the objectives of the state. For example: If India’s prime minister says borders cannot be redrawn, a suitable analysis could be: “Such controversial statements could strengthen the hands of extremists” (Khurshid Mahmood Kasuri circa 2004). If the west plans to attack Iran, a suitable cautionary advice would be: “This will strengthen the hands of extremists” (Khurshid Mahmood Kasuri circa 2006). If NATO violates Pakistan’s border, a stern warming would include: It will“Strengthen extremists” (Zardari circa 2008). In short, the “hand of extremists” is the adult version of “My daddy will come by tomorrow” — a subtle threat that can be used in every occasion. Ofcourse, only a Pakistan-hater will pause to ask “Who are these extremists? What do they want? Why do we even care what they want? How about some good policing and laws to weaken the hands of extremists?” because asking such sensitive questions will only serve to strengthen the hands of extremists in Pakistan. While every sensitive issue strengthens the hands of extremists, every intractable issue can be solved by: Solving the Kashmir Issue: Which has, at various times, has been touted as the solution to the mess in Afghanistan, to prevent future “Kargils” (as argued by Musharraf), to reap the “Peace dividend” for the economy (hinted whenever India’s finances are in a mess), to prevent nuclear war in the region and to even prevent floods in Pakistan by preventing glacier melting in Siachen! In short, Kashmir solution is like your grandmother’s home-remedy — It cures everything! Thus, a well-informed analysis of Pakistan will read: Ignoring the Kashmir issue will only serve to strengthen the hands of extremists in South Asia and solving the Kashmir issue is necessary for strategic stability in the subcontinent. Which sounds entirely reasonable, informed and enlightened! But I got ahead of myself by not explaining: Strategic: Which is a mystical word, evoking thoughts of the Army, courage and intelligent planning, which automatically makes any bad idea sound profound. Try arguing along the lines of “If India attacks Pakistan, we will all run away, hide in the mountains of Afghanistan, re-group and then fight back” and you will be laughed out of the room. On the other hand, declaring with a solemn face “Pakistan needs strategic depth” and committing several million dollars to run training camps to train and send several thousands of illiterate, brainwashed fighters across the border is a profound military strategy. In this vein, while assets are needed for economic security for civilians,Strategic assets are needed for the security of the country (acquiring which, will make a country insolvent, but secure). Again, Pakistan’s propensity to pick up fights with the U.S. can be explained away as “Strategic defiance”which will not invite any retaliation from the U.S. due to Pakistan’s geostrategic location. Using the word “Strategic” liberally like: Pakistan’s strategic defiance of the U.S. to acquire strategic depth in Afghanistan leaves little strategic options for the U.S. due to Pakistan’s geostrategic location and strategic assets. Will elevate your columns from merely being an “Analysis” to the exalted heights of a “Strategic Analysis”. While a cynic will characterize Pakistan as a country of extremists and people who write columns about extremists, a strategic analyst on the other hand will highlight positive aspects of the society like: The Silent Majority: Which forms the core of Pakistan and is the vanguard of liberalism and modernity. Though like the name suggests, it has never been seen or heard from, it can be effectively used to re-assure the terrified west (terrified presumably due to the extremists and columns about extremists pouring out of Pakistan). When vague allusions to the silent majority is inadequate, its effectiveness can be increased manyfold when used along with the percentage of support religious parties enjoy. Thus yet another massive protest of support for religion-inspired murder can be effectively explained away by: The protesters are a fringe group in a country where the moderate silent majority ensures that religious parties win less than 10% of the votes. Which should be written in english, to make sure that the vocal supporters of the said religious parties dont chase you down and silence you. When such allusions to silent majorities and the unpopularity of religious parties dont reassure an anxious (and frequently exasperated) west, it is time to pull out the victim card by declaring that: Pakistan is the biggest victim of terrorism: However, care should be taken to follow it up with a statement that blames “non-state actors” and other people without nationality or religion for terrorism. Without this, using the phrase “Pakistan is the biggest victim of terrorism” runs the risk of hinting at carelessness — somewhat like an arsonist who sets his own house on fire by improperly storing flammable materials at his own house. Putting it all together, a timeless strategic analysis of the latest terror incident (with the inevitable Pakistani connection) would read: Before the world pressures Pakistan to do more against terrorism, they should realize that Pakistan itself is the biggest victim of terrorism. A key step towards reducing the influence of extremists in Pakistan is finding a solution to the Kashmir issue. Ignoring the Kashmir issue will only serve to strengthen the hands of extremists in South Asia. Without solving the Kashmir issue Pakistan will continue its strategy of strategic defiance of the U.S. to acquire strategic depth in Afghanistan, which leaves little strategic options due to Pakistan’s geostrategic location and strategic assets. A solution to the Kashmir issue will strengthen the silent majority and further marginalize the religious parties who, in any case, win less than 10% of the votes in Pakistan. —-xxx—- The Year That Was – Part 4 (Oct-Dec) FEBRUARY 14, 2012 4 COMMENTS Yours sachly wanted to write a blog post summarizing the events of the year past. Since he never got around to it, here is a collection of tweets from yours sachly’s fourth cousin which summarizes the events. October Zardari had his customary Op-ed in Washingtonpost Zardari oped in Washington Bost!! http://wapo.st/pGaTGz I have to admit, @husainhaqqani writes well Amreekis should leave the region so Pakistan can complain that Amreekis left the region. Was followed by the customary Rehman-Malikism Rehman Malik “no negotiations if the insurgents held AK in one hand.” http://bo.st/ngEfyP Exberts use both hands to hold AK for stability!! If someone holds an AK in one hand, claims to be an extremist and wants negoshiashuns — he is lying. He is not a properly trained extremist And some Cricket So the retired current ex-captain is the ex-retired current ex-captain. Gaddafi died OKAY IT IS CONPHIRMED!! Bositive Neuj!! Gaddafi captured and killed and it was NOT near Pakistan Military Academy!! Repeat: NOT near PMA!! Mother-in-Law visited Last time Clinton sahiba visited, she alleged that OBL was in Pakistan. I bet she won’t have the guts to make that accusashun in this visit. My advice to Clinton Sahiba: If you want to take Pakistanis on in a debate, blease to train with Yindian Saas-Bahu serials. We are exberts. Steve Jobs book was released Steve Jobs “time in India taught me intuition” Hmph!! If he had visited Pak he would have learned how to save on taxes Mushy and IK start politicking Taken at the Imran Khan rally todin (photu) http://bit.ly/hLXJ3N To Beepuls who suggest the photu is fake, it is 400% original!! I made it myself in photushop! Musharraph: “Pakistan bending backwards to invite Afghan” he then added “Pakistan bending forwards to invite Chinese” My summary oph Musharraph Speech: Fear that Amreeka might leave behind unstable Aphghanistan has caused Pakistan to destabilize Aphghanistan Saudis get a new Crown prince Saudi Barbaria has youthful crown brince. Sultan bin Abdul-Aziz was 81 and the new crown brince Nayef bin Abdul Aziz is only 78. Progress!! November People got divorced Kim Kardashian Marrij just like US-Pakistan strategic relashunship!! It was short, involved a lot of money and people got screwed. People got caught Why cant we play a clean Krikit game like the Yindians? Where doing massive corrupshun is taken care of by the organizers? My idea to Butt & Asif: Immediately release statement supporting Qadri. 400% guaranteed hero welcome back home & lawyers fighting to defend! Amir conphession and Butt & Asif whining confirms that only Butt and Asif have no balls. My summary of Courtroom arguments: Amir: “I did it” Asif: “Butt made me do it”: Butt: “I offered only moral, bolitical & diplomatic support” “Rehman Malik directs FIA team & lawyers to reach London and help Pakistani players” Translation: British will be dealt with an iron hand Butt Song: Roses are red // Violets are Plue // Match is broken? // Let me fix it for you. You self-righteous A-Hole!! It is cheating *only* if someone takes money and does *not* bowl no-palls. Ever thought of that? Amir was honest Pakistan, Nukes and Cold Start “Pakistan Carts Its Nukes Around In Delivery Vans”http://bit.ly/ufeLCz Thats why they are called “Nuke Delivery Vehicles” you moron! Sick of “Pakistan’s Nukes are in Danger” Propaganda by the west. Similar to “Osama Hiding in Pakistan” defamashun campaign they mounted. Cold start is a strategy conceived in the small, cold Yindoo heart. Pakistani strategy should be warm start. Eid “Jamaatud Dawa free to collect Eid donations”http://bit.ly/uVXDrJ Their Ban status, like Veena Malik’s age, is ambiguous & contradictory. Greece got bailed out Can you name a single Greek terrorist? I cant either. Then why is Greece getting all the money? What nonsense! India offers electricity and free trade Whoa!! Excited about Phree trade with Yindia!! What are we getting phor free? In two minds. Electricity phrom Yindia supports Yindian soaps. On the other hand, they are essential phor ISI interrogashun technawlaji US tries civilize Pakistanis “US. tries hip hop diplomacy in Pakistan” http://reut.rs/uAO4bZ I soch telling Pakistanis to bust a cap at Police is not the need of the hour Sick of artecals selling US to Pakistan to “westernize” us. We are already westernized you morons! We emulate Saudi Barbaria on the west PTA tries to civilize Pakistanis Words are oph two types. Good words and Bad words. Should talk with the good words and ban the bad words. #PTA Whoa! Padma (#369 in Urdu list) is banned. I soch Salman Rushdie had a hand in putting that one in. They also banned FORESKIN. The Brophet banned Foreskin Captain Redundant!! Why is Niger banned but not Algeria, Libya, Chad, Mali OR Bukina Faso? They are all neighpours of Niger!! First hints of trouble for Husain Haqqani My idea: @husainhaqqani should threaten Army that he’ll become Ambassador to China instead oph Ambassador to US if they ask him to do more. Visited India through Marvi Memon’s tweets Going to Yindia for a South Asian Youth leadership conference. Hope to teach them some civilization and hopefully get back Cashmere. First, Dilli. Airplane just landed in Dilli. Runway looks just like those in Pakistan. A bit shorter in length and the asphalt a bit darker. So we share the same kind of runways. Documentary program “Khuda Gawah” on TV. Exposes Yindian strategy of enticing Afghanistan into its orbit #YindiaVisit Let me hasten to add I avoid all Yindian programmes. I could be persuaded to watch if Cashmere is returned though. #YindiaVisit For someone who boycotted indian music due to principles, “sheila ki jawani” sounds pretty okay.#YindiaVisit Yindian Bollywood songs seem to be shorter in length and darker in mood than Pakistani Bollywood songs #YindiaVisit Had chai for breakfast. Yindian chai like Pakistani chai, except it is darker and served in shorter cups. #YindiaVisit This shah rukh khan looks identical to our Bollywood shah rukh khan. #YindiaVisit Irregularity filled, corruption ridden land distribution to poor. No army like efficiency for allotting plots.#YindiaVisit 5 lakh ride train in Dilli & no ambulances. REPEAT 5 Lakh, no ambulance. That is 5 lakh, no ambulance. Ppl could misuse info.#YindiaVisit Wrenching poverty causes women to get into degrading professions. Saw song of one “munni” who became badnaam.#YindiaVisit Got a calendar from Hurriyat Grandpa. He seems to have several.#YindiaVisit Yindian youth brainwashed that Pakistan created only in 1947!! Pakistan was formed 4.5 Billion years ago with the rest of earth#YindiaVisit More trouble for Husain Haqqani Jernail Pasha. DG CSISI. US Army got OBL you say?! Bah! Pakistan Army got@husainhaqqani !! TAKE that and DESPAIR Amreeka!! The important question to answer in #memogate is who was Maha Siddiqui? Did she really marry Shoaib? Hopefully ISI can answer this too. Memogate song: Roses are red // Violets are plue // Please to not challenge // Army’s right to Cooo “@ijazulhaq A lesson for all of you too. Be careful of what you say on Twitter” Most of all be carephul of accepting mangoes phrom strangers Salala Incident If NATO wanted to attack Pakistani soldiers they should atleast have had the decency to send in deniable proxies. December Ashura, traditional celebrations and traditional blasts Ashura is the traditional festival celeprated to mark the commencement oph Shia hunting season in Pakistan. Whoa!! Cylinder blast!! My advice: please to check pressure, valves and proximity oph Shia processions. India-Pak That reminds me. A Monkey’s Asha was shattered when it was arrested when it crossed the border.#AMonkeyAsha Another Son of Pakistan arrested Whoa!! Fai pleads guilty!! Before US accuses ISI of illegal influence, they should realize that Pakistan itself victim of ISI influence Fai says he got 3.5 million $ but didnt lobby phor Pakistan. OUTRAGED!! HE STOLE ALL OUR MONEY!! More propaganda that India won in 1971 It took 14 days phor army to prove they suck at phyting. And about 30 years to prove that they suck at governing too. It is time we got past the 71 fiasco, come together as a nation and rewrite our destiny. And history books. We won in 71. Government under attack from multiple directions Aphter his wife died he became dejected sucked at governance and wrecked the economy. His son who helped him was a bumbling fool. His subordinates conspired with jernails to overthrow him and there was anarchy all around. Joo thought I was talking about Mughal empire? Sorry, was reading neuj. People threatened by 9mm guns Those twits boasting about their 9mm: Meet Mr 9 inches! Year ends! Mens of teetar, in the new year, pick up courage and tell the wimmens how much you love them. Preferably in DM with SMS lingo. Wimmens of teetar, ignore creepy guys who DM in SMS lingo. Talk to nice people, like yours sachly. —-xxx—- Pakistan: The Way Forward JANUARY 15, 2012 6 COMMENTS Pakistan finds herself at cross roads again. The recent protracted tussle between the civilian setup on the one side and the Judiciary and the Army on the other, with no clear winners so far, has left Pakistan tottering on the brink of instability. A paralyzed civilian government is unable to govern, a distracted Judiciary is unable to dispense justice in important cases like the missing persons case, and the Army’s focus on fighting extremism has been sapped by the recent confrontation. As can be expected, several commentators have written in western newspapers like the Wall Street Journal and New York Times offering simplistic analysis of the current crisis and recommend canned proposals like “Civilian supremacy over the Army” or complicated suggestions like “Checks and balances”. These solutions are unworkable, ridiculous and inapplicable given the peculiar nature of the power structure in Pakistan, her history, her constitution, jurisprudence and her polity. I wish to use this blog post to evolve a set of proposal for the Army, the Judiciary and the Civilian government. Please do post your own proposals as well in the comments: Army: On earlier occasions, the crisis would have come to a quick conclusion with one simple trip to PTV on a tank followed by a speech. The reason for the current drawn out confrontation and festering instability is clear:Bad economy. I am sure that the Army’s economic advisors are aware of recent research which show that ruining the economy by profligate spending and picking up irresponsible fights with the US is more fun than actually fixing the said ruined economy. This is restraining the army from ending the crisis with a quick coup. In the interests of stability, crisis should be kept short and coups should be quick. Therefore, the Army, in addition to foreign policy and national security should also run the economy. This would guarantee that the economy would be in great shape like the our foreign policy and national security. This would ensure that the Army can conduct coups anytime they want without being overly scared of inheriting a hopelessly broken economy after the coup. Crises would be short! The Judiciary: Pakistan’s Judiciary has accumulated impressive experience at justifying coups post-facto.However, it has shockingly meager experience in initiating regime changes. Initiating a regime change is what they are trying now and have created a protracted messy crisis. The fly in the ointment is the constitution which has hurdles like Presidential immunity, to prevent exactly this attempt at power-grab, but astute observers will note that the same constitution provides for a way out: Only a Muslim can become a President! Therefore, I propose that the Supreme court rename itself as the Supreme Jirga and the Chief Justice assume the title of Chief Qazi. Want to get rid of the government? No problem! Declare the Prime Minister and the President as bad Muslims and ergo, not Muslims at all! (This has a second advantage: Getting rid of Prime ministers by declaring them to be bad Muslims is definitely less ridiculous than citing judgements in Nigeria and Uganda to justify coups as the honorable Supreme Jirga did in Begum Nusrat Bhutto v. Chief of the Army Staff‎ case.) Want to defuse the current crisis instead? No issues at all. Rule that the president should gift 1000 goats to the Chief of the ISI to repent for defamation and drop the case altogether. Crisis solved! The Civilians: Of the three arms of the Government dreamt up by the Quaid – Qazis, Army and Bloody Civvies (This is what the Quaid really wanted. I claim that he carried a concealed gun in addition to his concealed beard and turban that people constantly search for), the Civvies are the weakest. They neither have the tanks of the Army nor do they have the religious self-righteousness of the Supreme Jirga. So they have to rely on subterfuge to ensure stability. It is clear that the recent crisis has been exacerbated by the extension granted to the COAS and DG-ISI. Keeping all this in mind, I propose that the Prime minister grant extension for life for the COAS. This offers many advantages: The COAS wont be in a hurry to overthrow the government before his extension is up. He is COAS for life! Dictators in Pakistan have a typical shelf life of 10 years at the maximum, after which either they are exiled or presented with mangoes. What would you rather be? Dictator for 10 years or COAS for life? COAS would be busy purging his generals to make sure that they dont overthrow him to become COAS for life and therefore would be too busy to intervene in the civilian setup. With a Supreme Jirga and a Chief Qazi taking care of Judicial matters and a General for life who commands his armed forces, purges his subordinates and has the final say on economy, national security and foreign policy and a Prime minister appointed by the General and Qazi, to take care of other minor issues with a relatively stable job and who constantly conspires to play off one power center against the other, crises would be short and stability would be guaranteed. Then Pakistan can finally return to its roots, get the magnificent administrative setup and the concomitant prosperity of the Mughal empire! Musharraf-Pulled Speculations on NATO Shenanigans NOVEMBER 29, 2011 6 COMMENTS Due to changed circumstances, not getting enough time to maintain this blog. So here is a bunch of (musharraf-pulled) poorly thought out speculations. With equipment like GPS is it impossible for ISAF ground forces to not know that Pakistani post was inside Pakistan territory Even if ISAF ground forces did not know this, GPS and maps on their air-assets would have indicated that the post was inside Pakistani territory. They chose to attack anyway. This indicates that NATO forces knew that they were attacking a post inside Pakistan. Ergo, this negates the latest BS peddled by NATO of taliban “provoking” a firefight with Pakistanis. However this statement itself is salient, we will return to this later. The attack went on for two hours “despite repeated pleas” PAF was not scrambled Which means that “the soldiers were sleeping” reports which initially came out is BS. If they were indeed sleeping, the discipline of the people manning outposts is suspect. Even if they were, they probably woke up quickly. The“Soldiers were sleeping” was probably trotted out to imply that they did not provide covering fire to retreating taliban or fire first. PAF was not scrambled either due to inter-services bureaucracy, shenanigans by the Army without taking the PAF into confidence or PAF knowing that they will be shot out of the air. Please note this in the context of interpreting all future blusters and bravado about shooting down drones. Initial reports spoke of “Lightly manned outposts” which was manned by a captain and a major nonetheless! DGMO talked about interpreting the incident in the “background of May 2″ So speculation time. What to conclude? Let us assume as given: 1. NATO knew the post was inside Pakistani territory. 2. NATO has a selfish motive of not pissing off Pakistan much, because they know that Pakistan will stop supplies (as was done before). These leave only two possible logical conclusions: Previous news articles have reported that field commanders are mighty pissed with the taliban firing from positions in or close to Pakistan border outposts. NATO stringently refuses to apologize for this incident (and by extension promise that such incidents will not happen in the future). Taken together: This probably indicates that the rules of engagement of border posts offerring covering fire has possibly changed and NATO will attack first and ask questions later. This was probably the double-speak of NATO about “taliban provoking a border incident”. If the rules of engagement have indeed changed, expect many more incidents in the future, if powers that be do not intervene and smooth ruffled feathers. Smoothing ruffled feathers will not happen by refusing to talk to the US, boycotting conferences or stopping supply lines. If the attack was not in response to a change in the rules of engagement, and was carried out despite NATO knowing that the post was inside Pakistani territory, they could have proceeded Only if they knew that the post was sheltering a high-value target. This possibly explains the “Background of May 2″ comment by DGMO. So change in the rules of engagement or high-value target? take your pick. ____________________________________________ Postscript: I dont know about the composition of the forces manning the border posts. But is it standard operating procedure for them to be manned by a Captain and a Major? Pakistan has reacted vehemently by closing NATO supply lines and boycotting the Bonn conference. Which is predictable and understandable. But a little surprising given that US reaction to Pakistani border guard killing its soldiers, numerous attacks — including the one on its consulate — traced to the Haqqani network and the biggest of them all: Osama Bin Laden hiding in Pakistan for six years, have all been muted. I am sorry to say this, but Pakistan protests look too loud in comparison. Pakistan has ruled out joint investigations and wants nothing short of an apology. NATO has refused to apologize and says US will press on. So 1. We might never know the truth 2. Next few days will be interesting. —-xxx—- Pakistan and Indonesia are Different Countries OCTOBER 28, 2011 The perceptive Sadanand Dhume in his article “A Model for Pakistan’s Revival” draws parallels between Pakistan and Indonesia, and uses the dramatic transformation of Indonesia as a reason for optimism and the way forward in South Asia. Dhume cites the current stability and prosperity in Indonesia and points out: Consider the parallels between yesterday’s Indonesia and today’s Pakistan. Sukarno’s Indonesia was the region’s problem child: unhappy with its borders, tilted toward an authoritarian power (China), and infested by a totalitarian ideology (communism). Today Islamabad pursues so-called strategic depth in Afghanistan and won’t quite abandon obsolete ambitions in Indian Kashmir. It leans toward “all-weather friend” China even as its economy stagnates and radical Islam eats away at society and the state. While at first look the similarities are uncanny, the example cited is not remarkable: If one wants to cite examples of poorly governed countries with poor economies turning around, there is South Korea. If you want the example of aMuslim country which turned its economy around, it could be Saudi Arabia in the 60s and 70s. An example of aMuslim country without oil achieving this feat could be Turkey. Essentially what I am arguing is that such a parallel between Pakistan and Indonesia does not quite capture the very basis of all that ails Pakistan: Her identity which will cause a perpetual instability in the eastern border and her geography which will cause a perpetual instability in her western border. On the subject of Identity: Commentators who wish to explain Pakistan’s seemingly irrational behavior—Supporting the destabilization of Afghanistan and her affinity towards China*—frequently attribute it to Pakistan’s security anxieties vis-a-vis India. This is not an accurate explanation: Nuclear bombs and ballistic missiles have ruled out India-Pakistan wars of the magnitude which cleaved Bangladesh away from Pakistan. Therefore, possibility of conflicts which challenge the existence of Pakistan itself is ruled out and in this sense the conflict has stabilized. Then why does Pakistan still pursue avenues which give it strategic advantage over India? The only possible explanation would be the pursuit ofIndia’s defeat rather than the pursuit of any guarantees of Pakistan’s survival. This is because: Pakistan views herself as the ideological progeny of the Mughal empire, with an unfinished agenda of conquering the subcontinent. Abandoning this endeavour would mean accepting the eventual supremacy of India (simply due to her demographics and geographical area) which would be interpreted (in Pakistan) as the defeat of the religion itself. This is unthinkable. Furthermore, abandoning this identity of Pakistan is unthinkable. This is the first “circular” conundrum. This is essentially what sets the India-Pakistan conflict apart from seemingly similar conflicts, and can end only with the ideological collapse of one of the adversaries — in this sense it resembles the US-Soviet cold-war conflict (which ended with the collapse of the USSR) than the Turkey-Greece or Egypt-Israel conflict (where the adversaries realized the futility of conflict and the economic advantages of peace). This is the first objection that I have towards Dhume’s prescription: Convincing Pakistan of the benefits of peace and working with her to de-radicalize her society and re-structure the economy to bring stability, would have as much success as attempting to talk the Soviet Union out of the Cold-war, by convincing the Soviet Union to abandon communism. The “Convincing Pakistan of the benefits of peace” part is an order of magnitude harder than what US has achieved in Indonesia and elsewhere. In the pursuit of this “Convincing” strategy, US has failed in an even more dangerous way: She has armed Pakistan (to address the “insecurity vis-a-vis India” thesis), which will eventually serve as a catalyst for more conflict (due to the “defeat of India” pursuit) rather than less conflict. The second part of Pakistan’s problem is her Geography. The land that is Pakistan today, has neither been a viable entity nor had peace with Afghanistan except during periods of economic linkages and power projection from the Gangetic Plain. Astute observers of history will not fail to notice the fact that: Peace between Pakistan and a strong Afghanistan is possible only with a strong Pakistan-India military alliance. In the absence of this alliance, peace is possible only with a destabilized Afghanistan. However an Afghanistan under perpetual Pakistani hegemony is possible only with strong economy in Pakistan, which is impossible without strong economic linkages with India. This is the second “circular” conundrum. Ergo, Pakistan is not Indonesia. Therefore, any solution to create stability in the region will not have “Sell the idea of economic prosperity to Pakistan” as the first step. If anything, Pakistan is the Gordian Knot, which can be cut only by a revolution inside Pakistan first — that too a revolution of the good kind. But this is no reason to abandon optimism. Being the optimist that yours sachly is, I will wait till the region collapses into a rubble and then rebuilds itself into a stable and viable entity. ___________________________________ *Pakistan shares no common grounds or linkages with China on the basis of race, religion, values or geography (except of course the tiny strip of a perilous highway). The single point of convergence with China is the shared hostility towards India. Even there, both countries disagree about the magnitude of hostility. While China is content with an India that cannot drain her resources through economic and territorial challenges, Pakistan wishes to bet her very survival towards besting India. —-xxx—- A Thought Provoking Article OCTOBER 31, 2011 In the crowded field of “South Asian Analysts”, many of whom have excellent credentials — like managing to be born in Pakistan or better still, having managed to visit Pakistan within the past five years — how does one get noticed? By writing thought provoking articles of course! And“thought provoking” gentle readers, is synonymous with “contrarian”. Or for the clueless, “thought provoking” means to vehemently disagree with accepted wisdom. But “thought provoking” articles should be written with care. What you disagree with doesn’t matter as much as when you disagree with it: Timing is everything! “So how long should I wait, and what should I wait for” you ask? Fikar not. The wait is usually a couple of weeks and the incident can be one of: Ahmedis getting massacred, Shias getting shot,Interior minister declaring that he will kill Blasphemers with his own bare hands, MNAs going underground for proposing amendments to Blasphemy laws, murderers getting garlanded or Judges running away to Saudi Arabia (you get the idea). That is the right opportunity for you to bust out your column “Why Pakistan is still largely a moderate country”. Many have done this, and many more will do this in the future. To save time and effort for everyone, I present for your gentle consideration: The “Pakistan is a moderate country”column generator!! The formula itself is very simple: Riveting opening sentence, intriguing provocation of thought, religious mumbo jumbo, meaningless statistics, blame Zia, guilt out the west, demand money, cashmere or both. So here it goes. The opening sentence should be riveting (choose one) Pakistan is A country usually mentioned in the same breath as the Taliban. Viewed synonymously with Osama Bin Laden. Thought of as a cesspit of Blasphemy laws, Coups, Nuclear weapons and Jihadis Most people will be tempted to end the article right here. But dont!! Brave analyst, you should plod on!! Don’t forget that we aren’t stating facts, we are disagreeing with them! The second sentence should turn the premise around and be thought provoking (choose one): But could it be That Pakistan is in fact a moderate, secular democracy founded on rule of law? That the problems commonly associated with Pakistan started only as recently as 1947? Nothing but propaganda by Zionist-RAW-CIA controlled western press? That the problems facing Pakistan are completely misconstrued? Now these two sentences set up the right platform to stake your credentials as a Pakistani. “But I don’t know anything about the core cultural zeitgeist of the country!” you say? Not to worry. Nobody reading your column does either. The trick is to act confident and informed (choose one): The religious violence in Pakistan is perpetrated by a small minority of Wahhabis while the bulk of the country follows the Berelvi sect of Islam known for its tolerance and plurality (Please DO NOT mention that Qadri was a Berelvi). Most people visit the graves of mystic saints who were clean shaven. The call for prayers co-exist with vibrant cultural scenes in Karachi, with girls in tight jeans under their shuttlecock burkhas, art festivals, book readings (inside well fortified, double cavity searched British consulate, but it is best not mentioned here). Next is the time for some statistics (choose one) The so-called conservative Pakistanis: Overwhelmingly vote for secular parties with less than 10% voting for religious parties. Where are my choices you ask? YOU MORON!! YOU DONT HAVE A CHOICE!! THIS STATISTIC SHOULD BE MENTIONED IN EVERY ARTICLE ARGUING THAT PAKISTAN IS MODERATE!! Now that we are past statistics, go on to blame Zia (choose one): It was Zia who: Started a process of Islamization of the society Declared Ahmedis to be non-Muslims* Stopped PTV anchors from dressing up stylishly in sarees Next is guilt trip! And Zia was co-opted by the west for their Jihad against the Soviets. (To be mentioned in every article) The next is the clincher So what should the west do? They should support the fledgling democracy in Pakistan with adequate economic support. Strike a grand bargain involving Cashmere for peace in Afghanistan to demonstrate their seriousness among ordinary Pakistanis. Encourage close economic linkages with the west through a liberal visa regime, relaxed trade quotas and co-operation in the nuclear field. (Choose ALL of them). So putting it all together, here is an example of “Pakistan is a moderate country” column I put together: Pakistan is a country usually mentioned in the same breath as the Taliban. But could it be that Pakistan is in fact a moderate, secular democracy founded on rule of law? The religious violence in Pakistan is perpetrated by a small minority of Wahhabis while the bulk of the country follows the Berelvi sect of Islam known for its tolerance and plurality. The so-called conservative Pakistanis overwhelmingly vote for secular parties with less than 10% voting for religious parties. It was Zia who started a process of Islamization of the society. And Zia was co-opted by the west for their Jihad against the Soviets. For a safe and secure future of the world, the west should support the fledgling democracy in Pakistan with adequate economic support. Strike a grand bargain involving Cashmere for peace in Afghanistan to demonstrate their seriousness among ordinary Pakistanis and encourage close economic linkages with the west through a liberal visa regime, relaxed trade quotas and co-operation in the nuclear field. Please submit your “Pakistan is a moderate country” in western press!! ________________________________________ *It was actually ZAB who declared Ahmedis to be non-muslims, but remember that we are disagreeing with facts here, not stating them! —-xxx—- A Comprehensive Analysis of Aatish Taseer Episode JULY 22, 2011 Note to everone except Ejaz Haider: Go and get a life. Dont grab your AK and express OUTRAGE for every teeny column written by random semi-popular people from across the border. Note to Ejaz Haider: Please try harder to impress us with your reading list. —-xxx—- Pakistan’s Security Posture is Untenable MAY 16, 2011 Pakistan has decided that its security is dependent on a destabilized (and pliable) Afghanistan on its western border and an India tied up through covert warfare on its eastern border. Pakistan has had to fight Afghanistan, US and India to achieve this. Pakistan has relied on a three-pronged strategy: sub conventional warfare, denials and deterrence in this fight. Pakistan has fought Sub conventional warfare through (a) the Taliban proxies in the west and (b) and in the east, through the various so-called “non-state actors” derived from groups such as Lashkar-e-tayyiba which enjoy state patronage. It has maintained Deniability by disassociating itself from these armed proxies. Pakistan skillfully employs its diplomats, myriad media personalities and “analysts” who trot out denials ranging from the respectable to the bizarre. For example, in the Osama Bin Laden case, one has a variety of denials to choose: From ambassador Haqqani’s articulate denials of complicity, to Prime Minister Gilani’s ludicrous assertion that the failure belongs to the world, to the conspiratorialMirza Aslam Beg’s theory that the operation was staged and a look alike was killed!!* The third prong is Deterrence from retaliation for pursuing sub conventional warfare. To deter conventional retaliation from India, Pakistan uses a mixture of nuclear threats and conventional counter attacks and to deter retaliation from the US, Pakistan uses the threat of cutting off NATO supplies, ceasing co-operation and increased anti-Americanism among its population. I wish to argue that this security posture is untenable. The current security posture seems to be based more on spite than on deliberate strategy and is likely to fail with disastrous consequences because Pakistan has failed to understand a simple fact: adversaries have options. Much has been written about the costs incurred by Pakistan in terms of human capital, security and economy. My argument is not along these lines and more along the structural aspects of this strategy. Using terror as a security strategy is flawed because: 1. There is no end-game: Due to the denials that Pakistan is indulging in covert warfare, negotiations cannot be a solution (which would require Pakistan to take responsibility for its proxies, either LeT vis-à-vis India or the Haqqani faction vis-à-vis Afghanistan). The only conclusion of this approach of subconventional warfare-deniability-deterrence is the defeat of the adversary through force. Be it US in Afghanistan or India in Kashmir and elsewhere. This is unlikely to happen. The adversaries have strong national will backed by a sense of morality, and no incentive to accept defeat. Surrendering Kashmir is not an option for India, since India will calculate the costs of losing access to its waters and a possibility that the conflict will not end with Kashmir. Surrendering Afghanistan is not an option for the US, since attacks originating from Afghanistan have a potential to shape domestic politics in the US. Under such a context, Pakistan will be forced to continue this indefinitely and forced to escalate, which it cannot because: 2. Escalation defeats the strategy: Any escalation, either of the form of spectacular attacks in Mumbai or arresting American operatives for example, leads to a breakdown of deniability and could invite retaliation. The Mumbai attacks trial in India have conclusively proven that Pakistani attackers were involved. The upcoming trial of Rana (involving Headley) in Chicago might uncover even more uncomfortable truths. A similar situation arose when it was revealed that Raymond Davis was accosted by armed intelligence agents and not a couple of random bystanders as was reported first. This breakdown in deniability can be used by the adversary to escalate, leaving Pakistan with no option because 3. The adversaries enjoy flexibility in their response: Pakistan seems to have forgotten that her adversaries are intelligent, adaptive and backed up enormous economic and military resources. India is fighting back by choosing not to fight. Without raising tensions, they have embarked on an arms build-up spree, developed a cold start strategy backed up by ballistic missile defense. This is aimed at eliciting arms build up by Pakistan and ultimately bankrupting Pakistan (one can notice parallels to Regan’s SDI approach). The Americans are following an approach through technology and coercion. Pakistani declarations of its inability to fight in the tribal areas led to the Americans employing drones. Which has had a backlash inside Pakistan. Furthermore through the OBL raid, Americans have simultaneously struck at the credibility of the civilians and the myth of capability of the armed forces gavely injuring the deniability part of the strategy and demonstrating that Pakistani threat to shut down the NATO supply routes are hollow. This loss in credibility combined with the fact that keeping the economic lifeline of Pakistan alive requires negotiations and goodwill from the international community means that Pakistan has been boxed into a corner and American leverage over Pakistan has increased many fold. Make no mistake: the Americans are following a strategy of feigning friendship while indulging in warfare – as a reply to Pakistan’s strategy of feigning friendship while indulging in warfare**. While Pakistan measures its short-term success through body counts, India and US are charting a path to their successes by running Pakistan to the ground. The same sub conventional warfare-deniability-deterrence approach was tried out in Kargil and failed spectacularly due to the same reasons of lack of endgame, asymmetric escalation by India and the flexibility of response that India enjoyed. Pakistan could not obtain a negotiated withdrawal (because that would imply that Pakistan would have accept responsibility for the intrusion) and counted on an Indian surrender (and were not prepared for their will to fight). Indian escalation could not be matched by Pakistani escalation, due to the danger of loss of deniability. Ultimately India prevailed through strength of arms through Artillery and Airforce and thoroughly discredited Pakistani denials by going on a diplomatic offensive***. Though the conflicts themselves were dissimilar, the current conflict is following the well-charted Kargil route. A bloody nose in the Kargil conflict**** led to a decade of military rule, erosion of Pakistan’s economic base, steeper economic divisions and radicalization. A bloody nose in the current conflict will prove to be much more costly and might very well be fatal to Pakistan. * This despite Al-Qaeda’s acceptance that OBL is dead, the historic closed door briefing given by the armed forces to the Parliament and the possibility that US might find incriminating evidence from among the materials seized in the compound! ** Hence Pasha’s protestations about why US is not a reliable ally and noises about violation of sovereignty. Also, commentators seem to have missed the most significant aspect of the OBL raid: The fact that a successful operation would thoroughly humiliate and discredit Pakistani armed forces at home and abroad, could not have been overlooked by the US. In fact, this could have been one of the primary objectives of this raid. *** People with long memories will recall that in the aftermath of the Kargil war, (and before 9/11) similar loss of credibility ruined Pakistan’s economy. 9/11 was a fortuitous windfall. **** The defeat in Kagil was predictably sold off through stories ranging from a victory to denials that Pakistan was ever involved. —-xxx—- Post OBL Raid–Quick Notes MAY 7, 2011 Pakistan’s Sovereignty US has stationed RADAR evading helicopters in Afghanistan. Since Taliban does not have RADAR, it wont be a stretch to guess whey they plan to fly these to. This raid is not the last. Probably was not the first. I find it impossible to believe that they did not go on a “test run” at night to see if they would be caught. Did the Army help? The sooner everyone gets over the delusion that the Army and ISI helped as an institution the better. The resulting loss of honor & dignity is strong enough to fracture the Army. The chief must be an idiot to do this. Trying to palm off the blame to PAF chief and civilian leaders are an indication that the Army is trying to get over this humiliation. Here is a sanity check: Nobody even had a coherent statement to make 3 days after. What next in the Army/ISI? Expect a witch hunt. The top brass must conclusively prove to the people of Pakistan that incompetence is punished. Expect a few heads to roll. More importantly, the top brass must conclusively prove to the radicalized middle and lower rungs that they were not hand in glove with the US. Not addressing this issue is a huge threat to the cohesion of the Army. Expect a few more heads to roll. If the Army and ISI did not help with this operation, by now they suspect that there are CIA moles inside. Expect still more heads to roll. It would be interesting to scan newspapers over the next several months to see how many Army/ISI operatives get bumped off. So who helped? I find it impossible to believe that CIA has not penetrated the ISI. They have had 10 years to cultivate mid-level ISI operatives, who probably are high level ISI operatives now. The repetition of the “courier” story is a red-herring. Someone from within the Armed forces ratted about RADAR installations and operating procedures. Someone from within the ISI ratted out a list of “off limits” houses. If you truly believe Americans zeroed in on the OBL compound, set up a observation house near OBL compound (and therefore, near PMA Kakul) without getting caught, evaded RADARs in the middle of the night and snatched OBL AND there are no rodents inside Army/ISI — I have a Minar in Lahore that I wish to sell you. If you believe Army & ISI helped, I will throw in a big Mosque in Islamabad for free. —-xxx—- Thorough Brosecution Of Mumbai Attackers in Pakistan APRIL 5, 2011 Gautam Gambhir’s recent statement that the Indian cricket world lota victory was dedicated to the 26/11 victims rightfully raised outrage in Pakistan. Before heaping blame on Pakistan for Pakistan-trained terrorists who commit terror acts in India, Indians should realize that Pakistan too is a victim of Pakistan-trained terrorists. In any case, viewing India-Pakistan relationship through the one-dimensional lens of terror is quite unfair to the world’s foremost front-line ally against terror. Pakistan has time and again tried to rescue India-Pakistan relationship from falling prey to 26/11 issue by first insisting that Kasab was not Pakistani, then by insisting that the terror attack was planned in a ship in international waters and finally when Indians nitpicked based on confessions of Kasab, insisting that the terrorists were non-state actors and terror did not have a nationality. When the Indians complained that the terror organization responsible for 26/11 attack was registered in Pakistan, Pakistan went the extra mile to declare the LeT as a charity organization. Despite all this, Indians insisted in Judicial action, indulged in state-sponsored tree-terrorism, sent pages and pages of dossiers and defamed Pakistan. Pakistan reciprocated positively even for this grave dossier provocation. Nowhere in the world have terrorists been dragged through the courts for such extended period of time with such meticulous prosecution. Consider the chronology: March 4, 2009: The trial starts!! AK Phyrr!! (in camera of course) May 24, 2009: How can there be a trial without a judge, hain ji? (not our fault) July 18, 2009: Chargesheet filed!! (Going to Sharm-al-Sheikh, have to show brogress!!) July 25, 2009: Case adjourned for 1 month (Back from Sharm-al-Sheikh!!) Aug 29, 2009: Adjourned for 1 month (Still digesting the food eaten at Sharm-Al-Sheikh!!) Sep 26, 2009: Adjourned again (Still digesting) Oct 3, 2009: Adjourned again (digesting…) Oct 21, 2009: Judge wants to leave the case for “unavoidable reasons” (400% sure it is a gastric problem) New judge, many adjournments, case put off till accused plea for acquittal is considered (I yam no judicial exbert, but isnt this what the case is about?) fast forward to Feb 13, 2010 Feb 13, 2010: Case adjourned because the judge is “busy” Feb 20, 2010 to Apr 19, 2010 (heated debate whether Kasab is an absconder, a fugitive or a proclaimed offender) Adjourned till July 03, 2010 to find out whether Yindia will send Kasab to Pakistan (Riddal: Blease to guess Yindia’s answer) July 24, 2010: Judge didn’t show up for work July 31, 2010: Judgement on Lakhvi’s bail plea reserved till August 7 (“reserving” is a judicial activity 400% distinct from “adjourning”) Aug 28, 2010: Reserved judgement is adjourned till Sep 18. (Did I naat tell you “reserving” is different from “adjourning” hain ji?) Nov 13, 2010: Pakistan has determined that Yindia will not hand over Kasab (then what happened on July 03, 2010 you pooch? Just making 400% sure) Dec 17, 2010: Defence lawyer has fake degree. Case adjourned.(imagine how long the case would have dragged on if he had a real degree!!) Jan 8, 2011: Adjourned Jan 22, 2011: Adjourned Feb 5, 2011: NOT ADJOURNED!!! (heh heh, just kidding. Also adjourned) Feb 17, 2011: Take a guess!! Feb 26, 2011: Guess again if you made a mistake last time!! March 05, 2011: One more chance!! March 26, 2011: Last chance for guessing!! As you can dekho, even before examining a single witness over 2 years, look at the thoroughness of Pakistani Judiciary! Then why do Indians complain? Pakistanis have chosen to move on and forget the trauma to the national Image the 26/11 has caused and tried hard to forget. Maybe the tiny hearted Indians should take a clue from large hearted Pakistanis and move on too. Regular statements to the media about the 180 odd killed in Mumbai will only serve to keep their memories alive. In conclusion, what I am trying to say is…. (artecal adjourned till later) —-xxx—- Scared People Attend Book Party, Dont Really Defy The Taliban FEBRUARY 6, 2011 By now you might have figured that the phrase “liberal people of Pakistan” severely annoys yours sachly’s goat who goes nuts and writes blog posts. So this lazy sundin yours sachly opens newspapers and what does he see? Krachi Literature Festival!! Where about a hundred authors and about five thousand people gathered to “defy the taliban and talk about books and not bombs”!! (paraphrased) where among many things people indulged in: Reimagining a state that presently “breaks bread with the Americans during the day and sleeps with the Taliban at night” and of course “You know that all is not lost when eager readers turn up in the hundreds to witness a former nun open a literary festival” Whoa! So a bunch of people gathered to talk about books, re-imagined the future of Pakistan which happens to be a tolerant society!! (or at least will become one by the time the literature festival ends) While their safety is of atmost concern, articles insinuating that literature-loving intelligentsia form the vanguard of Pakistan’s saviors were a bit hard for your sachly’s goat to chew and digest. The goat started to wonder “Is this whole fixing Pakistan thing a PR stunt for the festival or are they serious?” So yours sachly’s fourth cousin tweeted: So I think it is safe to conclude that no taliban defiance is going on in Krachi Literature Festival. It is a bunch of scared people having a party about books. And just in case you had any lingering doubts (or any hopes about the whole Blasphemy law issue and/or liberal people saving Pakistan)…. PS> For more rants, please see yours sachly’s comment response. Major says: February 7, 2011 at 7:58 am I agree & understand. But it makes me rant 2 things. A smaller rant and a bigger rant: 1. If it is just a bunch of people gathering to read books — why all this news articles about the people somehow reforming Pakistan or the festival being a proof that somehow Pakistan is still a peaceful & tolerant place to live in? (Ref: “You know that all is not lost when eager readers turn up in the hundreds to witness a former nun open a literary festival”) In any other part of the world, attributing a statement that calls for punishing a murderer would not invite such a quick denial or such a thorough wetting of people’s pants. 2. This is a bigger rant: If people in posh areas in Karachi (which presumably includes powers that be/ diplomats and others) cant even risk a statement which condemns a murderer, why make statements like “Solving Cashmere is necessary for peace in South Asia” — People cannot speak out against a semi-literate, inbred, room temperature IQ murderer – how do they propose to take down well oiled terror machinery? Major says: February 20, 2011 at 8:20 pm Outrage much? Please to try it. Major says: February 20, 2011 at 8:26 pm And I am amused to see that you think that (a) A statement calling for judicial prosecution of a murderer and (b) A statement filled with bigotry and blasphemy are totally the same and equal. Pakistan needs more people like you! —-xxx—- How to make your own Ejaz Haider (at home) FEBRUARY 14, 2011 So everyone loves an Ejaz Haider! But it ij not availabal every din and can become costly (due to subscripshuns). I too love columns of Ejaz Haider and after careful reading, I think I have reverse engineered the recibe!! The secret is simbal. The recipe has 5 major combonents: Demand Money–Act as if terrorism is normal–Show bravado–High sounding grabagic nonsense—Toilet/Adult jokes. To beepuls who are afraid about cooking their own Ejaz Haider column, I am providing this ready to make recipe!! Ejaz Haider Column Generator!! A. Sentence one: Choose one phrom each category: (Demanding money) 1. Not giving Pakistan money 2. Asking Pakistan to do too much 3. Expecting Pakistan to serve US interest for the money Will only 1. Strengthen hands of extremists 2. Compel the Army to take over 3. Weaken democracy 4. Put region into Chaos B. Sentence two: Choose one phrom each category: (Acting as if terrorism is normal) Terrorism is a reaction which is justified because 1. Every country has done it 2. It is how weaker countries challenge the stronger 3. Oppressed people have no recourse 4. It is the leverage of the weaker against the stronger in any case 1. US has indulged in it 2. India has indulged in it 3. Pakistan has indulged in it in the past several times 4. It is one of the 5 tools of statecraft C. Sentence three: Choose one (Bravado) 1. Pakistan is here to stay 2. US cannot achieve strategic goals without Pakistan 3. India cannot pacify Kashmir without Pakistan D. Sentence four: Choose one from each category: (High sounding nonsense) 1. The normative interpretation of inter-state relations 2. The consensus understanding of the spirit of Magna carta 3. An informed reading of Carl von Clausewitz will indicate to an enlightened reader the nature of 1. Temporal-spatial nature of geo strategic relationship 2. Inter- and intra state transactions of state actors 3. Game theoretic achievement of Nash equilibrium E. Sentence five: Insert your own toilet humor/male anatomy jokes here: Here ij what I generated!! Expecting Pakistan to serve US interest for the money will only put region into chaos. Terrorism is a reaction which is justified because it is the leverage of the weaker against the stronger, in any case it is one of the 5 tools of statecraft. US cannot achieve strategic goals without Pakistan. An informed reading of Carl von Clausewitz will indicate to an enlightened reader the nature of game theoretic achievement of Nash equilibrium. There is a long glorious erection of flagpole outside my window. Tee heee. –Ejaz Haider. As you can see, the number of variashuns are infinite!! Taking time to explore all of them will assure your career as an analyst and strategic thinker!! Post your own columns and variashuns!! —-xxx—- How to Borrow Money Phrom Your Unkil FEBRUARY 11, 2011 So you dont have a job, the roof of your house has collapsed, your kids keep setting your car on phyrr and you dont have any money. Fikar not! Everyone has a rich unkil! But how do I get money phrom unkil you pooch? Fikar not again! Yours sachly happens to be an expert. Yours sachly has an unkil. Unkil Samad. I fondly called Unkil Sam and have extorted much money phrom him. Here is a list oph things that worked. 1. Does your Unkil own a business? In which case, has it ever lost money and has your unkil taken loans and/or borrowed from his kids to cover for the losses? If so, DEMAND money like it is your birthright!! How do I demand you pooch? Fikar not. You can uje the eloquent words oph Hussain Haqqani: Pakistan aid pales next to U.S. bailouts “A company at the verge of failure is quite clearly able to get a bigger bailot than a nation that has been accused of failure,” Ambassador Husain Haqqani said in remarks at a Washington think tank…”That’s something that in this town needs a review”. Pakistan and Afghanistan deservemore resources than “some failed insurance company or some car company whose achievement is that they couldn’t make cars that they could sell,” said Haqqani. As you might have no doubt observed, having a sense oph entitlement while simultaneously making fun oph Unkil’s failed business ventures can be quite helpful. Also please to note that companies making stuff they cant sell is funny, doing that at a country-level is a different and quite serious issue altogether. Blease to 400% make sure you lose that irony. 2. Unkil still not convinced? Hint that your hungry kids will burn his house down! How to do that with straight face you pooch? Fikar not! Shah Mahmood Qureshi to the rescue!! Pakistan Flood Aid Helps Fight Terrorism as Peace `Fragile,’ Qureshi Says “We are not going to allow them (terrorists) to take advantage or exploit this natural disaster,” Qureshi told reporters in New York yesterday. The result “depends on how effective and quick the response is. That is why it is so important that the international assistance comes immediately.” But ij using your poor destitute childrens as selling points and hinting that they might become terrorijts a honorable thing to do you pooch? Joo idiot! Do you want the money or not? If you care about haanaar that much, restore it by beheading your wiphe. 3. Okay scared Unkil gives you money but insists that you fix your roof and wants to send his servant to make sure your kids dont burn his house. Now what to do? Simbal! Protest hugely about how you know how to spend his money, arrest his servant and tell your kids you have been dishonored! Then do what you ujually do with the money and when it runs out, back to step 1! Isnt this fun?! And oh, encourage your kids and turn a blind eye when they burn his house down anyway to show that you haven’t lost any honor due to shameless borrowing! —-xxx—- 3.Formula JANUARY 5, 2011 Governor Salman Taseer has been murdered. My condolences to his family. Full disclosure: He was the target of some sarcasm from my fourth cousin’s tweets, especially those concerning India’s space program, (which got yours sachly’s fourth cousin’s Patriotic goat because he thought that the real joke — Pakistan’s space program — didn’t get the credit it deserved for being the bigger joke). Nevertheless, as a self-made man with wealth made not from privilege, connections or Khaki, notwithstanding my fourth’s cousin’s tweets, *I* always thought of him as the vanguard of Pakistan’s future. So yours sachly has been following twitter posts and achieved great enlightenment (not the Buddhist variety, please don’t shoot me for blasphemy!!) on how to proceed to build a strong and prosperous Pakistan and defeat the Mullah brigade. Here is my 3 point plan: As a nation, we should debate Hadiths at great lengths to determine what constitutes Blasphemy, and whether Blasphemy does in fact entail death as a punishment. By “nation” I mean well-traveled, middle-to-upper-class english educated people on Twitter whose tweets on non-assassination days involve booze, cricket, sexual innuendo, flirting and complaints about the latest gadgets. After all, their pronouncements on religion have much more credibility than shabbily dressed, hirsute madrassa educated firebrands who are employed in Mosques and preach everyday. Any debates along the lines of “I have traveled to a few places and have a modern education and am of the opinion that running a country with laws based on religion is a medieval proposition” should strictly be avoided. That would make Iqbal and the Quaid sad. If the Quaid said what I thought he said. But I digress. We need to defeat Mullahs in their own game!! More importantly we need to do a bait-and-switch on the questionable fence sitters (which would be 99% of the non-mullah population) who might be intimidated if we bring in too much modernity into debates and start denouncing religion as the basis of nationhood. While engaging in such a debate, care should be taken to protect Honor & Dignity. Western commentator says Pakistan’s laws are F’ed up? Scream “PALESTINE!!!!”. Indians taking the opportunity to brand Pakistan a medieval country where people cannot speak out without getting shot 27 times? Bring up the outrageous Arundhati episode where Hindu trained Zionist RSS terrorists did Hindu terror in her house and broke a flowerpot!! Keep in mind that *all* countries are as bad as Pakistan, they only have better PR. Fixing Pakistan is important, but not at the cost of hurting its “image” in the process!! Never for a moment even entertain the thought that Pakistan might be more F’ed up than any other reasonable-sized country and acceptance of this fact might possibly provide a good starting point. That brings me to the third issue: We must take a nuanced view and not end up criticizing all religious intolerance. Everyone knows that there are two types of Jihad. Internal Jihad and external Jihad. I heard it on TV once. I think that it means Jihad fought internally in Pakistan (“Bad Jihad”) and Jihad fought externally — say in India, US, Afghanistan, Palestine or Dagestan for that matter (the “Good Jihad”). While criticizing internal Jihad and religious intolerance inside Pakistan, care should be taken to balance it with vehement expressions of outrage when “OPPRESSED” indulge in external Jihad — say when a few fellows with nice sized rocks throw them on policemen in Cashmere and get shot at in the process. Ofcourse religion inspired ethnic cleansing of say, Kashmiri Hindu Pandits should be swept under the rug. Few cases of religious intolerance when a revolution is in the works are inevitable and should be condoned (Note: This applies only outside Pakistan, inside Pakistan please criticize all religious intolerance.) And lastly, don’t let Salman Taseer’s death bother you for long. The next time Turkey sends a flotilla to Israel, Alms from the US or IMF come with strings attached, IPL does not take Pakistani players or some random Indian celebrity gets criticized in Indian media, the services of our collective outrage and short attention span would be in urgent demand. I’d say Salman Taseer should be given half the time that was spent after Benazir’s assassination debating the use of violence as a state policy. PS> As an aside, deep introspection has revealed that Kasab is not Pakistani. If he is, he is a non-state actor led astray due to atrocities in Cashmere & Palestine. Nothing about that episode or the lack of progress in the case indicates any sort of Society-Establishment-Mullah-Army-ISI-Judiciary-Politician consensus on using radicalization-inspired violence to achieve the objectives of the state. If you are not part of this consensus, you are part of the minority. And you know what happens to minorities in Pakistan… —-xxx—- Cultural Concepts of South Asia–Part I FEBRUARY 20, 2011 For the benefit of the Goras who might find it strange to get to terms with Pakistani South Asian cultural concepts, Yours sachly has produced a quick cheat sheet of terms & concepts. These are very useful when reading blog posts, listening to diplomats, “analysts”, talking heads and the all too pervasive columnists you would come across in newspapers (Which about covers 99% of the Pakistani population). But first things first: South Asian Indians are Indians and Pakistanis when caught in tight situations (like in Airports) are Indians too. In other circumstances they are South Asians. Being “South Asian” offers many advantages. Such as an overwhelming numerical advantage. Example: When faced with the question “Is radicalization a problem”? South Asians can reply with a straight face “Only 170 million, or less than 10% of the South Asians are radicalized”. Which sounds entirely reasonable. Glorious Victory When Side A attacks Side B, and everyone in Side B is dead, save for one man with one leg, one eye and no arms who stands up and yells “Death to the Kuffars”, Side B is judged to have won a resounding Glorious Victory. Because Side A is (non bious and) powerful, Side B is (bious and) not powerful, Side B always wins a Glorious Victory. Other equivalent concepts: Hezbollah Victory, Kargil Victory (We internationalized the Cashmere issue), 1965 Victory (celebrated to this day), Simla Accord Victory (as claimed by ZAB), Baglihar Dam Victory, and the recentTalks with India Victory (as claimed by Shah Mahmood Qureshi). My strategic forecast: Kishenganga Victory will be added to the list of Glorious Victories soon. 99% Solution to Cashmere issue When someone gets booted from position of power, it is frequently used as a tagline to demonstrate they did useful and audacious things. Claimed by Benazir, Musharraf, Sartaz Aziz and everyone who was ever kicked out of position of power in Pakistan at various times. Usage: “Cashmere issue was solved 99.999% under my tenure and we were hours away from signing the agreement” (with subtle subtext that India signed away all of Cashmere, retreated from Siachen, gave away Sir Creek and resolved not to build any dams at all. Because we won a Glorious Victory in the battlefield and the negotiating table) Please Note: It is a tactical mistake to claim that electricity problem, employment or the economy of Pakistan was 99.999% solved. Because that would just be plain absurd and ludicrous. Free Aafia!! When an issue is raked up provide a local advantage (such as raising the Aafia issue as a warning to threaten the political ambitions of Musharraf, who handed over Aafia in the first place) and ultimately ends up consuming scarce resources (such as the millions of dollars spent by the government of Pakistan for mounting her legal defense while the IDPs of Swat get loads of….Malaria) while becoming a huge headache, it is called Free Aafia!! Recently Seen in: Raymond Davis and all other Honor & Dignity related issues. Silent Majority Himalayan yeti. Nobody has seen it, but it is rumored to be big and powerful. —-xxx—- Major Emoshuns JANUARY 21, 2011 Yours sachly waj reading Ayaz Amir column where he excoriates the general Pakistani buplic about where their obsesshun ij leading them. Reading his column, yous sachly started to wonder why the country waj in this shape when sensibal beepuls like Ayaz Amir ij shaping our obinions. Here ij a record oph my overflowing emoshuns: Ayaz Amir: The fallacies of the military class – such as its never-ending quest for security, the preoccupation with Afghanistan, the bane of India-centrism, less a threat to India than to our own mental stability. Yours Sachly: Whoa!!! Ayaz Amir: What Pakistan is today, the depths it has plumbed, the failures courted, the follies assiduously pursued, have been the handiwork of its English-speaking elite classes Yours Sachly: AoA!! Agree!! Ayaz Amir: Our militarist adventures vis-à-vis India; and the honing of ‘jihad’ as an instrument of strategic fallacies. This last piece of brilliance came from the army as commanded by Gen Ziaul Haq. Religious elements became willing accessories in this game but were not its inventors. Yours Sachly: AK Phyrr in the Air!! Beace with Yindia!! I like!! Ayaz Amir: The religious parties have been the hyenas and jackals of the hunt, yelping from the sides and helping themselves to the morsels that came their way. Lords of the hunt, lions of the pack, have been Pakistan’s generals and politicians, assisted ably at all times by a powerful and equally short-sighted mandarin class. Yours Sachly: Whoa!! He calls a lota a lota and an AK an AK!! Ayaz Amir: If the Pakistani establishment continues to see India as the enemy, keeps pouring money into an arms race it cannot afford, is afflicted by delusions of grandeur relative to Afghanistan, and remains unmindful of the economic disaster into which the country is fast slipping, we will never get a grip on the challenges we face. The raging cleric, frothing at the mouth, is thus not the problem. He is merely a symptom of something larger. Pakistan’s problem is the delusional general and the incompetent politician Yours Sachly: Beace in South Asia!! PHREEDOMM!!! BEACE BEACE BEACE!! Phreedom!! A Monkey’s Asha!! Yours Sachly: Who are theje Jackals that feed morsels phrom army and blay the syncophant?! Who are those short sighted idiots who gloriphied moojahids and drove our society to the depths oph extremijam!! Who are these beepuls? Where ij my AK? OUTRAGED!! 100 Aafiyas!!! Ayaz Amir: Circa 1999: It is instructive and not a little inspiring to consider the courage and skill of the fighters who are challenging the might of the Indian army and air force along the cruel heights of Drass and Kargil in Indian-held Kashmir. Risking a battle in which the chances of death outweigh those of remaining alive requires motivation of a high order. Whatever the Indian side may say, these fighters have a better right than most to call themselves mujahideen, those who fight in the way of Allah. Whether any or most of these fighters acquired their combat skills in Afghanistan is a matter of detail. What is important is that their spiritual outlook has been shaped by the Afghan experience which they, and a goodly part of the religious and military establishment in Pakistan, considers to have been a true jehad. It was the spirit of jehad which drove the Soviet army from Afghanistan. It is the spirit of jehad which can drive the Indian army from Kashmir…. Right from the Afghan war till now in Kashmir, volunteers for jehad (or whatever else the finicky may call it) have come from social classes far removed and indeed alienated from this structure. How many people from the intelligentsia or the newspaper-reading classes fought in Afghanistan? How many of them are fighting in Kashmir? Yours Sachly: FACEPALM —-xxx—- Birth of a Liberal Pakistan!! (approximately after 70 years of screwing) JANUARY 18, 2011 After Salman Taseer’s assassination (about which one of my fourth cousins had something to say), I read several articles lamenting the death of liberal Pakistan. These many excellent articles that you would have definitely read were probably written by a middle aged donkey resting somewhere in Peshawar. I base it on the fact that I get a profound impression of an (intellectually) lazy, gas emanating being typing out identical articles and concluded that the only possible explanation is an unemployed donkey. Who takes on foreign (Indian and the West) nom-de-plumes occasionally. By now you probably figured that I disagree with those articles. If you hadn’t, let me formally state it. I formally disagree with those articles. So atleast by now, you probably figured that I disagree with those articles. Well, Good. So what do I soch you pooch? Salman’s taseer assassination, wimmens and gentlemards, heralds the arrival of an egalitarian Pakistan! “But Why!” you pooch? Here is why. Liberalism, wimmens and gentlemards, is a belief in social justice rooted in individual liberty and equal rights. So how did social justice and equal rights prevalent before Salman Taseer’s assassination die on that day? Actually it didnt. Before going back to the begining, for dramatic effect let me start with the end. The day Salman taseer got assasinated, the elite suddenly realized that they cannot do what they wished, such as down a few or have their way with the blasphemy law, without the danger of their incensed security guard or domestic help firing off a clip in their direction. This, I suspect, the aforementioned muddle headed donkey has mistaken for the death of “liberalism”. What has instead died, I humbly submit, is the power over the common man which was usurped and weilded for so long by the the elites. And that is because power has been democratized. And that is because everyone has a gun. Ergo, the power to shape the future and destiny of Pakistan, which used to lie with the elites is suddenly with the masses. Because every one of them has a gun, and unlike the elites, they seem quite comfortable firing it to protect their beliefs. A round of applause for AK-facilitated egalitarianism!! So what of this elusive little-understood animal (like the Yeti and “Silent Majority” of Pakistan) called Liberalism? More importantly what is and why Liberalism? Liberalism wimmens and gentlemards, among other things, is to ensure social mobility and equal participation in governance. And social mobility in yesteryears depended on access to capital producing goods. Like Land. Ergo, if Liberalism had existed before Salman Taseer’s assasination, Land reforms would have been implmented. Pray tell me how did that go? As you would have guessed: Fantastically!! We had the Provincial Tenancy Act of 1950!! Since yours sachly fancies himself as a story teller more than a lawyer (and is allergic to the word “WHEREAS” in all caps that every legal document seems to have) instead of describing the law, let me tell you a story. There are 1.7 million landless agricultural workers in Pakistan and in January 2002 The honorable High court of Sindh dismissed petitions for the release of bonded laborers citing this very same act and declaring bonded laborers to be a “dispute” between Landlords and peasants. Covered by the Tenancy act. So much for equal rights and social mobility based on capital producing goods. So, did the “liberalism” enabled by tenancy act die with Salman Taseer’s assassination? No! Did the egalitarianism of the threat of a few peasants banding together, declaring their landlord to be a blasphemer and shooting him in the head become a real possibility after Salman Taseer’s assasination? Emphatic yes!! So wimmens and gentlemards, I submit that egalitarianism has taken birth!! Let us take the second aspect of social mobility. Education. The less said about this, the better. But let me belabor the point. Education in Pakistan has become a propaganda tool of the state. To supply canon fodder for the various Jihads. Afghanistan. Cashmere. And dont forget Dagestan. Before Salman Taseer’s assasination, it used to be the case that only the likes of Khaled Ahmed had a monopoly over dissemination of his (incoherent) opinion in English about how Pakistan is the guardian of Indian Muslims. Now after Salman Taseer’s assassination, Khaled Ahmed’s interpretation of the Nationhood of Pakistan is being challenged, (in an egalitarian way, let me hasten to add) by the products of our emiment education system who insist that the Nation of Pakistan means strict adherence to Blasphemy law. Now pray tell me, why does this diversity of opinion indicate the death of Liberalism? Ladies and Gentlemards, a round of applause for free speech and the right to dissent (with an AK if the need arises) !! What am I getting at here? Salman Taseer’s assassination is a tragedy. This piece is not about him, but about the other tragedy. The so-called “intellectuals” who are hemoragging columns after columns lamenting their inability to continue business as usual and realizing to their horror that their long neglect of Pakistan’s population and radicalization of the successive generations brought about by their hatred of India and the west and desire to maintain status quo has in fact enabled the opposite. That the very base of their authoritarian power to shape the future and destiny of Pakistan has eroded. They are simply using the death of a governor to lament the death of their authoritarian power over the masses. The very masses they neglected, manipulated and whose world view they grotesquely mutilated for their short sighted needs. The future belongs to this grotesque semi educated, poor, landless, hatred infused, mullah directed armed Yahoos. And they are coming for you. To shape a society where more people are equal and have a right to shape their country’s future as they deem fit. In short, a Liberal Pakistan. Ergo, Liberalism in Pakistan is quite fine. The elites who claim to practice it on the other hand….are F’ed. LONG LIVE THE POWER OF THE PEOPLE!! LONG LIVE EGALITARIANISM IN PAKISTAN!! PS> For an excellent writeup about Land reforms in Pakistan by Shahid Saeed, please see here: PS> My fourth cousin’s goat suggests that the elites immediately jumping into the “Lets all find ideas to prevent blasphemy & uphold the blasphemy law” bandwagon is further proof of their aversion to Liberalism *and* AKs. So they should probably STFU and not write more articles lamenting the death of liberalism. —-xxx—- Internashunal Community Should Help Themselves by Helping Pakistan Help Themselves to Cashmere NOVEMBER 1, 2010 Here ij my help to bopularise to the 400% brilliant artecal “International Community should help themselves by helping Pakistan” which helpfully concludes Consequently, what the United States needs to do, and this is not at all an easy job, is bring the Kashmir issue to the forefront. If they can come to some sort of conclusion concerning Kashmir,Pakistan will have no use for terrorist cells and hence create a more stable Subcontinent.Pakistan will be able to focus more on their economic welfare and the wellbeing of their citizens. Such a clear articulation for the end of terrorist activitiej has never been written on the internets. Hugely encouraged, I wish to jump into the Jeehaard and contribute as well. Here is my 400% endorsement titled “Internashunal Community Should Help Themselves by Helping Pakistan Help Themselves to Cashmere” To understand the phenomenon of the terrorijt infestation in Pakistan, it is imbortant to understand the relevanje of Cashmere issue and the part it plays in forcing Pakistan to train moojahids to fight in far away places. As it ij well known, in the past 4 years Pakistanis were implicated (and in many cases convicted) for terrorism in France Spain Canada Norway Tunisia India US Britain China (Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region) Russia (Chechnya) Uzbekistan (Tashkent, Ferghana valley) Dagestan Tajikistan Southern Philippines Bosnia Afghanistan Iran Maldives Yemen Saudi Arabia Burma Indonesia South Korea And that ij just a few places yours sachly got in 5 minutes of Google News archive search. Look at the list of blaces that will benefit if Cashmere ijjue is solved!! If you ask “What do these places have to do with Cashmere and why are Pakistanis & Pakistani trained terrorijsts attacking them?” you are most probably a Joo working for CIA, RAA or Mossad out to defame Pakistan. On the other hand, the first thing that should come to any Batriotic Pakistani’s mind is “Whoa!! There is a place called Dagestan? And our moojahids know enough geography to go there and set off bums?” YES!! And this is precisely the reason why even though Yemen is increasingly showing botential to challenge this record, WE ARE STILL NO 1!! AK Phyrr in air!! Okay I got carried away and I digress. Where were we? My support for an article which articulates why Cashmere is a normal and legitimate explanation for using the State apparatus of Pakistan to terrorize the population of a neighbouring country by randomly killing innocent civilians. Going back to the list, look at the size of the Internashunal community that can help themselves by helping Pakistan help themselves to Cashmere!! Ofcourse, this will not solve *all* terrorijam and will leave a few countries behind. Like Denmark (Stop drawing cartoons you Kuffars!!), Switzerland (Build more Minarets!!), Norway (Stop giving out Nobel brizes to Chinese dissidents!!), US (FREE DAUGHTER OPH PAKISTAN AAFIA!!). But that is for a later analysis on how remaining terrorism can be tackled. Right now let us stay with supporting the low standards of conduct the State has set for itself _______________________________________________ PS> Several beepuls have pointed out inconsistencies and addishuns to this blog post and I am listing them here. A reader feels left out that Pakistan’s accomplishment in Thailand has been ignored. 400% abologies! Pakistan trained moojahids have spread Pakistan’s name far and wide in Thailand as well. A reader points out that Dagestan is a Russian province. Another reader says that Dagestan is not a country at all, but is probably a Joo kanspeerajy to defame Pakistan’s image and RAA, CIA and Mossad are probably partners in this kanspeerajy. I agree with both. Another reader points out that Pakistani moojahids going to Dagestan is 400% proof of the wholesome madrassa educashun preparing people with real world skills. Who said real-world subjects like Geography are not taught in madrassas hain? Another reader says that the internashunal community is obligated to help Pakistan and quotes one of my tweets “Pakistan is doing the whole world a favour by being Pakistan. Would you rather have your country be Pakistan hain?”