Afghanistan Reflections

Romair:

And

Pakistan due to its nuclear arsenal, and due to the fact that it is

the only Muslim country which has a military that can hold its own

against any country in the world, except China and USA.

China and the US are not muslim countries. Or did you mean that only China, Pakistan, and the US have militaries that can hold their own? Iif the latter, I would doubt that very much. Pakistan or for that matter China would hardly hold its own against a NATO attack. Not that its going to happen, but hypothetically speaking.

Rromair # 18

Good post. I have been reflecting upon the same thing. The terrorist profile does not match the Afghani Arab lifestyle. I agree that the real headquarters are probably in Egypt or Saudi Arabia. But both countries are US allies, therefore you can`t go and bomb them. The Taliban regime is isolated, and everyone hates them in any case, and therefore it becomes an easy target.

Getting into Afghanistan and finishing the Taliban will be the easy part. The hard part will be taking on Islamic Jihad, Hamas and Hezbollah. What will the US do about the extremists who operate in the bylanes of Algiers, Cairo, Damascus, and also the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. How do we take them out?

Reply Romair # 7

“The terrorists are from the two Arab states that the US considers to be its closest of allies. “

There’s a direct connection. The terrorists are from the two major Arab states which are most engaged with America and the global economy, where the resulting social dislocation is the most profound and where the indigenous consequences of America conducting business by buying off a repressive elite are becoming most apparent.

Agree?

Fuzair #12: Your comments about the Afghanistan situation is quite interesting. I am also begining to get a bit tired of all the flak Pakistan is catching. If it wasn`t for Pakistan, Afghanistan would have been run over by USSR. Pakistan has accepted the biggest refugee population, I believe anywhere in the world. It made quite a few wrong self-serving moves in Afghanistan, but it has helped a great deal also.

I don`t think that Afghanistan is the base of the recent WTC tragedy. The US media has publicised OBL so much, that everyone thinks he the main man. I do not agree.

No terrorist leaders who operate at international level, are going to come out on video. The true headquaters of this whole network is in Saudia Arabia and Egypt, in my opinion. If one looks at the profile of the WTC terrorists, they are not individuals who would be influenced by people sitting in Afghanistani caves. They are people who would be influenced by worldly-wise businessmen and cosmopolitan individuals in Saudi Arabia`s five star hotels. This is the type of poeple who are running this whole show.

If you look at the names of the terrorists, they are Arabic names from areas like Hijaz and Cairo (Saudis and Egyptians). The Saudi kingdom and the Egyptian leadership are probably sh/i/t scared at the moment. They are both civilian dictatorships (royals in Saudi Arabia, and Hosni Mubarak, an ex-Chief of Air Staff of Egypt). They are in a damned if you do, damned if you don`t situation.

People talk about religious extremissm in Pakistan. This is nothing in comparison to what is simmering under the surface in S.A. and Egypt (or India, for that matter). The Pakistan leaders like Fazl and Sami have no bite behind their bark. An Army Captain can go pick them up and put them in the slammer (try doing that to Altaf Hussain or Benazir). The moment Pakistan picks up economically, all their religious followers will get jobs, and their powerbase will be finished. And these guys at most target local areas. Saudi and Egyptian situation is completely different.

The US has stated it is going to target other areas after Afghanistan. I am wondering how they are going to target S.A. and Egypt, i.e. the only two Arab regimes, along with Jordan, who are allied with the USA? I think within ten to twenty years, the same thing is going to happen in S.A that happened in Iran. The royalty of 6,000 princes is going to go under, and Wahabism is going to take over. This will bring out the true face of the super-conservative Saudi Arabia. With Iran, S.A. and Iraq in the super-anti-US camp, Kuwait and UAE royalty won`t last too long in the Gulf. This is all the oil in the Middle East.

Palestinians hate Americans. And Jordan has a 65% Palestinian population. So Jordan and Palestine will be anti-US (assuming Abdullah is gone). Libyans et. al hate the USA. This leaves Egypt as the only safe haven for the US. However, as evident from the WTC tragedy, Egypt is the hotbed for recruiting terrorists.

This leaves one Muslim country in the area that is still somewhat moderate, despite the Samis and Fazls, i.e. good old Pakistan. Hence all the attention that Pakistan is currently getting. I think Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are now the two pivotal states in the Islamic world, as far as the US is concerned. If either of these goes to the, ``dark side,`` a crisis situation will develop for the West. Saudi Arabia due to the reasons described above. And Pakistan due to its nuclear arsenal, and due to the fact that it is the only Muslim country which has a military that can hold its own against any country in the world, except China and USA.

Musharraf, the wily Delhi-born Muhajir that he is, has made all the right moves, at the right time. The US is going to give him everything he wants for ten years. I think Shaukut Aziz is going to get a huge deal during his current visit to the US. By ten years time (hopefully) Pakistan will be on its feet, and all the street throwers in Quetta will have jobs and no time to throw stones. All the ill-informed Army haters (on Chowk and other places) will have seen a good face of the Army, and will stop their conspiracy theories. Musharraf had slowly started cleaning house in the Army, and has now accelerated the process. The only people who are going to get promoted now in the Army are the wine drinking, dining and dancing types like himself (this was already the case in the Air Force and Navy). The civilian Mullah bubble has been burst and exposed, and I think after the dust settles down, his new liberal Army leadreship is going to start changing Zia`s laws.

I am waiting anxiously to see what the US is going to do in Egypt and Saudi Arabia (I don`t think it can do much).

SameerJB #6: It is quite unfortunate to see people running around Pakistan attacking Pakistan`s current govt. and Pakistan`s buildings, for its handling of the current situation. It is even more unfortunate to see you criticizing the current govt., in such a sensitive situation, when people in Pakistan should be coming together. I think Musharraf and co. have handled things very well.

In my opinion, everyone in Pakistan has a vested interest. This includes politico-religious figures, various military leaderships, various supporters of politicians, etc. Each one is tooting his/her own horn. You dislike the military, plain and simple. Just like the religious leadership dislikes Musharraf, plain and simple. This is unfortunate, because people in such a state of mind, refuse to see what is good for Pakistan and what is bad. Any decision made by Musharraf will never appeal to you or the religious right (and to a great extent to the supporters of NS and BB), even if it is beneficial for Pakistan. The correct criteria for judging decisions should be how beneficial they are for Pakistan, not one`s like or dislike of the people making it.

``Musharraf has yet to answer the million dollar question as to why he scrapped the previous (NS-USA, with the promise of lifting sanctions against Pakistan) covert operation by 60 trained Pakistanis in order to kidnap or kill OBL``

This would have been a ridiculous operation, and I doubt the US would have lifted sanctions. If NS wanted to avoid sanctions, he should have not attempted to explode the, ``bumb.`` At the very least, he should not have put a missile replica on his desk, and in the intersections of Islamabad.

I have information from a friend of mine in the Army that an operation was actually attempted by American soldiers. He flew them into Afghanistan. According to him, all the Americans were killed. I a not sure whether I believe him, but he has never lied to me before.

Could you exactly explain how 60 people could get OBL? What would they have to do? How would they infiltrate into Afghanistan, and then get out? NS is not a military strategist, if you ask me. And why in the world should Pakistan risk 60 of its soldiers to do the dirty work for any other country? Are Pakistani soldiers expendable? Their job is to fight for Pakistan, not for the US. Would you have volunteered for such an operation? Shouldn`t the US risk its own soldiers? Would the US send its soldiers to fight in India for Pakistan?

``-the guy who who will happily sacrifice more than 500 soldiers in Kargill.``

Once again your blind hatred for your own military (quite unfortunate) is coming through. You cannot differentiate between good military leaders and bad ones. That is equivalent to racism, in my book. Should people hate all Punjabis because of Nawaz Sharf? Should people hate all Hindus, because of Advani?

A lot of the people who attained Shahadat, during the Kargil conflict, were around the same seniority as me. The strategic benefits of such an operation is a separate debate. I don`t hink Nawaz Sharif should have ordered it. It was a mistake. However, one thing I can tell you with quite a bit of certainity, the young officers of Pakistan who fought in this battle all blame Nawaz Sharif for sacrificing their colleagues. They do not blame Musharraf. In their opinion, either Nawaz Sharif should not have ordered the operation, or he should not have backed off, after so many Pakistanis had been killed, while achieving their objective.

I would like to encourage you, if for no other reason than the honor of the people who did died for Pakistan, to outline the correct facts about the feelings of the people who fight in these conflicts. I don`t think they would agree to you being their spokesperson.

One needs to look at decisions, not based on personal hatred and likes, but on what is beneficial for Pakistan. Pakistan has been thoroughly screwed by all leaderships (both military and civilian),in my lifetime. Each was worse than the other. You seem to completely disregard the faults of the feduals and corrupt businessmen who have ruled Pakistan. You only point out the military leaderships and the religious leaderships. Please be fair in your judgement. Bhuttos and Sharifs are definitely not angels.

For the first time, a leadership has come into power, which is honest and sincere. It is trying to do its best, within its limited experience and abilities, and resources, to make progress in Pakistan. It is the first one to take religious extremists head-on (the products of Z. Bhutto`s laws, Zia`s personality, BB`s corruption, and NS`s shariat bills). It has taken on the beaurecracy. It has taken on the politicians. It is now trying to clean house in the military, to remove the after-effects of Zia, Benazir and Nawaz Sharif`s indulgence into the internal affairs of the Army. It is attempting to negotiate anytime and at any place with India, to get a fair deal on Kashmir. How many Pakistani leaders have been able to go into the lion`s den in Agra, to put across Pakistan`s point of view, so professionally, that even the Indian press was impressed? It is the first one to get positive assesments from the IMF even before Sept. 11, etc.

I am not quite sure why you are so against the current forward looking govt., and such a strong supporter of poeple like Shahbaz Sharif, and Benazir (the icons of international corruption). Please read honest, upright people like Cowasjee, Ayaz Amir, Sethi, etc. to get your views about Musharraf and his govt. Not opportunists like Mushahid Hussain.

If the writer can criticize American foreign policy I am sure you can find flaws order of magnitude higher in internal and foreign policies of India, Pakistan, PLO, Saudi Arabia etc.

The writer is right that a line was crossed on September 11th.

I am sick of hearing Pakistanis complain about heroin, AK-47 culture in their cities. If the Pakistani government maintained strict controls over the activities of the Afghan refugees and rebel groups you would not be in this position. I need not remind anyone that military generals (not corrupt civillian politicians) who were running the show.

India backed LTTE in Sri Lanka. Tamilnadu was a base to Sri Lankan Tamil refugees and groups. Tamilnadu is fine and prosperous.

As far as Osama Bin Laden being a darling of the west, please spare me this nonsense. All the US aid to Afghan rebels were channeled through the ISI. Americans had no choice. It was Pakistani government that decided to back Islamic groups in Afghanistan over secular nationalists. You reap what you sow. No whining please.

The Afghan people have no reason to trust the Pakistanis. You milked USA in the name of Afghan War during the 80`s, financed the Taleban in the 90`s. Of course it remains to be seen what will happen during this decade.

sadna:

[A Mr. Popham from The Independent, UK asked Musharraf in (today`s) press conference why was the operation aborted. Musharraf replied something like `he had no knowledge that such an operation was planned by former Prime Minister and the former ISI chief. When he(Musharraf) came to know about the plan, he ended it because in his judgement, it had absolutely no chance of succeeding`.]

In his judgement what were the implications of Kargil operation? My feeling is that NS-US cooperation was through IB (intelligence Bureau) of Pakistan which is under civilian control and not part of military. I guess Musharraf claims to be smarter than all the US assets put into that operation when he says ``in my judgement, it had absolutely no chance of succeeding``. Sadna, Musharraf power is due to his position of COAS of army and not being smarter than all americans or Pakistanis or something else. Sure, one rises to power due to certain professional capabilites but near the top, it is civilian decision to promote any one of many to become COAS. Once out of military, their ``smartness`` disappears as you can notice among the writings of a large number of below average and sometime outright stupid articles in Pakistani newspapers by retired military officers.

Ras Siddiqui

Dear Mr. Siddiqui:

For the second time in it`s History, Pakistan has a leadership that has in mind the supreme interests of the Pakistani nation.

Situations change, policies change, national interest remain supreme. Afghanistan`s future is now recognized as being one in which it`s partnership with Pakistan, can lead it to unity and prosperity and brotherhood. These are in the national interest of Pakistan and Afghanistan. Perhaps, now, Indians will also reject the way of confrontation and negation and want to seek a negotiated settlement of the outstanding dispute, keeping in mind the will of the Captive kashmiri.

Dear Ras Siddiqui,

Besides to ``quit fighting and to learn the benefits of trade and commerce`` Pakistan and other Islamic countries (who have a state religion) need to be secular, allowing and promoting plural societies.

NotAMullah

The following is a cut`n`paste from another board but, what the heck, I didn`t feel like typing it in again. Before we get carried away with all this ``poor Afghans`` nonsense and its all Pakistan`s fault for supporting the Taliban or similar tripe, lets not forget that the Afghan obscurants did it to themselves. Don`t forget, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar is a high ranking member of the Northern Alliance and he is as bad as Mullah Omar when it comes to wanting to revert back to the 7th century CE. The only halfway decent Afghan `resistance` fighter was Masud and he started life as whacko as any Taliban obscurantist. The difference was that Masud discarded most of his stupid ideological baggage when he realized you couldn`t actually run a society that way.

Pakistan and the US only helped the Afghans in committing suicide. Sure, we helped the Mujahideen and later on the Taliban and without us the PDPA or the Northern Alliance would still be in charge of Kabul but we couldn`t have done it if the Afghans did not want to destroy themselves and whatever passes for civilized society there. Don`t forget, many of the anti-US rioters in Pakistan now are Afghan refugees.

Whats that shair?

Kuch hamay bhi marnay ka showk tha,
Kuch shehr key loag bhi zalim thay.

Regards.

OK, end of diatribe. Here`s my earlier post.

The coup in 1978 was really a palace coup, done without the knowledge or approval of the USSR, since Daoud Shah had been installed in 1973 with the help of the Afghan Communist Party (either the Parcham or the Khalq faction, I can never keep them straight). Against Soviet advice, who based it on their experience in Central Asia, the Parchamis (I think that was the faction in charge: Hafizullah Amin and Noor Mohammed Taraki, the man he murdered later on) insisted on a series of very radical reforms that insured a widespread rebellion against the central government. What were these reforms? Some truly unIslamic ones:

1 Abolition of the Islamic Waqfs.
2 Compulsory female education.
3 Stopping the payment of ``stipends`` (i.e., bribes) to the various tribal maliks and assorted pirs, faqirs and other religious leaders.
4 Radical land reforms to give land to the tillers.

It is only AFTER these reforms had been announced that you have mass uprisings against the Communist government. Prior to this, the common Afghan or his malik could not have cared less who ruled in Kabul as long as the maliks were paid off and left alone.

Incidentally, this is not the first time that the Afghans have thrown out a progressive government: Amanullah Khan was removed in the interwar period when he attempted to implement fairly radical, for the time, reforms.

BTW, the Afghan resistance was on its last legs and the Soviets had almost pacified the country by the mid-1980s when the Americans decided to ship Stingers to the Mujahideen. This ended Russian air superiority and convinced them that the war was unwinnable with the current extremely low level of Russian troop strenght: approx. 115,000, down considerably from the troop level immediately after the Russian invasion. In contrast, the Americans in Vietnam in 1968-9 had just over 550,000 soldiers (not counting the Army of the Republic of Vietnam and 200,000 Montagnard Highlanders armed, trained and commanded directly by the CIA).

In some ways, the Afghan Communist rulers were the only halfway decent government the Afghan people have had, or are likely to have, for a very long time. Although Hafizullah Amin and Noor Mohammed Taraki were not particularly nice people (the murder of Daoud Shah and his entire family, as well as the ruthless use of the secret police against suspected opponents was much worse than anything done by Daoud Shah, himself no angel), they at least had the aim to move Afghanistan out of barbarism. Under them, the average Afghan woman had for the first time some hope of living a real life and escaping from the prison of traditional Afghan society.

Mr Ras Siddiqui

what are your opinions on Musharraf regime oppressing the Pakistani masses. Riots breaking out in clashes with the cops and armed forces everywhere. These are all indications of a ``freedom struggle`` against the oppressive Pakistani regime aren`t they ?

Please do write something on this ``indigenous freedom struggle`` against the armed forces and Police of Pakistan.

Also where is the ``proof`` that the US has attacked Afghanistan. All the planes came from Pakistan. I repeat ``where is the proof ?``

Sameer #6
``Musharraf has yet to answer the million dollar question as to why he scrapped the previous (NS-USA, with the promise of lifting sanctions against Pakistan) covert operation by 60 trained Pakistanis in order to kidnap or kill OB``

A Mr. Popham from The Independent, UK asked Musharraf in (today`s) press conference why was the operation aborted. Musharraf replied something like `he had no knowledge that such an operation was planned by former Prime Minister and the former ISI chief. When he(Musharraf) came to know about the plan, he ended it because in his judgement, it had absolutely no chance of succeeding`.

Re: Sameer

``BJP is going to stay in power in India for several more years and not goning to turn against USA for any reason.``

Hmm..not sure about the latter. The BJP can be very petulant ... witness Jaswant Singh`s recent tactics in DC and GoI`s reception of Tony Blair.

India takes exception to Pak stand on terrorism





NEW DELHI: Dismissing Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf`s description of militancy in Jammu and Kashmir as ``freedom struggle``, India on Monday asserted that it would resolutely oppose cross-border terrorism being fomented from across the borders.

``It is not a freedom struggle. Jammu and Kashmir is an integral and inalienable part of India``, an external affairs ministry spokesperson said when asked about Musharraf`s remarks at press conference in Islamabad this morning.

``Cross-border terrorism and militancy is being fomented by a neighbouring country. We resolutely oppose it``, she said.

Rejecting Musharraf`s charge that India was deriving political mileage from the evolving situation in the wake of the September 11 terrorist strikes in the US, she said, ``we have not sought to compound Pakistan`s difficulties``.

India, she said, has been defending its concerns and at no time sought to complicate the situation in that country.

India has made it clear that terrorism cannot be tackled in a piece-meal manner and stressed that it should be dealt with globally in a comprehensive way.

Asked about the Musharraf`s sudden decision to remove ISI chief, the spokesperson said she would not like to comment on an internal issue of Pakistan.

New Delhi is well aware of the role of certain Pakistani agencies in the promotion of cross-border terrorism in J and K and other parts. It remained to be seen how the situation evolved and whether it would have a salutary effect in curbing the menace, she said.

There are few interesting factors related to the terrorist acts of Sept. 11:

If one looks at the names of the hijackers, most of them have Saudi and Egyptian names. They are not from Afghanistan, or Iraq, or Palestine or Iran. They are also middle class to upper-middle class Arabs. They are educated, with many obtaining higher education. And both Saudi Arabia and Egypt have not agreed to openly support the US with military facilities.

This must have put the US in a quagmire. The terrorists are from the two Arab states that the US considers to be its closest of allies.

Taliban were created during BB reign in Pakistan although it can be arfued that she was a puppet prime minister with respect to Afghan policy. Her government and particularly her interior minister Naseer Ullah Babar was competely on board with military in creating Taliban. From a minor role of protecting trade trucks passing through Kandhar area, they became monster once Pakistan opened the military storage at Spin Boldak near Pakistan border, in Afghanistan that was under the control of ISI. Later on, BB tried to bring moderate Islamic elements into Taliban by trying to make an alliance between Taliban and Herat governor Ismail Khan. Ismail Khan was of the calibre of Ahmed Shah Masood during war against USSR and was running Herat most effectively, progressively and pragmetically after the withdrawal of Russian troops from Afghanistan. She arranged a meeting with him in Turkeministan capital and rumor had it that he agreed but wanted strong presence in the Afghan affairs. ISI shot down that idea because they calculated to win Afghanistan without him. Herat was later lost to Taliban and Ismail Khan arrested but couple of years ago, he escaped from Taliban prison by bribing some taliban guards.

ISI helped Taliban through buying local tribal chiefs and commanders from drug money. Pakistan was given practically free hand in choosing Afghan leadership since US and CIA started supporting anti-USSR campaign. They first chose Gulbuddin Hekmatyar and later Taliban. Having free hand to control Afghan leadership was once in a long time opportunity that was wasted by Pakistan military. Pakistan could have bought much better strategic depth if military leadership was smart. The inept leadership of military, opportunity to make a killing from drug trade and tribal/ ethnic loyalties of Pashtun officers combined to create Taliban-almost a criminal enterprise. Musharrah went too far in allowing to go people from Indian hijacking go scot free and one of them, Maulana Azhar, was supported to set up another terrorist organization while other is alleged to have been involved in WTC bombing by sending money to one of the hijacker. Musharraf has yet to answer the million dollar question as to why he scrapped the previous (NS-USA, with the promise of lifting sanctions against Pakistan) covert operation by 60 trained Pakistanis in order to kidnap or kill OBL-the guy who who will happily sacrifice more than 500 soldiers in Kargill.

The military leadership is at it best in conquering Islamabad which they have done repeatedly. They think themselves to be most loyal and smartest of Pakistanis. As the high command of the largest and most expensive institution in Pakistan, they have given only headaches to the people of Pakistan. Their policies have led Pakistan to a highly volatile situation where one more stupid move would have been fatal. Then, there are Pakistanis who think that by replacing couple of generals, the high command will become sharpest and smartest. They will have the same mindset as before, to safeguard their own interests. They are hoping that Pakistan will be given another free hand to choose the next Afghanistan government after the current crisis. There is no chance for that. Pakistan is much less important in the current crisis with Tajikistan and Uzbekistan fully on board with US-Britain. They would like to have say in the post-crisis Afghanistan also and they will have the backing of US, Russia and Britain. Once Pakistan has used their trump card of sharing intelligence about Taliban, its hand is weak now. All Pakistan can do now is pray to god for a seat, alongwith northern alliance, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Russia, US and Britain after crisis is over.

Pakistan will have to end support of terrorist activities in Kashmir with a promise for sumpathetic consideration by IMF and WB. Pakistan will have to make peace with India, with or without Kashmir solution. BJP is going to stay in power in India for several more years and not goning to turn against USA for any reason. From now on, the pressure will be on Musharraf to yield on terrorism in Kashmir. The importance of Pakistan in US plans regarding Afghanistan seems to be much less than previously thought. The first area to be freed from Taliban control and thus providing a foothold for US special military units will be in the west and north of Afghanistan-away from Pakistani border, decreasing the reliance on Pakistan.