Lighting The Nuclear Fire

An Indian summer

By Edward Luce

Published: July 1 2002 20:59 | Last Updated: July 1 2002 20:59





American diplomacy has averted the imminent threat of war between India and Pakistan. But senior members of the Bush administration know that it is only a matter of time before military tensions flare up again between the two nuclear-armed neighbours.

The prospects of renewed tension were underlined at the weekend with the appointment of L. K Advani as India`s deputy prime minister. Although Mr Advani was already seen as the successor to Atal Behari Vajpayee, the prime minister, his new title is a timely reminder of the hardline, anti-Pakistani elements that surround the ageing - and increasingly frail - prime minister.

``It might be three months, it might be nine months, but we all know that India and Pakistan will go back to the brink again,`` says a senior US official in Washington. ``Maybe next time they will go over the brink.``

Until now, the US has consistently respected India`s adamant refusal of third-party mediation on its core dispute with Pakistan over the divided state of Kashmir. But having sweated through the latest and most intense bout of nuclear brinksmanship, the US and its allies are quietly revising their long-held position.

http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1025534365666&p=1012571727282

Kashmir: From earthly paradise to potential Armageddon

The Arizona Republic

http://www.arizonarepublic.com/opinions/articles/0618thomas18.html

June 18, 2002

Just before the sun dipped below the horizon, it touched the surface of Dal Lake, turning it into molten gold.

A fragrant breeze rolled off the pavilions and cascading waterfalls of the mountaintop Hanging Gardens of Kashmir and ruffled the placid surface, releasing a million shards of light and sending a ripple through the floating fields of lotus blossoms.

No wonder Mughal Emperor Jahangir had said, ``If there is paradise on Earth it is this, it is this, it is this.``

I remember the scene as if it was yesterday. I was 16 and Kashmir was a pristine paradise. Today it is an armed camp, teetering on the brink of nuclear war with roadblocks, rumbling army trucks, Indian commandos in black, suicide bombers, a dying economy and shell-shocked civilians. How did paradise turn into potential Armageddon?

Pakistan and India have fought three wars over the disputed territory of Kashmir, each holding their positions at the Line of Control.

Today a fourth war - perhaps even a nuclear war - seems to be looming large. Apart from the damage it would do to the two countries (estimates range from 12 million dead from a direct hit, to a 100 million in peripheral damage from fires, starvation and disease) it would break the international taboo of using weapons of mass destruction. Ideally these are only a deterrent, not weapons of choice.

It is estimated that India has about 25 nuclear weapons and that Pakistan has about half that many. This imbalance is inherently dangerous; military strategists predict that the losing side in a conventional war would be tempted to use nuclear weapons to reverse the advantage.

The two countries have been fighting over Kashmir since 1947, when India achieved freedom from British rule and the new state of Pakistan was formed from parts of India. The Hindu maharaja of Kashmir opted at the time to sign an instrument of accession to join the Indian Union - though the population of Kashmir was predominantly Muslim - and not Pakistan. Ever since, a relentless campaign to ``liberate`` Kashmir from India has been waged from across the Indian border.

Janak Singh, a native of Kashmir and a former bureau chief of the Times of India, says, ``Extremist organizations operating under the guidance of Pakistan`s intelligence agency, the ISI, are engaged in staging relentless acts of violence all over India. Trained militants continually cross over the Line of Control into Jammu and Kashmir.``

In winter 2000 I met with the Pakistani high commissioner to India. While waiting in his New Delhi embassy, I noticed a number of pro-Islamic, anti-Indian brochures neatly stacked on a shelf.

I asked, ``Does Pakistan support Muslim militants operating in India?`` ``No, no, that is just Indian propaganda,`` the commissioner replied. When I indicated the brochures, he said, ``Oh, they (fundamentalists) just leave those here.``

According to Singh, intelligence sources reveal that there are about 30,000 Pakistani operatives in India. It is widely known that in the past the ISI has had a cozy relationship with Muslim fundamentalists, but it now seeks to distance itself from the stigma of terrorism.

About 400,000 Hindus have been driven out of Kashmir, according to the Kashmiri Overseas Association USA. They wait for someone to restore peace to Kashmir, so they can return to their ``Paradise on Earth`` as the destitute Muslim population of Kashmir awaits the same ephemeral peace.

Mantoshe Singh Devji is a Phoenix writer whose new book is ``The Mad Messiah - Osama bin Laden, and the Seeds of Terror.`` She was born in Lahore, which is now Pakistan, and is of Indian origin. She has lived in the United States for 35 years.

re: akash

{Do some skirt chasing in Baltics and tell us the truth.}

...i`m going for the russian art and opera scene...

RSaxena

And learn some Russian boy... I mean not the whole language but some sweet nothings to tell Russian gals,in case you are going. I guess that will be in addition to your knowledge of English,Spanish and Hindi.

RSaxena

``no one goes to baltics for work man...unless you`re russian mafia...u go there for fun :)...

``

I didn`t know about mafia ;). But Russian girls are very cute. I have heard they are more caring and understanding than American women, kinda mixture of Indian values and American looks. Do some skirt chasing in Baltics and tell us the truth.

re: akash

{Baltics etc etc on a regular basis. }

...no one goes to baltics for work man...unless you`re russian mafia...u go there for fun :)...

Can Pakistan`s chief thwart Islamic radicals?

Friday`s bombing in Karachi underscores the difficulty in reining in the militants.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0617/p07s02-wosc.html

By Jawad Naeem | Special to The Christian Science Monitor

ISLAMABAD – President Pervez Musharraf is taking steps to halt two decades of Pakistani military support for Islamic militants.

But it`s clearly an uphill effort. On Friday, a car bomb exploded outside the US consulate in Karachi, the fourth attack against foreigners in Pakistan since January. The attack underscores concerns among Pakistani analysts about General Musharraf`s ability to sustain his commitment to rein in Islamic militants, not just those fighting India in Kashmir, but elsewhere in the country.



A previously unknown group, Al Qanoon (The Law) claimed responsibility for Friday`s attack, which it said was the start of a holy war against the US and its ``puppet ally.``

``It sounds a warning to the Pakistani government as well [as to the US], as we are an ally of the international coalition against terrorism,`` said Pakistan`s Brigadier Mukhtar Sheikh.

In recent weeks, Musharraf has managed to slow down the infiltration of militant groups heading into Indian Kashmir – thereby avoiding a war with its larger neighbor and nuclear rival. But yesterday, 23 people died in Kashmir – most of them civilians and Islamic militants – in separate attacks.

``Opinion is split among the [Pakistani] intelligence corps whether to wash their hands permanently of the freedom fighter outfits or to put a temporary lid on their activities to appease international opinion,`` says one Pakistani intelligence source, who asked his name not be used.

Those within the Pakistan military favoring a temporary freeze contend militants may be needed again if the international community fails to persuade India to negotiate with Pakistan and Kashmiris to reach a political solution to the long-running dispute, which remains on the agenda of the UN Security Council.

``There is, however, a definite order from the military hierarchy to put the militant groups on a tight leash not only because of external considerations but also for the sake of internal peace and stability,`` the source says.

Musharraf is attempting to reverse more than a decade of institutional and public support.

Intelligence sources estimate between 3,000 to 5,000 motivated hard-core fighters are aligned with about a dozen Islamic groups, which have thrived on donations from the public as well as support from the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).

Many of the fighters are veterans of Afghan jihad (holy war) that ended in 1989 with the defeat of the former Soviet Union. Others were trained in camps set up by the jihadi groups inside Pakistan and in Islamabad-controlled part of Kashmir.

When military ruler Pervez Musharraf joined the US-led war on terrorism after Sept. 11 and abandoned the Afghan Taliban, India skillfully exploited the situation to bring international pressure on Pakistan.

In January, about a month after India massed troops on the borders on the heels of a terrorist attack on the parliament in New Delhi, President Musharraf banned the two main militant groups blamed by New Delhi for the assault.

Lashkar-I-Tayyaba (Army of the Pure) and Jaish-e-Mohammad (Army of Prophet Mohammad) were outlawed along with three other groups.

The Lashkar was founded by Hafiz Mohammad Saeed, a professor of Islamic studies at Pakistan`s prestigious University of Engineering and Technology in Lahore. He fought against the Soviets in Afghanistan, and had close links with wealthy Saudis, who funded his mission generously.

Another Pakistani Islamic scholar Maulana Masood Azhar, who spent years in jail in India, founded the Jaish in April 2000 after New Delhi freed him in a swap for hostages of an Indian airliner hijacked to Afghanistan in December 1999.

The dusty town of Muridke, near Lahore, was the headquarters of the Lashkar. Annual jihad gatherings attended by tens of thousands of followers were held there for recruitment purposes.

After the January ban, the Pakistani government closed Muridke camp and subsidiary offices of the Lashkar and other groups in the country.

But Pakistani intelligentsia still complain that the US spawned the jihadi culture with dollars, arms, and propaganda to defeat the Soviets in Afghanistan.

``When the Americans abandoned the jihadi groups they had created, the ISI started channeling the trained and indoctrinated manpower into Kashmir for its objectives,`` says a pro-jihadi leader, speaking on condition of anonymity.

And Musharraf has repeatedly vowed that, ``No Pakistani can even think of abandoning the Kashmir cause,`` to allay fears that his regime was preparing a deal with India over Kashmir.

Political analyst Mohammad Afzal Niazi says the Musharraf government can achieve ``a degree of success`` on its pledge to stop infiltration across the Line of Control in Kashmir. ``But no government in Pakistan can completely halt cross-border movement in Kashmir, which is one of the most difficult terrains in the world and where people on both sides do not accept the division of their homeland.``

Still, in a sign that tensions on the India-Pakistan border may be easing, Indian Army officials said yesterday that soldiers are being allowed to go on leave for the first time since December.

An Honest Broker`s Reward

By Jim Hoagland

Sunday, June 16, 2002; Page B07

American diplomacy centered on a single word has led to a fragile truce between India and Pakistan. By persuading Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf to add the word ``permanently`` to his promises to stop aiding cross-border terrorism against India, the United States has averted immediate catastrophe and may have opened the way for a strategic realignment in Asia.

Defining precisely what permanently means -- which is an indirect way of establishing the guarantees India needs to relax its still-threatening mobilization of troops and weapons -- is a work in progress. But Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage has initially coaxed enough specifics out of Musharraf about dismantling terror camps in Kashmir to allow the two adversaries to move back from the brink.

Effective diplomacy, if belated. A clearer and more insistent engagement by Washington in March or April to get Musharraf to stop double-dealing on terrorism might have averted the crisis altogether. And for the truce to hold and lead to greater reductions in tension, the United States must remain deeply engaged in the region.

But there is an existential quality to the new commitments Musharraf has given. If he follows through, the general will abandon more than the grisly tactic of murder by proxy. He will sacrifice a fundamental lie that he and his nation have told themselves about Kashmir since he seized power in October 1999.

The lie was that terrorism in Kashmir would significantly affect the outcome of Pakistan`s multiple disputes with India. Pakistan has no other visible hope of getting its larger, more powerful and prosperous neighbor to end its control over two-thirds of Muslim-majority Kashmir. So Musharraf has pretended that he had an answer -- one written in the blood of the Indian occupation force -- and Pakistanis pretended to believe it.

But terrorism against a billion people lacks the force of terrorism against a few million Israelis. Nor does Kashmir resemble Jerusalem as a coveted, cherished goal. What is important to both India and Pakistan is that the other not have Kashmir. Their national identities are bound up in denying possession of it to the enemy. This is a conflict even more artificial -- therefore more unyielding to reason, and savage -- than most such struggles.

Without the myth of an effective terror war, Pakistan accepts, at least implicitly, a status quo that will gradually become the final outcome: an international frontier along the present line of control in Kashmir.

Armitage did not have to dwell on the immediate risks the Pakistani general faced when they met in Islamabad on June 6. The United States had already told Musharraf it would not be able to stop the Indians from attacking if he offered no movement. Washington would not come to his aid if that happened. And China, pursuing better relations with India, had also let Pakistan know it would not intervene if war came.

Against this bleak horizon Musharraf took up the U.S. suggestion that a pledge to halt permanently the infiltration that has been episodic over the past six months was the only way to move the Indians off war footing. The change was announced that day not in Islamabad or in New Delhi but in Washington, as if to emphasize the American role in guaranteeing the promise.

The essential new element is Musharraf`s undertaking to close down the 50 to 60 terrorism ``camps`` the Indians have identified in Kashmir. These range from a collection of a few tents in fields to well-established urban neighborhoods that terrorists control. But Musharraf is now committed to ripping out the plumbing of the terror network created by his intelligence services.

India has offered a few immediate symbolic tension-reducing gestures in response, with more to come in July and then troop reductions in Kashmir if local elections there in October proceed peacefully. All this is contingent on Musharraf`s keeping his word, and surviving an expected Islamic fundamentalist backlash at home.

There is much to worry about in the short term. But India`s acceptance of America`s role as an honest broker in this crisis is a strategic shift worth developing.

Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee seemingly overruled his hawks not because he believed Musharraf but because he believed George W. Bush. There is now an opportunity to use this crisis to reverse decades of mutual mistrust between Washington and New Delhi, which had feared Bush was resuming the U.S. ``tilt`` toward Pakistan that prevailed during the Cold War. That is the big picture the Bush administration must keep in view.

http://www.sulekha.com/redirectnh.asp?cid=211120

Fawad

``another pluce about goa is thats its CHEAPER i know this hot ass israeli chick whose been there

i heard abiza is so expensive anyway its too expensive for a student ``

You get your money`s worth in Iibiza. Besides, u make up in airfare. From the states, a ticket to Barcelona costs half that of a ticket to India. From Barcelona, u can get a ferry to Ibiza for 20 USD.

Goa is great, but only in comparison to rest of India. Cyprus and Ibiza are much better in Europe, and Thailand has some great resorts as well, less prudish too. Thai women are way friendlier than Indian..and the food is cheaper...Lobster in Goa will cost you easy $6 U.S. Thailand, you get it for 2 dollars.

Al Qaeda Gathering Strength in Pakistan

Asia: Operatives are hiding in cities, with support from local extremists. The nation is the terrorists` new hub, U.S. officials say.

Los Angeles Times



http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/la-000042372jun16.story?null



By BOB DROGIN, JOSH MEYER and ERIC LICHTBLAU, TIMES STAFF WRITERS

WASHINGTON -- Hundreds of Al Qaeda terrorist operatives are hiding in Pakistan`s cities after forming or renewing alliances with local Muslim extremist networks that have helped provide safe houses for communications, training and logistics, U.S. officials say.

The result, they fear, is that America`s closest ally in Central Asia has in effect replaced Afghanistan as a command-and-control center for at least some of the battered remnants of Osama bin Laden`s terrorist army.

``They don`t operate with impunity there like they did in Afghanistan,`` a U.S. intelligence official said. ``But they have lots of supporters, and it`s easy for them to blend in.`` A Justice Department official agreed, saying Al Qaeda members appear to have gone ``wherever they want`` in Pakistan`s teeming cities.

``They`re hiding in plain sight,`` he said.

Brian Jenkins, a terrorism expert at the Rand Corp. think tank in Santa Monica, says Bin Laden might have viewed Pakistan as part of a ``business continuity plan to ensure survival of leadership, financing, communications and so on`` in case Al Qaeda lost its sanctuary in Afghanistan.

Authorities say that Al Qaeda has made similar efforts to regroup by merging with local Muslim extremist groups in Africa, the Middle East and Southeast Asia. These makeshift alliances are more decentralized than the network long directed by Bin Laden, officials say, and thus might be more difficult for outsiders to penetrate.

Since last fall, the United States and its allies say they have foiled more than a dozen terrorist plots around the world and arrested more than 2,400 suspects in nearly 90 countries.

But more than half of Al Qaeda`s known leaders remain at large, including several linked to the Sept. 11 assaults and other major attacks. Officials are especially eager to catch Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, an Al Qaeda operative linked to almost every attack against the United States since the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993.

U.S. intelligence analysts still believe that Bin Laden and his top aides have found refuge somewhere along Pakistan`s long and lawless border with Afghanistan. Broad pockets of local sympathizers are said to exist in the semiautonomous tribal areas of Baluchistan and North-West Frontier Province.

But U.S. and Pakistani officials now estimate that hundreds more Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters who fled the war in Afghanistan have disappeared into Pakistan. Many are thought to have linked up with like-minded local groups opposed to secular Muslim regimes and to the Western powers that support them.

Backers Mount Attacks

Al Qaeda supporters appear to have been responsible for at least two suicide attacks on Westerners in Pakistani cities this year, U.S. officials say. Al Qaeda leaders and followers have been arrested or tracked in nearly every major Pakistani city, including Karachi in the south, Lahore and Faisalabad in the east, Peshawar in the west, and Rawalpindi and Islamabad, the capital, in the north.

In some cases, U.S. officials say, Pakistani militants and even some members of the government`s Inter-Services Intelligence agency, known as the ISI, have openly supported Al Qaeda and have used an informal underground railroad to help fleeing terrorists.

``The ISI is filled with extremists, and I don`t think they`re trying very hard to find these people,`` said a recently retired U.S. counter-terrorism official who is familiar with the manhunt. ``In fact, they`re actively trying to hide them.``

Another U.S. official downplayed ISI`s role, citing recent intelligence reports. But ``that doesn`t rule out the possibility that there are still links between rogue elements of ISI and Al Qaeda,`` he said.

Al Qaeda`s presence in Pakistan poses a growing danger and dilemma for both Washington and Islamabad.

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, who visited Pakistan last week, and other U.S. officials have offered strong public support for President Pervez Musharraf`s military regime, which has provided airstrips, bases, fuel, intelligence and other critical help to U.S. forces.

Privately, however, many U.S. officials are increasingly voicing concerns that Musharraf`s crackdown on local terrorist groups this year has largely failed. Several banned groups have morphed or spawned virulent offshoots that have launched several attacks against Westerners this year. Authorities haven`t solved Friday`s car bombing outside the U.S. Consulate in Karachi, which killed at least 11 Pakistanis and wounded dozens more. A previously unknown group has claimed responsibility, but U.S. officials said the FBI is investigating whether Al Qaeda might be linked to the attack.

U.S. intelligence officials now suspect that groups linked to Al Qaeda were responsible for a May 8 bus bombing in Karachi that killed 11 French engineers and a March 17 grenade attack in Islamabad that killed four Protestant International Church congregants, including a U.S. Embassy employee and her daughter.

The arrest last month of an American-born alleged Al Qaeda operative, Jose Padilla, after he flew to Chicago on what authorities called a scouting mission for a possible radioactive bomb attack, suggested just how widespread Al Qaeda may have become.

U.S. officials say that Padilla, who used the Muslim name Abdullah al Muhajir, studied bomb-making early this year at an Al Qaeda safe house in Lahore, met with senior Al Qaeda officials in March at another safe house in Karachi and traveled elsewhere in the country. Pakistani police arrested Padilla`s alleged accomplice in Rawalpindi.

Although Padilla`s role was not known at the time, U.S. and Pakistani officials raided the Lahore safe house where he had stayed as well as suspected Al Qaeda compounds in several other cities March 28. Abu Zubeida, Al Qaeda`s operations chief, and several of his senior aides were captured after a shootout that night at a house in Faisalabad.

US. authorities say Abu Zubeida approved Padilla`s proposed ``dirty bomb`` plot at a meeting in December in Afghanistan and later traveled with him in Pakistan. Abu Zubeida, U.S. officials say, had been responsible for rebuilding the Al Qaeda network inside Pakistan before his capture.

A senior intelligence official said Al Qaeda ``already had a presence`` in Pakistan ``so they don`t require other groups`` for operations.

``They have always had loose alliances with fellow travelers with similar goals and motives,`` this official added. ``The memberships are very loose. People go back and forth from one group to the other.``

*

Group`s Reach Spreads

Arrests elsewhere also point to the terrorist group`s spread. Saudi Arabia acknowledged Saturday that three men arrested in Morocco on suspicion of planning attacks on U.S. and British ships in the Strait of Gibraltar are Saudi citizens. Morocco said they claim to be Al Qaeda operatives. The attacks would have been similar to the suicide bombing of the U.S. destroyer Cole in Yemen--an operation also linked to Al Qaeda.

As for Pakistan, the State Department, in its annual report on global terrorism issued last month, said Islamabad had ``rendered unprecedented levels of cooperation to support the war on terrorism.`` The report noted that Islamabad broke ties with the Taliban regime in Afghanistan after Sept. 11, froze hundreds of thousands of dollars in suspected terrorist assets and moved to bring radical Muslim schools that served as ``breeding grounds for terrorists`` into the mainstream educational system.

Musharraf`s government also outlawed several terrorist groups and detained more than 2,000 domestic ``extremists,`` the report said. But most have now been released and might be active again.

Questions remain, the State Department warned, about whether ``Musharraf`s `get tough` policy with local militants and his stated pledge to oppose terrorism anywhere will be fully implemented and sustained.``

Part of the problem is Pakistan`s history of covert support and overt tolerance for Muslim extremist groups, starting with the Taliban.

Peter Tomsen, U.S. special envoy for Afghanistan from 1989 to 1992, said the ISI provided the ``weapons, resources and intelligence`` to the Taliban as the Islamic movement rose to power, and then was ``intimately involved`` as the Talibs forged ties with Al Qaeda.

On its other border, Pakistan provided similar support for years to Muslim zealots fighting to oust India from the disputed territory of Kashmir. Terrorist attacks against civilians in Kashmir and in India brought the two nuclear armed rivals to the brink of war in recent weeks, but the crisis eased after Musharraf moved to stop Pakistani militants from crossing into the Indian-held portion of Kashmir.

Until recently, however, little attention was paid to other Pakistani terrorist groups that share Bin Laden`s doctrinaire view of Islam and his hatred of the West. Many attended Al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan, or received arms and other support from Bin Laden, even if they didn`t formally join Al Qaeda. The contacts apparently paid off after Sept. 11.

A Pakistani official said his government estimates that at least several hundred Al Qaeda fighters slipped into Pakistan`s 10 tribal territories--mostly in the so-called Pushtun Belt that runs from Quetta to north of Peshawar--last winter. But they were exposed to U.S. satellites and other forces in the open desert, he said, and the cities seemed far safer.

Many had money to buy vehicles, supplies and guides from local warlords, this official said. And many, he said, reached out to a broad underground network of Bin Laden sympathizers and ``fellow travelers,`` mostly urban Pakistani militants.

``The network is there. You have religious groups that were sanctioned for years that no one was shutting down and are operating freely,`` the Pakistani official said. ``They are providing them with sanctuary.... It is an ongoing problem. We are cracking down on them, but they are still out there.``

Two Pakistani groups in particular--Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed--have long espoused the jihad cause against non-Muslims. They now appear to have provided haven or other assistance to Al Qaeda terrorists, the official said.

Authorities say Lashkar-e-Taiba was affiliated with the safe house in Faisalabad where Abu Zubeida and his top aides were arrested. And Jaish-e-Mohammed was linked to the January kidnapping and, later, beheading of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl in Karachi.

The State Department labeled both groups as foreign terrorist organizations in December, empowering Washington to freeze any of the groups` assets in the United States and to urge other nations to block their funds.

*

`Very Worrisome` Trend

A former Clinton administration counter-terrorism official said Pakistan`s increasing tangle of terrorist groups and their spinoffs is ``very worrisome.``

``The general turmoil has made it much more attractive for all jihadists in the region to go after American targets,`` he said. The long-range danger is that local Muslim militants backed by Al Qaeda could destabilize Pakistan, overthrow the government and set a dangerous new course for the nation.

``It is entirely within the realms of possibility that Pakistan could end up with an Islamic leadership that is a lot less sympathetic to the United States,`` he said.

Tashbih Sayyed, the Pakistani-born editor of Pakistan Today, published in Southern California, said the war in Afghanistan only ``destroyed an outpost`` of terrorism. ``The main infrastructure remained intact,`` he said. And Pakistan, he warned, ``is kind of a meeting place now for all the radical forces in the world.``

Yaar Saxena, how come you have been to so many parts of the world. R U an overseas consultant in some top shot firm or something. I would love to have this kind of job in which you get to go to Scandinavia, Baltics etc etc on a regular basis.

re harpreet

ur from london tons of pakistani girls dont know why u need to go to lahore( pakistani girls in nyc tend to be ..........id rather not say )

i like any kind of girl who looks pretty to be honest .....indian sikh girl particurally attractive ill make a deal with you ill find you a nice, hot paki girl u find me a nice, hot indian sikh girl ?

War and terrorism

South Asia’s nuclear winter

May 28th 2002

From The Economist Global Agenda

http://www.economist.com/agenda/displaystory.cfm?story_id=1153356

India and Pakistan do not have vast nuclear arsenals, but if a conflict over Kashmir did spiral out of control, the destruction from even a limited nuclear exchange could be enormous. Millions would die instantly, and millions more as services collapse and disease and famine spread. All of Asia would be affected

THREE months ago, the directors of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists moved the minute hand of their “Doomsday Clock” from nine minutes to midnight to just seven minutes to, in order to reflect the increased threat of nuclear war. The group, which was founded by scientists who had worked on the first atomic bombs in the second world war, listed the continuing crisis between India and Pakistan over the disputed region of Kashmir as one of their concerns. While all experts agree that the risk of nuclear war has increased in the subcontinent, there is little consensus about what the exact effects would be—except that it would reach nightmare proportions.

Publicly, at least, there are few firm figures on the numbers of nuclear weapons which India and Pakistan can deploy, let alone their capabilities. The atomic scientists estimate that India has about 30-35 nuclear warheads, which is fewer than Pakistan. Some estimates have put the numbers higher: up to 200-250 warheads in India and around 150 in Pakistan. Some American experts say India has around 60 nuclear warheads and Pakistan about 40.

Apart from secrecy, one reason why the estimates of the nuclear arsenals vary so much is that some of the weapons may not be fully assembled. There are reports that India has enough material stockpiled to make 50-100 more nuclear weapons. Most of the warheads are thought to be below 20 kilotons, equivalent to 20,000 tons of TNT. This means they are comparable to the nuclear bombs detonated by the United States over Hiroshima in 1945.

Both sides have short and medium-range ballistic missiles which could deliver nuclear warheads. But the majority of the warheads owned by India and Pakistan are thought to be designed to be dropped as bombs by aircraft. India can arm two types of aircraft to do this: the MiG-27 Flogger, which was made by the old Soviet Union, and the Jaguar, which was used in a nuclear role by the British and French air forces. Pakistan has American-built F-16s. Pakistan’s air defences may be better than India’s, even though its armed forces are heavily outnumbered.

Estimates of the level of destruction that could be wrought by a nuclear war between India and Pakistan vary even more than trying to count warheads. Much would depend on the target, the yield of the bomb, the weather and the altitude at which it is exploded. However, the New York Times has reported that a recent intelligence assessment carried out by America’s Defence Department predicted a frightening number of casualties. It says that in a full-scale nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan, up to 12m people could be killed immediately and up to 7m injured. This would have further cataclysmic consequences, overwhelming hospitals across Asia, and requiring a vast amount of foreign assistance to deal with radioactive contamination and famine and disease.

Even if both sides tried to limit the use of nuclear weapons the destruction would be terrible. At least 3m people would be killed and 1.5m seriously injured if both sides exploded just one in ten of their likely number of nuclear warheads over big cities, according to a study reported in New Scientist. Further deaths would come from the loss of homes, hospitals, water and energy supplies. Then there would be an unknown number of deaths from cancers that would develop in future years. If the bombs exploded on the ground, rather than in the air, radioactive dust could spread across hundreds of square kilometres. As the prevailing winds are from the west, India risks being the biggest victim of radioactive fall-out in any exchange of nuclear weapons.

Although the casualty figures are horrific, India and Pakistan do not possess enough nuclear weapons for their “mutually assured destruction”, a doctrine which helped to prevent the superpowers from entering into nuclear conflict during the Cold War. It is possible that military planners in India and Pakistan believe that a limited nuclear exchange could provide them with a victory. While the immediate death tolls would be huge, both countries have large populations: more than 1 billion Indians and 140m Pakistanis.

The big causes of concern are that conventional military strikes by one side or another could quickly spiral out of control. No one is sure that the unwritten rules which have contained the military conflict to the Kashmir region hold any more. In recent days, as in previous times of tension, the two sides have exchanged heavy machine-gun fire and mortar rounds across the Line of Control, which marks the unofficial border in Kashmir. But the first country to send a missile, even a non-nuclear one, could trigger a tit-for-tat set of reprisals that both sides could find hard to stop.

re: fawad

{another pluce about goa is thats its CHEAPER}

...hell yeah...much cheaper...

{i heard abiza is so expensive anyway its too expensive for a student}

...yeah, best to avoid...better place in spain is alicante on the southern coast...inexpensive...young, friendly crowd...

huh..there is/are no discos, dating or skirts in Lahore?

Despite End of Cold War, Danger of Nuclear Conflict

Looms Like Never Before

Interview with Dr. Helen Caldicott, leading anti-nuclear activist

and founder of Physicians for Social Responsibility

Interview by Scott Harris

Despite the end of the Cold War a decade ago, the danger of nuclear war -- and the human catastrophe such a conflict could inflict on the planet -- has not diminished. In recent months, India and Pakistan have both threatened to use their nuclear arsenals in any future conflict over the disputed territory of Kashmir. The Bush administration, in its drive for military superiority, has abandoned arms control treaties and embarked on deployment of a controversial missile defense system; proposed the development of new battlefield nuclear weapons and threatened to use nukes against non-nuclear states that may possess biological or chemical weapons.

The specter of terrorist groups acquiring and using nuclear weapons has caused great public anxiety with concerns fueled by the recent arrest of a suspect alleged to be planning to explode a radioactive bomb. These new threats, combined with the September 11th attacks on New York and Washington, have provided the White House renewed public support for more aggressive war plans and increased military spending.

Between The Lines` Scott Harris spoke with Dr. Helen Caldicott, a leading anti- nuclear activist for 30 years and founder of the Nobel prizewinning group Physicians for Social Responsibility. Dr. Caldicott, whose latest book is ``The New Nuclear Danger, George W. Bush`s Military Industrial Complex,`` examines the peril she sees in the Bush administration`s nuclear weapons policy.

Dr. Helen Caldicott is author of ``The New Nuclear Danger, George W. Bush`s Military Industrial Complex,`` published by New Press. Contact Dr. Caldicott`s Nuclear Policy Research Institute at (213) 225-5941 or visit their Web site at www.nuclearpolicy.org

http://www.wpkn.org/betweenthelines/

Dispute Over Jammu, Kashmir at Heart

of Rising Tensions between India and Pakistan

Interview by Scott Harris.

For the fourth time in 50 years, India and Pakistan are edging closer to war. Tensions rose shortly after a Kashmiri separatist group launched a Dec. 13 suicide attack against India`s parliament that killed 14 people. The leaders of both nations traded verbal attacks followed by a dangerous buildup of troops along their shared 2,000 mile-long border. India`s leaders charge that Pakistan has failed to rein in terrorist groups which are believed to have been behind the December Parliament attack and an earlier October 1st assault on India¹s Srinagar legislature.

Both India and Pakistan possess nuclear weapons, a fact that alarms many observers who note that the two nations have fought three wars since their founding in 1947. The spark that ignited previous conflicts has been the five decade long dispute over the territories of Jammu and Kashmir ­ a mountainous region both nations claim as their own.

Between The Lines` Scott Harris spoke with Jay Truman, founder and director of Downwinders, a research foundation that works to end nuclear weapons testing and reduce the threat of atomic warfare. Truman discusses the danger of war between India and Pakistan and the historical context which has led to the current conflict.

Untying the Kashmir Knot

Radha Kumar *

The Kashmir dispute, long on the sidelines internationally, has moved front and center since September 11. India has made use of changed opinions since the terror attacks on the United States to pressure Pakistan, which for decades has promoted a jihadist guerrilla movement within Jammu and Kashmir, the only Indian state with a Muslim majority. When Islamic extremists mounted a murderous attack on the Indian parliament last December, New Delhi responded with a massive troop buildup along its border with Pakistan. The confrontation of the two nuclear-armed neighbors was temporarily contained by U.S. and European diplomacy but could flare up again at any moment. Are there more durable means of containing this 50-year dispute? Is there even a possible solution to the problem? This essay will attempt answers, with the important caveat that it is difficult to con-vey the complex and angry passions that the word ``Kashmir`` evokes.

For confirmation, one only has to visit a website for a Pakistani Islamic university, Markaz ad Dawa`ah Wal Irshad (Center for and Invitation to the Spread of Islam). The site featured a poll that asked whether America`s new war was against Islam or terrorists. The poll was programmed so as to elicit an ``against Islam`` response. Elsewhere, the site quoted a prominent Islamic cleric`s claim that the war in Afghanistan was a clash of civilizations: ``This battle will take [the] shape of the religious war of Hind in which the Muslims stood victorious,`` the cleric said, referring to the Mughal conquest of India.

Markaz ad Dawa`ah is the parent organi-zation of the Lashkar-e-Taiba (Army of the Pure), a militia that the U.S. State Depart-ment added to its list of banned terrorist organizations this past January. Founded in 1994, the Lashkar is based in Pakistan but active in Indian-held Jammu and Kashmir. Its religious center is the 200-acre Markaz complex in Pakistan`s Punjab province, but its training camps are in Pakistani-held Azad Kashmir. Its mujahideen (holy warriors) are mostly Punjabi Pakistanis, and until recently it also drew heavily on the radical fringe of Britain`s Muslim diaspora, mostly of Pakistani origin, who provided it with funds and foot soldiers. After an attack on New Delhi`s historic Red Fort in December 2000, which the Lashkar boasts of on its website, Britain banned the group in February 2001. Since then, the supply of British Muslim foot soldiers has trailed off, though recent reports suggest that as much as $3 million a year still flows from Britain into the coffers of the Lashkar and the Jaish-e-Mohammed (Mohammed`s Troops).

*Radha Kumar is a senior fellow and director of the Program on Ethnic Conflict and Peace Processes at the Council on Foreign Relations, New York.