Games Generals Play

Re the article:
The author would certainly be given a chance by the General to head his band brigade!!!

````Thus the General deserves to be applauded for forcing a semblance of democracy to the working of political parties. Also at no time was the media, particularly television so free and so lively (in political debates and interviews) as it is at present under General Musharraf. A great deal more has to be done to make these ‘champions of democracy’ democratic, tolerant and transparent first. However the results of the elections have made it possible for General Musharraf to sit back, relax and have the last laugh. ````
Come on !!! can you dare to speak the truth against the existing dictator????

Cheers!!!!

I would like all to read the post for a better historiography on

GENESIS OF RUTHLESS AUTHORITARIANISM AND UNDEMOCRATIC MODE OF GOVERNANCE IN THE EARLY YEARS OF PAKISTAN(1947-’55) [PART I and II]

By M. Waheeduzzaman Manik

#184 by mwzaman on January 3, 2000 1:04am PT

http://www.chowk.com/show_article.cgi?aid=00000687&channel=civic%20center&start=0&end=9&page=1&chapter=1

I know that Musharraf would also be added to it by our future historiographers and would make us wiser at the hind sight. Let us hope that PAkistan would not be too late by then.??

PPS
And I think we should withdraw our no first use policy.

PS: I can just imagine Powell dismissing a nuclear attack on India using the same argument with which he dismissed all of Pakistan nuclear proliferation to N. Korea from as early as BB`s tenure (much before the nuclear tests) to as late as July this year ``I donot wish to talk of the past for obvious reasons. I have spoken to Gen. Musharraf and he has given me an assurance that he is 400% certain no such activity is taking place at this time``

After the second nuclear attack Powell will be asked again and he will say ``As I already told you, Gen. Musharraf assured me with 400% certainity that no such activity is taking place and I have full confidence in him that he has been working sincerely toward fulfilling that assurance ``

Even to reduce loss of Indian lives in the short term, India should never depend on US assurances in its relations with Pakistan. Both the assurances US gives us and the assurances they claim they get from Pakistan are nothing but a load of lies. If we are criminally stupid enough to believe these lies, we will end up losing a lot more Indian lives in the long run.

einsteinwallah #62 I dont care much for our military nowadays, and regardless of whether or not Pakistan has a nuclear strategy, the fact is that mere possession of the nukes coupled with a couple of well-timed missile shots stopped the bjp paper tigers and their million man army dead in their tracks earlier this year.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

einsteinwallah #62
Thanks. I tried ``Bruce Reidel AND Nawaz Sharif`` and got this :

http://www.sas.upenn.edu/casi/reports/RiedelPaper051302.htm
American Diplomacy and the 1999 Kargil Summit at Blair House

Pankaj #63
I too admire the Chinese sense of self-sufficiency without hangups. I hope what you recommend is what the govt. is doing.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

sadna

``Also, this simulation shows, even when India is under attack, it will likely have to act alone to protect itself and have to even confront the US to do so.``

Since simulation involved top-level people from the govt it does portray the way Americans look at the whole affair. To understand the mindset of American govt insiders, the Indians should go through the talks between Zhou en Lai, Henry Kissinger and Nixon that Indian Epress published some time back. Pakistan is a pliable ally that US would hate to lose and I would not be surprised if US went againt India at the critical juncture. In this case I like the approach of Chinese. Basically, lie low and develop your economic and military capabilities. For that you have to swallow your stupid pride and cautiously cooperate with US for mutual benefits. At the same time keep building your defenses against Uncle Tom and your enemies. I admire Chinese for doing exactly that. Bheeshma gave this mantra to Yudhisthira on how to manage foreign policy while on his deathbed . ``Strength respects strength`` will always remain true.

Did a search of google with words: ``Bruce Reidel Kargil satellite Pakistani Army nuclear weaponry`` and found this: http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITOR/ISSUE5-1/narayanan.html.

I predict in years to come there will attempt to achieve ``balance of doctrines`` in the sense that India will evolve a doctrine of second use which will be as frightening as Pakistan`s doctrine of first use. Pakistan`s doctrine is really no doctrine because there is hardly any attempt to define threshold which will trigger its operation. Real use of such doctrines is deterrence. And deterrence works not by what you do or what you are capable of doing but by what your enemy thinks you will do and whether your enemy thinks you have capability of doing it.

-ew

a_kaul73#58
``a desperate Pakistani president tells the White House he has no choice but to use nuclear weapons. ``

IMO, here is the fundamental mistake made by the US players. They assume there will be someone in the Pakistani Army chain of command who will bother to check with the US before making use of an opportunity to kill hundreds of thousands of dirty infidels in one go.

White House staffer, Bruce Reidel revealed how even during Kargil, satellite picture picked up how the Pakistani Army had begun assembling its nuclear weaponry. They were thwarted by Clinton and Nawaz Sharif on that occasion. What makes the US think the PA brass will stand to be thwarted a second time?

If it is to preserve itself from the inevitable(in my opinion) nuclear war, Indians must prepare themselves for nuclear retaliation and recovery from nuclear attack.

Also, this simulation shows, even when India is under attack, it will likely have to act alone to protect itself and have to even confront the US to do so. Hence IMO, India needs to work on ICBMs as a statement of our intent to preserve ourselves in an otherwise(in my view) inevitable confrontation.

A very balanced analysis of Pakistan`s leadership history. Sounds a lot like what Mazari wrote in, ``A Journey to Disallousinement.``

Usually when General`s describe the history, they forget their own faults. When civlian leaders describe the history, they forget theirs.

When the final history of Pakistan is written, it will say the following:
a country with relatively capable people, led by the most incompetent leaders in the world.

A better title for this piece would have been, ``Games leaders play.``

Ref a_kaul73 #58

[Hi, I thought the following report might be of interest to chowkies, Here it is:

In a shock conclusion to the BBC’s unique reality drama, featuring former White House officials trying to head off nuclear war on the sub-continent, the US `president` threatens India with military force unless it agrees to a stand-still ceasefire ]

Yaaaaawn!

What do you think happened in 1971?

Hi, I thought the following report might be of interest to chowkies, Here it is:

In a shock conclusion to the BBC’s unique reality drama, featuring former White House officials trying to head off nuclear war on the sub-continent, the US `president` threatens India with military force unless it agrees to a stand-still ceasefire

The surprising decision by the BBC’s fictional US president, played by former US Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia, Karl Inderfurth, was broadcast to British audiences on Wednesday night.

The 90-minute documentary, The Situation Room, offers a fly-on-the-wall view of White House crisis-management, in the room where every major emergency since the Bay of Pigs has been discussed.

The programme is given weight by its heavy-hitter cast of Washington political insiders, including President Bush Senior’s former confidante Arnold Kantor; former National Security Council member Robert Oakley; former CIA head Milton Bearden; former Ambassador to India Tom Pickering; Clinton chief of staff John Podesta; Clinton press secretary Joe Lockhart

The programme is thought to be heading for Indian viewers via BBC World, but some India watchers said its extraordinary, even possibly unwarranted conclusion, may not go down well in Delhi.

But in an early attempt to forestall both Indian and Pakistani objections, programme producer Susan O’Keeffe, who has worked in Jammu and Kashmir, insisted to this paper that she ``believed in the integrity of the programme``.

She said ``a lot of the people I spoke to were Indians`` and insisted the BBC ``had made a credible attempt at being calm and sensible about the whole thing``.

As first revealed in this paper, the BBC’s self-confessed ``plausible, hypothetical scenario`` involves an Indo-Pak war in April 2004. After the Indian defence minister is assassinated, Indian troops march on Karachi and a desperate Pakistani president tells the White House he has no choice but to use nuclear weapons.


With Podesta revealed to be the only reluctant member of a room full of hawkish Washington insiders, ‘President’ Inderfurth’s men discuss the possible use of B-52 bombers and US ground forces against the Indian Army.


The fictional US secretary of state shrugs as he admits the future will be 25 years of bad relations with India.


But to balance its actions vis-a-vis India, the Situation Room embarks on a covert operation to take-out Lashkar e-Taiba, something ‘President’ Inderfurth is urged to offer to India as the price of ceasefire and withdrawal from Pakistan.


The documentary is said by some to mark a political coup for the BBC, with its all-star cast and the creation of a new reality docu-drama genre.

``Gujarat pogrom happened, many Indians in Chowk deplored the mideeds of Modi and his ilk right away``(sridhar)

deplored? -- say CONDEMNED..

re:#50 by faisaluno
I suggest you think before you post anything. Go over in your mind why you are posting an article. My purpose is not to demean a religion. I have a lot of respect for Islam as a religion. My purpose is to point out why so many people have been silent. We should be seeing a mass demonstration against something like what happened in Nigeria or Bali. But none of that has happened. By remaining silent on important issues, majority of good muslims have given away their freedom to some fundamentalist elements who decide what is right or wrong for Islam.

Most hindus do not deny allegations of misdeeds by VHP or anyone else for that matter connected with Gujarat pogrom. Media has exposed Modi like nobody else. You yourself posted an article from Outlook about an investigation by an independent group that found fault with Modi. Rushdie is not new to India. He is a regular visitor and knows the Indian scene well. He has rightly criticised international agencies who have not done much to pressurise BJP on Modi`s misdeeds. Nemesis will catch up with Modi one day. Fortunately, his brand of politics has not spread beyond Gujarat.
My purpose of posting Rushdie`s article has been to show there is at least one muslim bemoaning the fact that muslim intelligentia is silent while fundamentalists are taking over. By not responding to that, you have only reinforced my belief that the silent majority is in fact in silent approval of the misdeeds of these fundamentalist elements. I expect at least some enlightened muslims in chowk to come openly and say what happened in Bali or Nigeria are deplorable. But, people have been silent so far. I may here remind chowkies that when Gujarat pogrom happened, many Indians in Chowk deplored the mideeds of Modi and his ilk right away. We did not wait for any proof. We do not have to. What is wrong is wrong and needs to be deplored.

Sridhar