Low Intensity Conflict

Mantolives at # 26:

Red Alert - Long Post

Q1. Do you think Pakistan should have made a u-turn on our Talibani policy or not?
Ans: The talibani policy was the firmly grounded in the Army`s pan-Islamic adventurism....

My response: This flawed policy was something admitted by President Musharraf at the outset. His announcement to curb extremism came on 14th August 2001, that is, before 9/11. You have to understand that strategies are made in the best national interest. Some times they backfire. An adjustment or even a reversal has to be made. Kindly recall that America made a u-turn on its policy versus Contras. India made a u-turn on its policy of self-imposed industrial isolation. Better late than never.


Q2. Do you think Pakistan needed to wipe out sectarian terrorism or not?
Ans: Who created Sectarian terror? Who created SSP?....

My response: You are talking about the past, whereas I am looking at present and future. While you can blame army of sectarianism, you cannot do so President Musharraf and present set of military. See above. He made Pakistanis take a u-turn. His philosophy of `Enlightened Moderation` has been lauded by everyone in the world and has to be appreciated.

Q3. Do you think Pakistan needed a better education system, police system, women empowerment, etc. or not?
Ans: Will the army provide this? No... maybe for its own members ...

My response:
1. The current Government is implementing new education policy. For example, its the Jamiat Goons who were once and are now again bent upon bringing the standard of education down. The new educational policy requires no student politics on campus.

2. President Musharraf has spoken many times against curbing extremism. All the moderate Sunni Muslims, minority Muslim sects and other minorities are with him. Who is resisting him? MMA, PML N, and PPP.

3. He has empowered Pakistani women. The LFO mandates 6 out of 19 provincial seats for women (plus more as women can contest on open seats as well). 72 women out of 340 or so members of the NA are mandated to be women, plus more as they can contest on open seats. Our assemblies are much more colorful now. Besides, women are being encouraged to make decisions on matters concerning them directly. With the passage of time, these women parliamentarians are expected to bring revolutionary changes in the matters adversely impacting them like Hudood Ordinance. But because of our culture, this will take time. Now honestly speaking answer this: Who do you think will be a major resistance to wiping out such ordinances? President Musharraf and his team or Mullas?

4. It took President Musharraf (``a dictator``) and his Government to open up media. Consequently, we see a plethora of private channels being beamed all over the world.

Continued on the next post.

Mantolives at # 26:

Continued from previous post.

Q4. Do you think Pakistan needed a dam or two or not?
Ans: What does this have to with the Army?

My response: This is the most critical factor for Pakistanis for we need water reservoirs at every cost. Previous Governments did not take any action on the matter under their populist agenda. They would not take on any opposition, whereas in the prime national interest a decision for building water reservoirs has to be made. Its President Musharraf and his Government that has made the decision.

5. Do you think Pakistan`s export performance has increased or not?
Ans: Has it? Please do quote some figures on this one.

My response: Please Check out:

http://news.tradingcharts.com/futures/4/7/40522074.html
http://www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/0/002d11d002feb7b5c1256d0b0053d1b3?OpenDocument
http://asia.news.yahoo.com/030829/4/13myb.html

6. Do you think Pakistan`s image in the world recently has improved or not (over that enjoyed by BB and Nawaz reigns)?
Ans: Pakistan`s image all over the world was the best under the democratically elected....

My response:
1. Yet under their regime, Pakistan was about to be declared as a rogue state.
2. Pakistan was being isolated internationally.
3. You cannot deny that both regimes were trying to dislodge each other`s Government.
4. Economically, who could endorse yellow cab scheme versus Red or Green Tractor scheme? The only foreign investment under BB`s Government was Power Plants, who we found out later were totally uneconomical. Even the lady who brought American industrialists to Pakistan, was sacked by Clinton`s Administration under corruption charges.
5. Both the regimes were unable to declare extremist outfits as terrorists.

Concludes.

#26 by Mantolives on October 18, 2003 9:39pm PT

Ditto!!!! I am in complete agreement,

The Root Cause- Army

1. Do you think Pakistan should have made a u-turn on our Talibani policy or not?

Ans: The talibani policy was the firmly grounded in the Army`s pan-Islamic adventurism. Yes we should have made the uturn ... but shouldn`t have been on the wrong way in the first place... courtesy ISI.


2. Do you think Pakistan needed to wipe out sectarian terrorism or not?

Ans: Who created Sectarian terror? Who created SSP? Who created Anti-Shiite feelings in Pakistan? Army, Army and Army.


3. Do you think Pakistan needed a better education system, police system, women empowerment, etc. or not?

Ans: Will the army provide this? No... maybe for its own members ... but not for the people of Pakistan... Pakistan needs to abolish Hudood laws, blasphemy laws and the notorious qanun-e-shahadat ... Has Musharraf done this? No!!

4. Do you think Pakistan needed a dam or two or not?

Ans: What does this have to with the Army?

5. Do you think Pakistan`s export performance has increased or not?

Ans: Has it? Please do quote some figures on this one.


6. Do you think Pakistan`s image in the world recently has improved or not (over that enjoyed by BB and Nawaz reigns)?


Ans: Pakistan`s image all over the world was the best under the democratically elected woman prime minister`s government... there is a world of a difference... I have lived in the US both before and after the Musharraf coup and certainly it was under Musharraf`s regime that our image was destroyed world over... Nawaz Sharif though criticized for attempts at theocracy, was largely seen as a democratically elected Prime Minister who wanted peace with India and good Economics.

In 1997 CNN commented:

``Pakistan is still far from realizing Jinnah`s dream. But as it celebrates 50 years of independence, it seems fitting that Pakistan`s democratic identity appears to be finally coming of age.``

http://edition.cnn.com/WORLD/9708/India97/pakistan/snapshot/index.html

Mushy`s contribution would be known at a hind sight after he goes and when the upright people who worked with him start speaking out at his hare brained commando strategies in making important decisions for Pakistan`s economy and polity.

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

as a Pathan ....

LOL....little boys run along, or you may be put to unwanted use. What else can a pathan do?

:)

Mantolives (could you, godot and nazarhayatkhan be the same persons?):

Now let me ask you this:

1. Do you think Pakistan should have made a u-turn on our Talibani policy or not?

2. Do you think Pakistan needed to wipe out sectarian terrorism or not?

3. Do you think Pakistan needed a better education system, police system, women empowerment, etc. or not?

4. Do you think Pakistan needed a dam or two or not?

5. Do you think Pakistan`s export performance has increased or not?

6. Do you think Pakistan`s image in the world recently has improved or not (over that enjoyed by BB and Nawaz reigns)?

Please answer these questions and we will move forwards from here.

And btw, if you are of a Pakistani origin, then let us not make any personal attacks from now onwards. You must understand that as a Pathan I can and will retaliate - ``Piyar ka jawab piyar say day ga or aik laathi ka do lathion say``

;-)

ahmedzai`s economic analysis is as sound as Romair`s...

Both are delusional... in their estimate of the `lost` decade and the current regime`s performance...

-YLH

...so what exactly does tariq uncle want? can someone summarize this article in 1 or 2 sentences?...thanks

We performed economically poorly and that we were almost a failed state was admitted by President Musharraf himeslf. He has told Pakistanis a number of time that in the October of 1999, we were at a stage that we could not have gone deeper in failure from there. He talks of economic development all the time.

I believe that Pakistanis should only be taught one lesson at schools. In order to become a world leader we have to be developed militarily, economically and socially. Thus development on these fronts should be our 1st religious duty.

For economic development, we should let the numbers speak. If the stability remains, and I believe that it will, unless of course the power that be decide that President Musharraf is becoming too big for their comfort, then Pakistan will see more successes.

All economic indicators are in our favor.

The problem would be if we had not recognized our failed performance of the yesteryears, especially those of the lost decade (90s).

Tariq Aqil- Jehadi boy is on the right track to his regulars in the hell!!

this concept of low intensity conflict by Pakistani writers reminds me of the famous couplet by Sahir

zindagi apni sulagtee see chitaa hai Sahir
nu tu jaltee hai nuh bunn ke dhuaaN hotee hai.......

#11 by sigalph235

An example of chivalry during the 1971 war is certainly worth recalling. I remember reading about it in ``Imprint``.

When a largish group of Pakistani soldiers surrendered to their advancing Indian counterparts, it turned out that the opposing commanders were former colleagues from pre-partition India. There was some kind of special langar, and they ended up organizing a cricket match between the two opponents, possibly at the cost of some valuable time. Mrs. Gandhi had to send a mild rebuke to the Indian commander, reminding him that he happened to be in the midst of a war.

Even in 1971, a significant number of senior soldiers on both sides were former colleagues, and while their professionalism meant that they were prepared to kill each other in combat, chivalry and magnanimity had not yet fallen prey to indoctrinated hatred.

Things have certainly changed for the worse today. We have to read news items about vicious intruders sneaking up to kill and to chop away heads of the dead enemy soldiers as memorablia.



E

Ahhhh ! .... the self-righteous Mahathir,

Let`s assume that Jews control the whole US of A and the wallstreet. I really don`t understand what is stopping the wallstreet jews to force American Dell and other companies to shutdown their Manufacturing plants in Malaysia and move them to friendly India. I am sure it must me damn easy for them to do that if we are to believe Mahathir`s worlds about those evil jews. May be that`s what these American companies should do... shutdown all their electronic manufacturing plants in Malaysia. Then we can see how the self righteous Mahathir would manage his country`s piggy-backing economy.

This article should be re-titled as HOW TO CONDUCT A SUCCESSFUL LOW INTENSITY WARFARE- AN INTRODUCTION.
Let me get to some intersting parts of it:

``Among the dynamic forces that contribute to low intensity conflict are change, discontent, poverty, violence, instability, religious extremism, Social imbalance, deprivation, exploitation and injustice....``

He has carefully omitted very crucial ``dynamic forces`` which may have bearing to his status : Martial Law, usurpation of civil authority by Army Officers, threatened judiciary etc. etc.

``Pakistan itself is a product of change through revolution. The two-nation theory, the very foundation of Pakistan was a revolutionary and radical theory during the period of low intensity conflict with the British Raj and the Hindu vested interests....``

This presumes that the interests of ordinary ``Indian muslims`` (was there any such monolith??) substantially different from their ordinary Hindu (where was the Hindu monolith at that time???) counterparts.

````After independence Pakistan unfortunately has failed to develop a form of government which allows social and occupational mobility through individual achievement and growth. Democratic institutions have not taken root and Pakistan’s long term interests are at grave risk with political, ethnic and sectarian groups exploiting the environment of political, social and economic instability. ````
This is typical Tinpot Dictator`s thesis- that internal problems has compromised ``LONG TERM INTERESTS`` of PAkistan. The ``LONG TERM INTERSTS`` are defined and re-defined by every martial ruler differently.

````Pakistan cannot be secure with out a strong and determined fighting force and this is not possible with out a just, equitable, and benevolent polity, in tandem with a vibrant and strong economy````

Translated it means- Guys you require a strong army to keep on fighting your TNT-s with the rest of the world- for this the government has to be conducive towards the army Generals.

``The possible use of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons (NBC) is also a grave and serious potential threat in Pakistan’s arena of LIC. The proliferation of NBC weapons and the possible threat of their use has greatly increased the subversive and terror potential of a nation or group with this capability. It is no secret that quite a large number of ethnic, sectarian and fundamentalist groups in the country are funded and supported by India who is in a position to provide NBC capability to some favorite group in Pakistan. Sources of external support to Pakistani radical groups are not restricted to India only. Many countries including some friendly and fraternal Muslim countries provide active or passive material and moral support to these radical and violent groups.``

All this rabble about India or some other country arming subversion with NBC is just another ploy to create a fear psychosis in the minds of the readers- it is called ``SEXING UP``- a ploy which Bush and Blair used to invade Iraq. So, now you can expect what this Khurafaati is going to say in the next para.

``Today Kashmir remains a thorn in the side of both countries and the very foundation of LIC. It is the smoldering volcano that could erupt into a nuclear holocaust. Kashmir is the root cause of tensions and LIC between the two Asian nuclear powers. Kashmir is symbolically and materially at the core of India-Pakistan antagonism. There is a third party to the conflict, the people of Kashmir whose rights are being denied. Both India and Pakistan exclude the independence option. India claims that Pakistan is fighting a proxy war in Kashmir, Pakistan justifies its policies and actions of supporting a home grown legitimate Kashmiri freedom struggle. ``

This the Mushy`s Propoganda theme- the ``CORE ISSUE THESIS`` and ``ROOT CAUSE THEORY``.

````Pakistan army has played a heroic role in containing all forms of low intensity conflict internal and external both.````
``Pakistan army has performed a monumental and historical task in containing and combating low intensity conflict in all its forms and manifestations.``
Great self-congratulatory references. This is BS! Army has propounded and executed this LIC Policy in order to justify its` existence and usurpation of the civil authority.

Now the last part on ``imperatives`` in a successful LIC operations which has baffled me:

How does this discussion on connect to the historiography of LIC ? What ``success`` is this guy talking -
1. success in ``combatting`` the LIC operations made by others on you- or
2. success in RUNNING a LIC operation against Indian by the PAkistani Army???

What is this bit about Political Dominance ,Unity of Effort, Adaptability, Legitimacy,Perseverance?

And this General Musharaff`s thesis on Legitimacy:
``Legitimacy is the willing acceptance of the right of a government to govern or of a group or agency to make and enforce decisions. Legitimacy is not tangible. Nor easily quantifiable. Popular votes do not always confer or reflect legitimacy. Legitimacy derives from the perception that authority is genuine and effective and uses proper agencies for reasonable purposes. No group or force can create legitimacy for itself, but it can encourage and sustain legitimacy by its actions. Legitimacy is the central concern of all parties involved in the conflict. It is also important to other parties who may be involved even indirectly. ``

It is just amazing!!! This guy is an Army Regular filled with grand visions about running LIC in neighbouring countries and has now put a part of his Jehadi Manual on LIC so that he can take a feedback from the chowkists and then build up an improved Manual on how to a run a successful LIC.
R@scals! They should be stripped of their uniform and flogged in public!!