You and I have a penchant for long posts
And i believe you did not understand what i said. 1% economic growth for India adds more in terms of total amount compared to Pakistan's 1% growth. India has only outpaced Pakistan in her economic growth for the last 1.5 decade, before that Pakistan consistiently outpaced India. Right now the difference between the economic growth is only 2%, also please consider the factor that Pakistan is going through a severe crisis with governance and security related problems. As these problems die down in the next couple of years, economic growth for Pakistan will roar back into 7-8%.
You believe that Pakistan's economic growth will go to 7-8%. The rest of us dont. Most expectations are still that Pakistan will remain around 5% growth rate around 2020.
Our economic slow down is also directly proportional to policies of the GoI which had started treating high economic growth as their birthright and arrogance- no less.
Massive welfare policies have literally drained the budget with a huge fiscal deficit. That said, it is also expected that starting with the budget being presented at the end of this month, things will move north. Our Finance Minister has just been touring the developed world assuring investors of GoI's decision to limit and reduce fiscal deficit.
And compared with that it is also expected that our growth will be raised to 6.5% the coming year and over 7% the year after that - provided the fiscal consolidation roadmap is adhered to.
So doesnt that hark back the same point? That an India growing faster than Pakistan outpaces Pakistan in every sphere - diplomatic, military and economic. The results of this 1 decade of faster growth are slowly manifesting themselves.
It does, it provides a counter weight to India's hegemony. Pakistan is the only country that is in the way of India becaming a regional hegemonic power in South Asia. Ignoring your back handed slap regarding Pakistan's influence in Afghanistan, it was quite stable after a long time but the equilibrium was tarnished after NATO lead invasion. I will refrain from commenting on India's overt and covert role in stirring up trouble in Maldives, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Pakistan etc.
Your statement that Pakistan is a counter weight to India's hegemony would be true if there were 2 facts:
1. Pakistan had the same economic size and diplomatic heft and military capability(not merely defensive - rather expeditionary) as India to be a counterweight
2. Pakistan had the ability to influence India and stop an Indian course of action which would have taken place had Pakistan not been there.
Point 1 is not even close to being true. Point 2 is correct in limited areas. Pakistan has been blocking Indian trade materializing with Afghanistan. Trade would be a misnomer. Indian exports to Afghanistan are a miniscule amount. What we want is extraction of mineral resources from Afghanistan. However do you realize that Pakistan is NOT blocking Indian trade to Central Asia ? Contrary to what Aeronaut believes Central Asia is distant enough that trucking is not economically feasible. The only viable trade of big economic value through Central Asia is via the nearest port. That is either Gwadar or Chabahar. Our friend Aeronaut is under the illusion that were Pakistan to allow Indian transit, India would be trading on land with Russia and other CAS states. I hope you donot make the same assumptions. The costs dont add up. It has to be via sea for any worthwhile extraction.
As i said, in this case, our trade with Central Asia is blocked by none other than our dear partner - USA.
So considering those above 2 conditions, you can hardly call Pakistan a 'counter weight' to India. If that were to be the case then South Korea is also a 'counter weight' to China! Pakistan is blocking our access. Pakistan can be bypassed, but the other route is being blocked by USA.
Another statement you made - that Pakistan is the only one who can stand up to India's 'hegemony'. I wonder, which sovereign State of South Asia has made claims that India is acting like a hegemon? Has any state expressed desire to counter India's claimed hegemony?
The last time I checked, we share more than warm relations with Bangladesh, who has in fact been the key to clamping down the insurgencies in NE India. They have been ruthless in hunting India's enemies, and we owe them nothing less than gratitude for it.
Myanmar shares more than amazing relations with us. India has been providing military equipment by the truckloads(literally) and surveillance equipment that none - including China - is providing them. We share cultural relations with the most important person in Myanmar - Aung San Syu Ki
Nepal? Nepal is almost a protectorate of India.
Sri Lanka? While we cannot arm Sri Lanka owing to severe domestic concerns, and despite India being the seeder of LTTE, it was India without whose tacit support SL would not have won this war. And yet again - we share cultural relations with them.
Maldives? We are the whole and sole provider of their nation. Their external security is literally entrusted in Indian Navy.
Not really, you allowed your enemy to concentrate his forces on one front instead of splitting them up in two taking into account his inferior numbers.
If you truly believe that having a BD is worse for Indian security than a United Pakistan, then I am having these discussions with the wrong person.
Excellent, thus the entire premise behind the CSD to mobilize before Pakistan mobilizes and catch Pakistan off guard is pretty much defeated.
You are wrong. And despite some articles claiming to say so, the entire premise of the CSD is to mobilize before International pressure stops India from starting action coupled with Indian political class of the day backing off after initial resolve.
If you thought the premise behind CSD was to beat Pakistan to the border, you can not possibly be more wrong. That is impossible as i said considering Pakistan's geographical shape.
Why would Pakistan want to lead an incursion into India when it can cause more damage to India from stand off ranges. Precision Guided Munitions and Cruise Missiles can cause more damage than sending in a Brigade to do the job. The only reason why PA in the past considered the idea of limited incursions into India because that was the only way to cause damage inside India. Our aircrafts in the past lacked the legs to strike deep inside India and cause considerable amount of damage. That disadvantage has been nullified with the addition of considerable arsenal of stand off weapons that Pakistan has accumulated in the last 2 decades.
Actually no. Pakistan's inventory of stand off weapons is not even close to taking out the military targets in Punjab and Rajasthan. You would run out of munitions long before even the important targets stop! That is a canard you are trying to peddle.
Pakistan Army has for the longest period of time followed the policy of initiating action and fighting on Indian territory instead of Pakistani. That was when they could enter India and hold on to territory. They could do much more damage than Pakistan's current level of inventory of munitions would ever. Considering the fact that Pakistan's Army also realizes that PAF would not really have all the time and assets to attack India, when most of them would be on interdiction duty. IAF today packs quite the whallop and what is different from yesteryears - is that it has the ability to
field its superior numbers on the west- something it lacked before. I have had this discussion with Oscar as well. Feel free to chat with him regarding this.
So, far from being an initiating force, Pakistan Army is today a defensive force. Quite a change in orientation.
Pray tell me, what force are you talking about because i have been closely following India's military build up and nothing suggests to me that Pakistan is outgunned. The only thing that i was terrified off were the 40 Smerch Batteries that IA acquired, it allowed IA to crush any mass formations of PA Armour from stand off ranges. Now that A-100 system has come online now with PA, it gives PA the ability to open the Smerch system for counter battery. But overall, i don't see any system with India right now that can deliver India the slam dunk she requires. As i said before, stop trying to be scary because you are not.
I agree with you on this. I said India is in the
process of acquiring assets - primarily airborne that would change the equations and by virtue of superior numbers make a difference. Indian defence acquisitions as we know, take more than a little time to get going.
Off course you want that, everyone of your strategic planners who retire have stated this over and over again that PA needs to be disbanded. The only force that is standing in the way of IA becaming the sole hegemonic power of the region is PA.
Again, as long as we can ensure a pliable Pakistan, it makes no difference whether PA is present or not, whether PA is ruling Pakistan or not.
Off course, consensus of India would be required or else it would have been plain discriminatory. As i said stop acting scary, this decision had nothing to do with your diplomatic or economic weight but more to do with equality.
Well, BD who was also against this didnt hold out long at all. Unfortunately the real world does not function on the basis of equality. Certain players are more equal than the others. And India did allow it as a gesture of good will, nothing else.
It more has to do with the fact that Pakistan has realized that Kashmir cannot be won through a military duel due to the terrain and topography of the area. The only way forward for an amicable settlement is through a dialogue, it has nothing to do with Indian clout. But using your analogy, if India has succeeded here, how come it has failed to force Pakistani leaders to deport Hafiz Saeed to India? Looks like the Indian clout failed here, as i said before your not scary.
India however did field enough clout to make sure Saudi Arabia deported an Indian back to India. I hope you will not feign innocence here, that the quite standard operating procedure for terrorists with links to Pakistan has been that Pakistan sends them to the Gulf on Pakistani passports, and the Gulf countries - in their support to Pakistan would refuse to deport anyone to India because they would hold a Pakistani passport despite India being able to prove that they are actually Indian.
So that was a first wasnt it? There are many firsts happening for India in the last 1 decade, doors are opening that were shut before. You would have to be deliberately willing to ignore these facts.
Same reason as Kashmirs, lack of ability to settle this through a military duel.
Yet Pakistan did think earlier that it could by means of military take both Kashmir and Siachen. What stopped them? Maybe the increasing military capacity of India - increasing in tune with increasing economic capacity? Or does that have no role to play as per you?
And pigs would fly, your just picking out straws to strenghten your flawed arguments. If Indian pressure was making Pakistan back off, believe me there are a lot more things India would have made Pakistan do.
I said that India is beginning to get some clout against Pakistan, and quite a bit more with the rest of the world. Water always flows from high to low ground. That is nature, as India's clout with the world grows, Pakistan will not be as immune
as it used to be.
Heard this Indian Utopian Dream many times. Haven't you guys learned anything after the stand off in 2001 and 2008, PA is at best immune from a strike from IA as it was demonstrated twice in these two cases. PA called out IA's bluff twice and mobilized, in these cases the IA was red faced and made to look powerless against PA.
Do read what i wrote above. Its a process that will take another decade more. Its only just started.
As they say, there is synthesis and antithesis. There are many who claim that stats were falsified but there are also many whom say that stats were not falsified. The stock market went through the roof, companies were producing record profits and consumption levels multiplied by almost 400 times. We living here in Pakistan saw the fruits of the economic development, never in my life did i ever see that much money in Pakistan as i saw it during Musharraf's term.
Sure. There was an economic improvement. To what extent is the question. It is generally accepted that Musharraf exagerated. So by how much is the question.
Time is on India's side as long as India grows faster than Pakistan.
Excellent and my sincere commendations for all that, but China still leads the race and is the largest patron of the Burmese Government. You still fail to understand what i said, you cannot grow on your East because the Chinese have blocked you over there. Building one port isn't enough, you lack the logistics.
Chinese have not blocked us anywhere on the East. Please understand this. The port is getting built, the roads are getting built. China has no say in this. You are dragging an unrelated topic altogether here. China has been to put very bluntly unsuccessful in blocking India from the East.
The
only place China has been successful is in Pakistan. On the other hand, India has been successful in denying China war time naval berthing rights that Myanmar was about to give away, or renew lease on Coco Islands - which again has been denied for now.
Predicting about the future and looking at the current trends is a whole different ball game. Once India is fully set to expand in the East, i will retract my statement but as of now i won't. When the roads are built, the port gets busy and trucks start moving on those newly built roads, we will talk.
Whether you retract or not is your decision. Even the Japanese are planning and investing in a corridor that spans India, Myanmar, Vietnam. The $90 billion Indian industrial corridor being built with Japanese money is just for that purpose. Construction for that has already started. A tricountry highway to be built has started construction in India connecting India, BD and Myanmar.
Not the US, it is Pakistan that is sitting between you that is stopping your expansion on your West. This is why you cannot send your goods to Afghanistan, the only way you can do that is through air or through a long link through the sea. I cannot remember the name of the report but it clearly stated that Indian goods are 30-40% more expensive due to Pakistan's blockage of the Indian goods.
Yes. As i said. Our exports to Afghanistan are really something that matter. Its less than miniscule compared to our overall exports. What is hurting is the ability to extract Afghanistan minerals. That can only be done by the nearest sea route - either Gwadar or Chabahar. Pakistan not allowing is acceptable. However US denying us use of Chabahar is what is really causing problems.
That day does not look possible any time soon, the Iranian regime still hates the US and chants 'Death to America'.
I agree.
Good for you, but is still enough to stop the PLA juggernaut. PLA can mobilize 40 divisions much faster before the Indians can rush their defences, this is why your raising new Corps over there. The infrastructure that PLA has built is simply spectacular, the IA is no where near building her capacity level similar to what the PLA has built.
We are building similar infrastructure. It takes time. We started late, and thus will take longer. On the other hand, there really is no need to rush things. We have adequate mobilization capacity with additional brigades already recruited and a new corps being raised. In those mountains you need a 1:9 ratio to attack.
That said, neither India, nor China expect to get into a fight. Infact both nations have tried to warm up relations. Both nations are focused on their economies. That is priority number 1 for both.
Anything that India produces even high valued goods can easily be substituted from China, hate to break the news for you. India hooking Pakistan onto her goods is highly unlikely, the only way i see India fielding economic leverage on Pakistan is if it starts to import a lot of Pakistani goods and start making a considerable contribution to Pakistan's FX, something similar to what the Americans do but thats highly unlikely.
Dependencies can be created even while exporting. This would come to fruition if the MFN is granted. Its a question of when not if.
On the contrary, PA has encouraged the Government to open trade links with India, you are severely misinformed my friend.
Ofcourse we all realize that foreign policy of all nations important to Pakistan are strictly decided by GHQ. That said, GHQ is under quite a bind. They dont like it one bit that there has to be trade, but they also realize the inevitability of it and the benefits of it. Its not a decision they have taken willingly.
Seriousally, what is with this classic Indian fallacy of PA taking too much budget from Pakistan's national budget. Is Indian propaganda that strong that even intelligent individuals like you start believing non sense propaganda. Defence expenditure as of last year constituted almost 17% of the total budget and almost 3% of the total GDP, and keep in mind that we are also funding our military operations on the Western border out of that 17% budget.
Well, even in peace time Pakistani budget has not gone below 3%. So its quite unlikely to do so in the future as well. Lets leave this issue altogether.
Nasr BRBMs 
