A New Strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan

[RabzonKhan]

I don't see them as ideologically "pure" -- The Afghan variety, in it's Qandahar home is more about tribal and clan rivalries = the Afghan need outside or external needling to get to the more extreme behavior -- The Pakistanis don't need any of this, they are more radical than their arbi masters and takfir is pretty much mothers milk to them whereas for the Afghan "Musa bar deen e khud, Issa bar deen e khud" - Yes the Hazara were victimized, but if I suggest, the "foreign" inspiration for this should not be over looked, recall the context, the line about the tajik not being Afghan and the Iranian involvement

Muse, the main root of religious terrorism is the Saudi funded terrorist hatcheries around the world, but particularly the ones in Pakistan.

It is well known that many Afghan-Taliban leaders and foot soldiers got their education from madrassas in Afghan refugee camps associated with Jamiat-Ulema-e-Islam (JUI-S) , the same madrassas from were Pakistani Taliban get their education of hate.

Some more similarities between them:

1. Ethnically, both are mostly Pashtuns. (Note: no disrespect to the Pashtuns, most of them are good people).

2. Both believe in gender apartheid (Imprison women in their homes, killing female teachers and burning girls’ schools, etc).

3. They seek to wipe out all those who do not adhere to their brand of Islam.

4. Both are strongly linked with al-Qaeda and other terrorists.

5. Both have blood of the innocent Afghans and Pakistanis on their hands.

It is important to note that the source of their hatred and madness stems from hardcore hate filled Wahabi madrassas funded by Saudi Arabia, if we want to win the war on terror then we must either close, or reforms them, otherwise, the madrassas would continue to produce foot soldiers for the terrorists.

 

[Vassnti]

But look, the editorial is asking the US to be responsible, it's going to evacuate, it must not set the stage for the civil war and bifurcation of Afghanistan - it will regret it - lets set the stage for the Afghans to slowly be rid of their Talib -- but lets make laws to the effect that any Pakistani individual or institution risk death if convicted in any sort of religiously inspired ideology.

To my mind, the Afghan Talib are not anywhere as dangerous as the Pakistani varieties of the Saudi disease.

Sorry to be a little late in the coversation but if you do not mind back tracing a little. There are repeated comments in every second post how the US needs Pakistan, how they cant win with out Pakistan and that should be the bargaining chip to get what Pakistan wants. The problem with that thinking is what if the US just gives up?

Oh there may be a nice media spin on the withdrawl, talk about how the Afghan army is now xx many and its their job now, but esentially a "screw trying to fix Afghanistan and leave" i doubt that will happen soon but if the US isnt out of Afghanistan by the election after next which ever side is in power is going to get its butt kicked.

I dont think you have the time to be "slow" in setting the stage for helping Afghanistan to get rid of the taliban or in getting rid of the fanatics at home.
Problem is the first step is getting people to realise there is a problem and from a cross section of opinions posted on the boards at least half of Pakistans population belive all that is required is for the US to leave and the taliban will give up their weapons and welcome their Pashtun brothers with open arms.

 

[All-Green]

Muse, the main root of religious terrorism is the Saudi funded terrorist hatcheries around the world, but particularly the ones in Pakistan.

It is well known that many Afghan-Taliban leaders and foot soldiers got their education from madrassas in Afghan refugee camps associated with Jamiat-Ulema-e-Islam (JUI-S) , the same madrassas from were Pakistani Taliban get their education of hate.

Some more similarities between them:

1. Ethnically, both are mostly Pashtuns. (Note: no disrespect to the Pashtuns, most of them are good people).

2. Both believe in gender apartheid (Imprison women in their homes, killing female teachers and burning girls’ schools, etc).

3. They seek to wipe out all those who do not adhere to their brand of Islam.

4. Both are strongly linked with al-Qaeda and other terrorists.

5. Both have blood of the innocent Afghans and Pakistanis on their hands.

It is important to note that the source of their hatred and madness stems from hardcore hate filled Wahabi madrassas funded by Saudi Arabia, if we want to win the war on terror then we must either close, or reforms them, otherwise, the madrassas would continue to produce foot soldiers for the terrorists.

Dear Rabzon,

Some associates were part of the anti TTP operations and i can tell you now that the TTP is not Pashtun dominated and very very different from Afghan Taliban.
There are men of all ethnicities in TTP and they are not as centralized as the Afghan Taliban were.

Afghan Taliban were the government of Afghanistan at one point in time so they are not just men with guns.
Good or bad they ran the country for many years before US invasion...so they were the last government of Afghanistan.

The talks with Afghan Taliban before US attack did yield results since they were willing to try Osama, however US rejected this and this is on record.

They did have stakes in Afghanistan and since it was their government which was blown Away by US, they are continuing the fight against NATO and have become more brutal as their struggle becomes prolonged.

The Afghan Taliban ran the government for some years, they are not just a terrorist group like TTP which had minimal support base...
If not all then many of them can be talked to and made stakeholders in the future of a stable Afghanistan.
After all, those who think that all the other groups currently in power are much better are sadly mistaken.
The political agenda of Afghan Taliban and their ability to form a government in the past makes it logical to talk to them.
Talking to them does not mean to let them decide everything, their brutal implementation of some quite senseless laws can be discarded as rubbish in the talks and they can be asked to let go of such primitive ideas detrimental to the development of Afghanistan.
Once they declare their commitment to such a vision, it will be impossible for them to go back on their word without loss of local support, and if they really do let go of such things...they will be a positive force.
Much better to attempt all of it now rather than when US leaves and all hell breaks lose again.

Speaking of legitimacy, believe me...the will of Omar to keep fighting against all odds will ensure that he is respected by many locals in post US scenario...better to talk to him now.

 

[RabzonKhan]

Dear Rabzon,

Some associates were part of the anti TTP operations and i can tell you now that the TTP is not Pashtun dominated and very very different from Afghan Taliban.
There are men of all ethnicities in TTP and they are not as centralized as the Afghan Taliban were.

Afghan Taliban were the government of Afghanistan at one point in time so they are not just men with guns.
Good or bad they ran the country for many years before US invasion...so they were the last government of Afghanistan.

Hey All Green, with all due respect, but I disagree, I do not think they were the legitimate government of Afghanistan, the UN did not recognize them, and only three countries, (Pakistan, SA and UAE) had diplomatic relation with them.

The talks with Afghan Taliban before US attack did yield results since they were willing to try Osama, however US rejected this and this is on record.

They did have stakes in Afghanistan and since it was their government which was blown Away by US, they are continuing the fight against NATO and have become more brutal as their struggle becomes prolonged.

The Afghan Taliban ran the government for some years, they are not just a terrorist group like TTP which had minimal support base...
If not all then many of them can be talked to and made stakeholders in the future of a stable Afghanistan.
After all, those who think that all the other groups currently in power are much better are sadly mistaken.
The political agenda of Afghan Taliban and their ability to form a government in the past makes it logical to talk to them.

On 15 Oct 1999 the UN Security Council unanimously (Note: our friend China voted for it) passed resolution, 1267, it demanded that “the Taliban must not allow territory under its control to be used for terrorist training” and “the Taliban must turn over Osama bin Laden to the appropriate authorities”.

As you can see they were already in violation of UN resolution 1267, they should have handed Osama to the UN almost two years ago.

Talking to them does not mean to let them decide everything, their brutal implementation of some quite senseless laws can be discarded as rubbish in the talks and they can be asked to let go of such primitive ideas detrimental to the development of Afghanistan.
Once they declare their commitment to such a vision, it will be impossible for them to go back on their word without loss of local support, and if they really do let go of such things...they will be a positive force.

I agree with you here.

Much better to attempt all of it now rather than when US leaves and all hell breaks lose again.

Speaking of legitimacy, believe me...the will of Omar to keep fighting against all odds will ensure that he is respected by many locals in post US scenario...better to talk to him now.

I very strongly believe that the government should never negotiate from the position of weakness, which is a recipe for disaster, and that’s why I support Gen Petraeus’ surge (negotiate through strength) strategy, but unfortunately, his strategy is doomed to fail, as long as the Taliban's top leadership has sanctuary in our country.

The ball is in our establishment’s court.

 

[F-16_Falcon]

They have more strategies for Pakistan? What else they can do?

 

[muse]

May i ask ,what do you think about negatives and positves of this policy for pakistan? short and long term.

Ahmad asks in relation to the quote below:

Well, that's absolutely true, obviously - but also I think education can go a long way towards helping people see this "truth" -- It would help all Afghans if they carefully project these realities without being hostile towards Pakistan -- The way to lose in Afghanistan, is to be hostile to Pakistan, it may be harsh but it's also true.

Muse

Ahmad:

I think there is only one, if and but, positives in this policy for Pakistan -- If Pakistan cannot help Afghanistan to stand on it's feet, then it must not even try, lets face it, even the US with her resources cannot help Afghanistan stand on her feet (because we think of this in the wrong way, I will explain a little later in the post)

Unless, with in Pakistan, there can be a greater effort to educate people that the various ethnic and linguistic groups in Afghanistan (the Minorities) are seeking a new social contract between the groups that recognizes them as Afghans and recognizes that they have sacrificed in the anti-Soviet Jihad and deserve political, social and economic "rights", that they want to be seen as "citizens" and not just "minorities" before the law, there is little point in trying to be of help to the Afghan.

I think the policies which seek to tie up Afghan economic potential with the potentials of her neighbors is the absolute best thing anyone can do for Afghanistan.

We tend to think of Afghanistan state and country model as if it was not where it is, and as if it does not have the geography that it does have -- the models we do have of creating industrialization, etc, etc; don't work in Afghanistan (mountains) or at least are very expensive -- and there is a great danger in the continued population growth in Afghanistan --

You know very well, but perhaps you may not have put what you see and realize in to a idea, but this population pressure has already created a condominium of sorts -- The Pakistanis and the Iranians are screwed if they do and screwed if they don't - with populations seeing the international borders as less than what they are and in the process creating of ordinary job seekers, criminals, and of course creating facilitators who end up becoming international threats given the kinds of armed ideas peculating in the mountains and plains (it's not just madaress, but even older ideas, one is shocked to read religious authorities in the SouthWest thanking Khalqis for their service)

So, if we can get to the stage where Afghanistan is economically connected to her neighbors through her agricultural production first and her labor potential as well, followed by whatever else she may create, I think, that's a Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran have a stake in seeing as stable and one in which that population bomb can be controlled.

That population bomb is dangerous to all, but most dangerous to the Afghan, because they are the least powerful, the least able t secure for themselves -- see the thinking is such that faced with this emergency, the decision makers will not opt for "grow out of this problem" and instead will "kill out of this problem"

Rabzon:

Afghan and Pakistani Talib similar? Sure, which one is more amenable to Pakistani treaty? The Afghan --- and that was the point I was hoping to making - yes they are both scum, but one you can deal with the other you must dispatch to hell

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

^^^^^^

If i could triple quadruple quintuple ''thank'' posts, i would have done it

 

[muse]

Send this envoy back - greet him with honors, feed him, listen to him and then send him back - please - we need these people gone back to their wives, children and their lives in the land of the free and home of the brave - let them fight the wars they like so much in their own home.

And of course there is the Indian - I invite readers to see just exactly how much time the ambassador spends in India and pay attention to the statement, lets see if anything has changed - in my judgement the Pakistanis can do without yet another carrot holding back an empty promise of being of influence with the Indian on Kashmir, If.... It's time to think of a Asia free of the Ferenghi, regardless of whether that Ferenghi is an English, A French, A Spanish, A Portuguese, or an American -- an Asia free of the US - this goal of all those who love freedom and who value dignity and self respect should be pursued regardless of the cost, as this cost will only continue to go down and the benefits only increase.:


US envoy visits Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Saudi Arabia
AFP



WASHINGTON: The US special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Marc Grossman, has begun a tour of both countries as well as India and Saudi Arabia, the State Department said Thursday.

It will be the first time that Grossman, who departed Washington on Wednesday, has traveled to India since he succeeded Richard Holbrooke, who died in December, the department said in a statement.

“In all of his meetings in the region, Ambassador Grossman will emphasize the US commitment to long-term, enduring partnerships with both Afghanistan and Pakistan,” the department said.

“In Kabul and Islamabad, Ambassador Grossman will meet with senior government officials, parliamentarians, and representatives from civil society and local media,” the department said.

He will also meet in Pakistan with those who chair the US-Pakistan Strategic Dialogue working groups to discuss preparations for the next round of consultations, it said.

“In Riyadh, Ambassador Grossman will also meet with senior government officials,” it said.

A State Department document from February 2010 that was released by whistleblower website WikiLeaks late last year said Saudi Arabia has been assisting in negotiations with the Taliban militia in Afghanistan.

Other US diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks said Saudi Arabia is also the key source of funding for radical groups including Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, Lashkar-e-Taiba in Pakistan and Hamas in Gaza.

Gross’ tour comes as President Barack Obama reshuffles his national security team by appointing CIA chief Leon Panetta as defense secretary, and General David Petraeus, commander of forces in Afghanistan, as CIA chief.

The US contingent which makes up two-thirds of the 140,000 member International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) is due to begin drawing down this summer.

 

[muse]

“In all of his meetings in the region, Ambassador Grossman will emphasize the US commitment to long-term, enduring partnerships with both Afghanistan and Pakistan,

A long term commitment, how? to what?

Dime will get you a Dollar that the long term commitment is the threat of US bases in Afghanistan

 

[RabzonKhan]

Rabzon:

Afghan and Pakistani Talib similar? Sure, which one is more amenable to Pakistani treaty? The Afghan --- and that was the point I was hoping to making - yes they are both scum, but one you can deal with the other you must dispatch to hell

Muse, I beg to respectfully disagree, since the Afghan-Taliban barbarian came on the scene, and we blindly started supporting them, Pakistan has paid a heavy price.

Now I don’t know what makes you think they are “more amenable”?

The fact of the matter is, my friend, they hardly listened or took our advice seriously, in fact on several important issues they worked against our interests, here are some examples:

We tried our level best but they still refused to recognize the Durand line or drop Afghanistan’s claims to parts of Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

Give sanctuary to Pakistani-Sunni terrorists, and Uighur terrorists.

Refused to expel AQ and Osama, and are still allied with them.

Treated women and girls like trash.

Massacred minorities, because of their actions, our economic and diplomatic relations with Iran and Central Asian countries were severely affected.

Completely rejected our advice not to destroy the historical statues of Buddha.

Because of our political and diplomatic support to them, Pakistan got the bad name and had to face criticism from the international community for their wrongdoings (though we're no angels) and bad behavior.

But the most important point I will like to make is that our border with Afghanistan is dangerously porous and almost impossible to control and if the Taliban’s win (God forbid) and once again rule Afghanistan, than, no matter what we do we’ll never be able to defeat Pakistani-Taliban or other terrorists, and have a peaceful, liberal democratic prosperous Pakistan.

Please read the following reports:

1. Pakistan: "The Taliban's Godfather"?

Of particular concern was the potential for Islamabad-Taliban links to strengthen Taliban influence in Pakistan's tribal regions along the border. A January 1997 cable from the U.S. Embassy in Pakistan observed that "for Pakistan, a Taliban-based government in Kabul would be as good as it can get in Afghanistan," adding that worries that the "Taliban brand of Islam…might infect Pakistan," was "apparently a problem for another day."




2. Taliban militancy could engulf Pakistan, Musharraf is warned - The New York Times

ISLAMABAD — The Pakistani president, General Pervez Musharraf, was warned this month that Islamic militants and Taliban fighters were rapidly spreading beyond the country's lawless tribal areas and that without "swift and decisive action" the growing militancy could engulf the rest of Pakistan.

The warning came in a document by the Interior Ministry, which said that Pakistan's security forces in North West Frontier Province abutting the tribal areas were outgunned and outmanned and had forfeited authority to the Pakistani Taliban and their allies.

"The ongoing spell of active Taliban resistance has brought about serious repercussions for Pakistan," said the 15-page document, which was seen by The New York Times. "There is a general policy of appeasement toward the Taliban which has further emboldened them."

 

[RabzonKhan]

A picture is worth a thousand words, from the pictures one can clearly see that Afghanistan use to be a pretty modern and liberal country, but look what the religious fanatics and their foreign backers have done to that poor country.




Once Upon a Time in Afghanistan

When Kabul had rock 'n' roll, not rockets.


BY MOHAMMAD QAYOUMI

This movie theater was located near where I once lived, and we could even see Hollywood movies there. (I remember seeing Spartacus, The FBI Story, and The Dirty Dozen.)

So, too, were record stores, bringing the rhythm and energy of the Western world to Kabul teenagers.

Compared with the 1950s and '60s, fewer women work outside the home, and their outfits are much more conservative than what you see here.

Clothing boutiques like these were a familiar feature in Kabul during my childhood.

The physical campus of Kabul University, pictured here, does not look very different today. But the people do. In the 1950s and '60s, students wore Western-style clothing; young men and women interacted relatively freely. Today, women cover their heads and much of their bodies, even in Kabul. A half-century later, men and women inhabit much more separate worlds.

Afghanistan once had Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts. In the 1950s and '60s, such programs were very similar to their counterparts in the United States, with students in elementary and middle schools learning about nature trails, camping, and public safety. But scouting troops disappeared entirely after the Soviet invasions in the late 1970s.

During the annual commemoration of Afghanistan's independence, Kabul was lit up at night in late August and early September for nine evenings in the early 1960s. Now the city is dark. Even driving at night gives an eerie feeling. There are hardly any lights on; the streets are desolate, and there is no night life.

When I was growing up, Afghanistan did have medium and light industry, such as the textile factory pictured here. There was a sense then that Afghanistan had a bright future -- its economy was growing, its industry on par with other countries in the region. Back then, most of the cotton processed in a plant like this was grown locally. But three decades of war have destroyed industry and the supply chain.




Mohammad Qayoumi is president of California State University, East Bay. He grew up in Kabul and came to work in the United States in 1978. Since 2002 he has volunteered his time in reconstruction efforts, serving on the board of directors of the Central Bank and as senior advisor to the minister of finance.

 

[muse]

Rabzon and Ahmad

Don't kid yourselves with these photos, 2 streets in Kabul were not then and are not now, Afghanistan -- While some in the West and other places buy into history through select pictures (Ithe same crowd that loves Wiki) are persuaded that a once liberal and modern Afghanistan existed, we have a duty to adjust this view -- kabul was not and is not, Afghanistan, lets be sober.

 

[Ahmad]

Rabzon and Ahmad

Don't kid yourselves with these photos, 2 streets in Kabul were not then and are not now, Afghanistan -- While some in the West and other places buy into history through select pictures (Ithe same crowd that loves Wiki) are persuaded that a once liberal and modern Afghanistan existed, we have a duty to adjust this view -- kabul was not and is not, Afghanistan, lets be sober.

Dear Muse, You are perhaps missing the point here. Nobody has said that Afghanistan was a modern, liberal and advanced country then. It was a conservative society with majority living in rural areas, the urban areas although were more liberal. Despite all the social/political injustices, people were relatively happy and there was very little sign of bigotism and religious fanatism, these pictures show that everybody was leading their own personal life with very little care on what somebody else was doing/wearing/believing etc. Religion didnt have any place in the gov which was the biggest plus point.

 

[muse]

these pictures show that everybody was leading their own personal life with very little care on what somebody else was doing/wearing/believing etc. Religion didnt have any place in the gov which was the biggest plus point.

Point taken -- and of course today in the streets, one does not see a great deal of diversity in, on the other hand, today there are easily around two million or more persons living in a city designed for 400,000.

 

[RabzonKhan]

COMMENT: The hornet is dead, near the nest

Daily Times
Dr Mohammad Taqi
May 05, 2011

Doveryai, no proveryai! This Russian proverb, meaning ‘trust, but verify’, popularised by Vladimir Lenin and later by Ronald Reagan, has not rung truer than in the events surrounding the assassination of Osama bin Laden (OBL) earlier this week. And we may see it applied much more intensely in the months to come.

Phone calls from friends in Abbottabad about an ongoing military action there, were enough to suggest that something big was happening in what the locals had always believed to be an ISI-run facility, but the e-mail news alert from The Wall Street Journal announcing OBL’s death was still a major surprise. Against the norms of punditry, this time one hoped that we were wrong and this was not happening in Pakistan. But it was, and yes, we now stand vindicated: all of us who had been saying and writing for years that the US’s most wanted man was not under the protection of any major Pashtun tribe but was guarded by the clan that has anointed itself as the guardians of Pakistan’s ‘ideological’ and geographical frontiers. It is this same clan that had actually codified in its curriculum that “you are the selected lords; you are the cream of the nation”. Where else could this syllabus have been taught but at the Pakistan Military Academy, Kakul — less than a mile from OBL’s last lair?

There is no polite way of saying it but these masters of Pakistan’s fortunes got egg on their face and that too with the whole world watching. A Peshawarite calling in on a television show said it most aptly: “Koilay ki dallali mein haath to kalay hotay hein per moonh bhi kala hota hai” (Those, whose business is foul, not only get their hands dirty but a blackened face too). But they still have the nerve to say with a straight face that a million-dollar fortress under their nose had been “off their radar”!

Not only that but they also have the gall to mobilise the right-wing media to create the smokescreen of sovereignty yet again while simultaneously playing up their ‘role’ in support of the US action in Abbottabad. The world, however, is not buying that in a cantonment city, the army — which keeps track of every inch of land around its facilities — did not know what was going on in the high-walled compound next to its primary training academy. The paid spin masters will have to do better than this. No matter what President Asif Zardari or his ghostwriter is made to say in op-ed articles in US papers, it is the top brass that is under scrutiny. Using the civilian political leadership as the human shield is not going to work, as the calculus has changed dramatically.

Barack Obama’s token acknowledgment of Pakistan’s non-specific cooperation is being construed by the Pakistani establishment and its minions to imply that the US can be taken for a ride again. It is too early for the specifics to surface but conversations with several sources in Washington and Pakistan point only to the deep mistrust that the US has had vis-à-vis Pakistan. There was no deal initiated by General Shuja Pasha to ‘trade in’ OBL for a bigger Pakistani role in Afghanistan. On the contrary, in response to the chest thumping by the Pakistani security establishment and its ultra right-wing political acolytes, they were confronted with damning evidence about the Haqqani network and possibly the Quetta Shura, while the OBL lead was not shared. The no-fly zone over Pakistan was created through phone calls, minutes after the OBL operation got underway. While the Pakistani brass is clutching at straws like blaming the ‘two Pashtun guards’ for protecting OBL’s compound, it was caught red-handed and was not given an option to say no to the operation. But the Pakistani deep state still does not get it, for its ideological sympathies are elsewhere.

Hillary Clinton’s nuanced diplomatic statements notwithstanding, the mood of the US leadership is almost reflective of the immediate post-9/11 days and was conveyed well by Senator Carl Levin in his remark: “(Pakistan has) a lot of explaining to do ... I think the army and the intelligence of Pakistan have plenty of questions that they should be answering.” In a complete paradigm shift, any leverage that the Pakistani junta was hoping to gain from the bravado that started with the Raymond Davis affair has been lost completely. What will follow is a steady demand within the US to hold Pakistan’s feet to the fire. While maintaining a semblance of a working relationship, a very tough line will be adopted in private. The question bound to come up is not just why Pakistan was hanging on to OBL but also if there was any connection of its operatives to the 9/11 tragedy.

From a tactical standpoint, the OBL operation is likely to serve as a template for future action against the jihadist leadership hiding in Pakistan, especially with General David Petraeus assuming his new role in the near future. To get closer to the strategic objective of a certain level of stability within Afghanistan and potentially a political reconciliation there, it is imperative for the US to neutralise the next two key hurdles, i.e. the Quetta Shura and the Haqqani network. Both these entities have so far been able to evade the US’s reach, thanks to the Pakistani security establishment’s patronage.

Members of the Haqqani clan have been roaming freely in the vicinity of Islamabad, Rawalpindi and Peshawar. Khalil Haqqani has conducted several meetings in the previous few months to broker the ‘peace deal’ for the Kurram Agency. It is inconceivable that he could act without the knowledge of the Pakistani security agencies. Similarly, Quetta is home to the Pakistan Army’s XII Corps, ISI regional headquarters, the Balochistan Frontier Corps, an army recruitment centre, the Pakistan Air Force base Samungli and the Pakistan Army’s prestigious Command and Staff College. One wonders if the Pakistani brass would still be able to say that they do not know the whereabouts of Mullah Omar.

A window of opportunity perhaps still exists for Pakistan to make a clean break with the past but its incoherent blame-game and constantly changing story says otherwise. The Pakistani establishment has given the world very little reason to trust it without verifying — unless, of course, another hornet is to be missed hiding near a major nest.