Just why did Musharraf stop support to Kashmiri militants in 2000s? Was it because of USA's pressur?

[Kamikaze Pilot]

Just why did Musharraf stop support to Kashmiri militants in 2000s? Was it because of American pressure?

 

[Jaanbaz]

Maybe it was US pressure or maybe experience considering he nearly dragged Pak-India into a nuclear conflict in 1999.

 

[T-Rex]

Despots can do everything to secure their grip on power. Their patriotism is seasonal, when it becomes too hot they dump it.

 

[PurpleStone]

Just why did Musharraf stop support to Kashmiri militants in 2000s? Was it because of American pressure?

Pakistan never withdrew support. What Musharraf did was for public consumption. The withdrawal of any any support was just on paper to fool the world.

 

[El Sidd]

Just why did Musharraf stop support to Kashmiri militants in 2000s? Was it because of American pressure?

What Support?

Kashmiris hardly ever needed Support.

They simply hate you

 

[Kamikaze Pilot]

Pakistan never withdrew support. What Musharraf did was for public consumption. The withdrawal of any any support was just on paper to fool the world.

But it is true that the violence levels in Kashmir did come down during Musharraf era. How do you explain that?

 

[Ryuzaki]

Musharaff after 1999 failure wanted "peace" with India and that angered Kashmir-oriented terrorist groups.They even launched an attack on his life around 2003

 

[PurpleStone]

But it is true that the violence levels in Kashmir did come down during Musharraf era. How do you explain that?

That's call tactical retreat. Pakistan never gave up the driver's seat. As long as you are in the driving seat, you could always press the gas pedal anytime you wish.

 

[Kamikaze Pilot]

Just why did Musharraf stop support to Kashmiri militants in 2000s? Was it because of American pressure?

@313ghazi

 

[313ghazi]

1. US pressure
2. Ego

Musharraf like most Pakistani leaders was a political reactionary, for the most part he wasn't proactive (Kargil was probably one of the only pro-active things he did). I guess it's normal to be reactive rather than proactive when you aren't coming from a position of strength.

Post 911 US applied pressure on him and after considering his options he decided to fall completely in line, and backed out of support for the Taliban and later military support for Kashmiri freedom fighters.

He was also egotistical, massively so. He wanted to be remembered as a big shot, hence the attempt to resolve Kashmir all by himself at Agra with VeggiePie, the concept of "Enlightened moderation" and finally the embarrassing and very damaging (to Pakistan) NRO.

I can understand the reasons behind the rollback of military support, we were under the microscope from the world at the time, we went to war in 1999 and nearly again in 2002. India was threatening war and we were not as well equipped to deal with that as we are now. I just think had he been a bit more bold, held the line, not folded into 100% of the American demands immediately, we might not have been put in the position we were.

 

[Smoke]

More like Nawaz Sharif succumbed to US pressure.. then he tried to control Musharraf and hence the coup.

 

[Tom M]

Despots can do everything to secure their grip on power. Their patriotism is seasonal, when it becomes too hot they dump it.

True, can't agree more. They just need to legitimise the reason of their power grab before the international community, especially before world powers. The same reason why another dictator prior to him choose to do the do all the dirty jobs for US in the 80's.