What's new

No to operation in North Waziristan Agency

Once the ISAF leaves the Taliban would able to shift their resources to on Pakistan. Simple as that. Thats how it happend in the Vietnam war. North Vietnam waited for American forces to leave then violated the peace settlement and invaded South Vietnam.
 
.
.
Assalam u Alaikum Agno.. Saw you after ages and what a come back with a great article.

When the US has told Pakistan earlier to start the operation, and make it final this time, I said it at the time it wont be possible and we mustn't do that at this time.. Maybe latter.. Looking at this thread, seems like they are trying to push us out, which at the same time may bring in second thoughts.. Forces including PAF have been fighting them lately in the Mohammad Agency.. If we simply quit they regain the control.. This is more like a dilemma for us now..

In the month of June, till now, we have lost 59 of our men to their counter strikes.
-This figure must be kept in minds.
Pakistani Forces Diary.
 
.
Thank you for posting an excellant article. Well thought out and analysed. I wander why we even question whether we should do whats in Pakistans interest or do what the Americans want us to. Its not open to negotiations we should always hold Pakistan interest paramount.
 
.
A big no. Millitary Operation will bring more Suicide attacks, more IDP's, More civilian deaths in NWA, and local tribes might join hands with TTP and then only Allah knows what will happen. and history tells us that don't trust the US of A, So don't expect end of drone attacks if we start operation in NWA.

i think the militants are already achieving what they want to achieve in Pakistan.bow down to them,else there will be some more suicide attacks...
 
.
i think the militants are already achieving what they want to achieve in Pakistan.bow down to them,else there will be some more suicide attacks...
It is the US and Afghanistan who are actually taking part in negotiations with the Taliban - according to Ambassador Haqqani, Pakistan is merely being 'kept aware' of the negotiations by both parties (to what extent we do not know).

It makes even less sense for Pakistan to make an enemy out of the Haqqanis/Afghan Taliban, when the US and Afghanistan are themselves finally trying to find a 'negotiated' end to the conflict.
 
.
It makes even less sense for Pakistan to make an enemy out of the Haqqanis/Afghan Taliban, when the US and Afghanistan are themselves finally trying to find a 'negotiated' end to the conflict.
Aren't you concerned that negotiations involving personnel, armed organizations, and real property in Pakistani territory are occurring without substantial input by the government of Pakistan?
 
.
Aren't you concerned that negotiations involving personnel, armed organizations, and real property in Pakistani territory are occurring without substantial input by the government of Pakistan?

We're more concerned about the US flip-flipping on the Taliban and mindless obsession with Haqqanis and NWA. The Haqqanis have been built up to be the "monsters under your bed" by the Western media with not so subtle guidance from US intel. Aren't you worried about how you are misguided by your own "free" media time and time again?
 
. . .
We're more concerned about the US flip-flipping on the Taliban and mindless obsession with Haqqanis and NWA. The Haqqanis have been built up to be the "monsters under your bed" by the Western media with not so subtle guidance from US intel. Aren't you worried about how you are misguided by your own "free" media time and time again?
I don't blame the U.S. media here. What the U.S. is exploring here is something about Pakistan: maybe the reason why Pakistan repeatedly won't do anything about the Haqqanis and Talibs is because it can't; the U.S. should therefore abandon the idea the Pakistanis are really sovereign in these areas and offer the offending groups a deal directly. Cheaper than bribing powerless Pakistani officials, perhaps also more effective.

To continue the historical analogy from yesterday, to get the Barbary Pirates to cease hostilities Americans didn't go to their nominal ruler the Ottoman Emperor but took diplomacy as well as battle to the leaders of the pirate city-states themselves.
 
.
I don't blame the U.S. media here. What the U.S. is exploring here is something about Pakistan: maybe the reason why Pakistan repeatedly won't do anything about the Haqqanis and Talibs is because it can't; the U.S. should therefore abandon the idea the Pakistanis are really sovereign in these areas and offer the offending groups a deal directly. Cheaper than bribing powerless Pakistani officials, perhaps also more effective.

To continue the historical analogy from yesterday, to get the Barbary Pirates to cease hostilities Americans didn't go to their nominal ruler the Ottoman Emperor but took diplomacy as well as battle to the leaders of the pirate city-states themselves.

Well that's really lovely that you don't blame the US media. Why would you blame them for not using their brains and becoming pawns of the White House narrative like good like soldiers. It's just SO much easier to not do basic research.

Pretty much any strategy from the US is going to be better then the current mindless Haqqani and "Kabul Attack Network" (CIA invented term) obsessed one. So, go for it.

It's funny how the AQ/TTP safe havens of Kunar don't get the same treatment that NWA does in the popular mainstream media.
 
.
Aren't you concerned that negotiations involving personnel, armed organizations, and real property in Pakistani territory are occurring without substantial input by the government of Pakistan?
According to US, Afghan and Pakistani sources, the current negotiations are being conducted between representatives of Mullah Omar (Afghan Taliban) and the US. The Haqqanis are, AFAIK, not part of the negotiations at this point. Therefore it would be incorrect to argue that the negotiations involve ' personnel, armed organizations, and real property in Pakistani territory'. The Afghan Taliban, based on the geographic analysis of violence in Afghanistan by Ejaz Haider, are not by any means primarily operating out of North Waziristan.

That said, Pakistan is concerned that it is not being consulted or involved properly in the negotiations, which stand to have a significant impact on Pakistan regardless of how they turn out. That is both indicative of US duplicity and treachery towards Pakistan, as well as yet more reason for Pakistan to not make more enemies.

I have to say that Pakistan's position on operations in North Waziristan, and its lack of faith in US rhetoric encouraging it to launch operations in NW, are turning out to be completely justified.
 
.
I don't blame the U.S. media here. What the U.S. is exploring here is something about Pakistan: maybe the reason why Pakistan repeatedly won't do anything about the Haqqanis and Talibs is because it can't; the U.S. should therefore abandon the idea the Pakistanis are really sovereign in these areas and offer the offending groups a deal directly. Cheaper than bribing powerless Pakistani officials, perhaps also more effective.
Ejaz Haider has rather clearly argued that NW is insignificant in terms of significantly limiting the violence in Afghanistan, and that therefore implies that US whining and ranting about NW was nothing but duplicitous and two faced treachery and vilification of Pakistan

If EH's argument about the level of violence from NW is correct, then, as I argued above, the Pakistani military likely realized this long ago, and therefore knew that all the US rhetoric around operations in NW was nothing but two faced propaganda and lies to get Pakistan cornered and its military even more deeply entrenched in fighting insurgents in NW, while the US continued bolstering India through discriminatory nuclear waivers, and high tech weapons sales.
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom