Pakistan Army - All is not well

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

You said Pakistan regains strength in Afghanistan....that means Pakistan had a great sway over what happens in Afghanistan post cold war. So my question is... Pakistan didnt build any roads or infrastructure in Afghanistan when it had a decent economic growth, then why do you think it will be possible for pakistan to do so now when its economy is weak and its is living on financial handouts?

Actually, Pakistan has invested hundreds of millions of dollars in Afghanistan on a wide variety of projects in the last few years.

The details of that investment can be seen in the following thread:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/strate...-investment-afghanistan-hits-500-million.html

So Asim's argument is completely valid, that as Pakistan recovers, it will continue to invest in Afghanistan and the CAR's if necessary to protect its interests.

And what are those interests? Energy supplies and a 'neutral' Afghanistan. The CAR's have a large economic interest in dealing with Pakistan since Pakistan is a potentially huge market for their gas/oil and electricity. Afghanistan then has a large economic interest in dealing with Pakistan since it stands to gain from the transit fees and construction activity from any pipelines/transmission lines constructed to deliver that energy to Pakistan.

The potential for these gas/oil pipelines to then go to the Arabian Sea for delivery to other nations, or even for delivery to India, only enhances Pakistan's influence, especially if Iran continues to be stubborn about its nuclear program.

 

[nitesh28]

The reason analysts have been arguing that 'events are going Pakistan's way' is because the regional situation relative to a couple of years ago is markedly improved in Pakistan's favor.

The author's entire premise, 'The argument, which a beleaguered Pakistan Army is doing all it can to buttress, goes broadly as follows: with Obama looking to thin out forces substantially from Afghanistan before facing American voters in late 2012, the job of policing the AfPak badlands will fall into Islamabad’s lap. With a free hand to run the place, Pakistan’s Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI) will carry the Taliban to power in Kabul and then douse the flames in its tribal areas by reorganising it into a terror factory from where it can direct jehad towards India and the West', is flawed and a contradiction of everything Pakistani military and civilian officials have said, on and off the record, about the role they see for the Afghan Taliban and the potential US withdrawal.

No less than Gen. Kiyani has been quoted as saying that Pakistan does not want a Talibanized Afghanistan, and almost everyone is in agreement that a hasty US withdrawal (completely) will not be in Pakistan's interests.

It is only Indian commentators that continue to stick to outdated analysis in order to concoct some manner of stick to beat Pakistan with.

STICK TO THE TOPIC OR GET BANNED.

well if a Non Talibanised Afghanistan can be achieved even if with pakistan's help then it will be benefitial for the whole world.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Kindly enlighten us about the powers which Pakistan got involved in ending WOT? And are you sure WOT is over?

US internal pressure and the billions of expenditure didnt have any role in US pull back plan?

If you think its Pakistan's foreign policy clout that got things done....then Bravo to Pakistan.


And regarding your trivializing about the headlines of the article rather than the content...speaks volumes in itself. As per the ongoing trend in mass media, one needs to use catch phrases to get attention.

Despite all the rhetoric about pulling out in the US, the fact is that if a US administration does pull out without a plan in place to continue stabilizing Afghanistan, Afghanistan will revert back to providing sanctuary for all sorts of terrorist groups, and these groups will likely attack the West.

The first attack that gets traced back to an Afghanistan from which the US pulled out without a plan in place will likely have significant domestic political repercussions for the concerned political party (in the current case the Democrats). That is why even this current US administration is only going to 'pull out troops' at a level that is insignificant, unless it has a plan in place to continue stabilizing Afghanistan. That is where Pakistan's international diplomacy appears to be targeted, offering to play a constructive role in developing a plan for Afghan stabilization (to facilitate a US pullout), and in return ensuring that the regime in power in Afghanistan is not anti-Pakistan (neutral is fine with us).

 

[RobbieS]

And what are those interests? Energy supplies and a 'neutral' Afghanistan.

Just neutral? Aren't we underestimating our intentions, Agno?

 

[EyelessInGaza]

Thats says it all doesn't it, an analysis of military capabilities and the current events is summarised in its subject by a quote from some stupid film. I have never heard of 3 Idiots anyway, is it a documentary on India, Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Sorry off topic but,




Aiyiyiyiyiyiyiyiyiyiyiyiyiyi..

That made my day, and the day is still young.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Just neutral? Aren't we underestimating our intentions, Agno?

No.

A neutral Afghanistan would not allow India to stage anti-Pakistan operations from its territory and would be eager to engage with Pakistan in developing an energy corridor from the CAR's.

Even when Bhutto decided to support the Taliban, the overriding goal was stabilization of Afghanistan to facilitate Pakistani traders and tapping the CAR's energy resources.

 

[Solomon2]

That is where Pakistan's international diplomacy is targeted, offering to play a constructive role in developing a plan for Afghan stabilization

And what would that "constructive role" be? The last time Pakistan implemented a plan for Afghanistan, it established the Taliban. Do you propose to bring them back?

 

[T-Faz]

Kindly enlighten us about the powers which Pakistan got involved in ending WOT? And are you sure WOT is over?

US internal pressure and the billions of expenditure didnt have any role in US pull back plan?

If you think its Pakistan's foreign policy clout that got things done....then Bravo to Pakistan.


And regarding your trivializing about the headlines of the article rather than the content...speaks volumes in itself. As per the ongoing trend in mass media, one needs to use catch phrases to get attention.

I am referring to the strategy devised by Pakistan in the early days of WOT when it actually laid out a plan of negotiations with the taliban to make the taliban problem, a part of the solution. This way Afghanistan would have been safe from groups like Al Qaeda, open for trade, utilized as an energy corridor and most importantly the development and education of rural Afghanis (majority) to come out of the 8th century.

But Pakistan was rebuffed and this plan thought of as nonsensical, now after internal pressure and the billions of expenditure coupled with an increasing and evolving insurgency, this plan seems to be the only way out. That is why Pakistan will play a vital role in this negotiation.

Alo if one needs to use a catchy phrase to attract attention then why not write 'Paris Hilton: Second Night in Paris and analysis of Pakistan's military woes'. That would be sure to get some attention.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

And what would that "constructive role" be? The last time Pakistan implemented a plan for Afghanistan, it established the Taliban. Do you propose to bring them back?

The last time the US implemented a plan for Afghanistan, it armed all sorts of mercenaries and Mujahideen to the teeth and then abandoned Afghanistan to deal with the mess. Yet we have moved on from that colossal cluster-fck now haven't we? So why drag in past policies, that appeared pretty sensible at the time, in the case of Pakistan? Going by past records the US should be the first nation to be kicked out of playing any sort of role in Afghanistan.

Back to 'Pakistan's role', we'll find out as time goes on I suppose. At the moment it appears to be focused on building relationships with Karzai and some other power-centers in Kabul.

 

[T-Faz]

And what would that "constructive role" be? The last time Pakistan implemented a plan for Afghanistan, it established the Taliban. Do you propose to bring them back?

What was better, the taliban ushering in 7th century normalcy or different mujahideen groups bombing Kabul from all angles.

Would you prefer an occasional lash and your wife to wear a burka or dodge missiles being reigned down into each and every city of Afghanistan on a daily basis.

Also US did not have a problem with the taliban in Afghanistan then, they even started negotiating pipelines and what not in the late 90's with them.

 

[H2O3C4Nitrogen]

And what would that "constructive role" be? The last time Pakistan implemented a plan for Afghanistan, it established the Taliban. Do you propose to bring them back?

The US admin itself said couple of times on record that it can work with the moderate Talibans , If you mean workable Talibans then certinly yes , We will play a role in bringing them back..

 

[AHMED85]

sorry man who told you
i think our army is one of best in Ashia........

 

[RobbieS]

No.

A neutral Afghanistan would not allow India to stage anti-Pakistan operations from its territory and would be eager to engage with Pakistan in developing an energy corridor from the CAR's.

Even when Bhutto decided to support the Taliban, the overriding goal was stabilization of Afghanistan to facilitate Pakistani traders and tapping the CAR's energy resources.

Agno, you are either being naive or I am afraid lying. You will have a hard time convincing anybody that Pakistan, believes in a neutral Afghanistan as a stable Afghanistan. The truth from Pakistan's interference in Afghan affairs suggests that for Pakistan, a stable Af means a pro-Pak Afghanistan. And this interference is not since the 80's. Its been on for much earlier as I read from an article by a Pakistani author in PDF itself.

 

[EyelessInGaza]

In Afghanistan the winners are often, if not always, also the losers.

The argument about a neutral Afghanistan should, in my opinion take that into account. Also, even an Afghanistan tilted towards India or Pakistan, does not necessary mean an Afghanistan stable enough to become an economic/ trade transit.

In my humble opinion that will be a very long time coming.

....
Alo if one needs to use a catchy phrase to attract attention then why not write 'Paris Hilton: Second Night in Paris and analysis of Pakistan's military woes'. That would be sure to get some attention.

I think that in focusing on the headline, you may be failing to distinguish between what the writer has said, and what a sub-editor in a paper dreams up as a headline.

There's no racist connotation there either; every time I have heard the phrase used it has been used in a context that is more inner directed than anything else.

 

[JonAsad]

The Author kept his perspective of things which are going to happen in Afganistan . It is true that all the taliban groups are not in favour of ISI or PA. There are lot of evidences in the past 2 years, What the author is trying to say is the mess created by US WOT is now haunting PA and ISI, which is causing lot of security problems for pakistan.
This mess in the paktoon khwa is there for years to come, pakistan has to prepare to fight the insurgents from Paktoon Khwa just like inidan army in J and K. In this regards Indian army is superior experience than PA as we are fighting for longer time.
The bottom line is Pakistan is dependent on military aid of US to clean the mess or to wage a war. It seems that even after the departure of US and west things are not going to be normal.

Just because we changed the name of one of our province it means that their is something similar to J&K going on in PK ?? Man you and your thoughts.. believe in which helps you sleep at night buddy.


Mod sorry being off topic again.. but this issue needed to be addressed and he is off topic on Pakhton Khawa..you missed him