Pakistan Faces Threat From Terrorism, Not India:US

[blain2]

"So let me be very clear, no Pakistan Army or FC Bn has surrendered enmasse anywhere in this entire campaign."

As you insist-

Taliban Capture 100-Long War Journal

The links inside the article are to DAWN and others so read as you will. 17 truckloads of troops and nine officers. Between 100-300. The incident was well-documented and I look forward to your explanation.

I stand by what I said earlier. No Pakistani Army unit enmasse has surrendered to the Taliban and certainly nothing like a battalion.

I am very well aware of this incident. This convoy was a mixed FC/PA formation. Yes indeed there were Army officers and troops in the convoy, however it was nothing close to a Bn or even half that as you have asserted in your earlier post. Secondly, the FC is also officered by the PA. Thus the 9 officers who were taken in by the militants.

 

[blain2]

Just no point to being defensive - If "conducive" political environment is what the army needs, then clearly it is playing politics, is that an unfair conclusion? And while it is playing politics, would it be unfair to conclude that it is willingly not discharging it's duty to safe guard Pakistan and Pakistanis?

How does conducive atmosphere suggest politicking? Army's problem from the very start has been that if the fight that they wage is considered to be against their own people then it will be problematic for them to fight it specially when no public support is forthcoming for this...there was absolutely no support for them for these actions and the newspapers can be looked at to see if you even come across a single editorial supporting the efforts of the Army to sort these folks out earlier (prior to the video of the girl).

So this is something that the politicians need to do a better job of so the public support can be galvanized and Army is no longer looked upon to be doing the West's bidding. Army is in a tough spot, when it has pushed the militants out of Swat in the past, this is the second time around that these folks are back in because the Army withdrew due to the political dispensation efforts that were pushed on by the politicians (ANP was angry at collateral damage...so Army backed out). Maybe the need is for the politicians to support the Army action until something permanent is achieved here instead of this on again, off again business.

Reasonable persons cannot be of two opinions about this. Howevr; moving further, what will it take for the the army to act decisively? indeed, can political conditions for decisive action be created? I think not, ordinary Pakistanis will have to create circumstances to which politicians and the Army can react - because neither the politiicans nor the army are able to or willing to create such circumstances

See above. Army simply taking actions on its own won't do it. People will talk about loss of life to the civilians and there is no cover for the Army to carry on like this. If the politicians provide Army the political support and the nation backs them then this is the basis on which they can get on with the business of taking on the militants and we will get somewhere. However to expect the PA to run a disjointed, military-only, campaign which does not resonate with the public is asking for failure.

Any major offensive will result in casualties on both sides, Lal Masjid affair showed that the nation has very little appetite for something like this, thus the current wave of concern about the militancy has to go a bit further than the usual lip service. I succinctly recall our liberal English media incessantly calling on the govt to do something about the LM brigade till the government did something. From that point on nobody on the side of the media took ownership and defended the Army. This by the way was also not the first time. Back in 1971, the same had happened before the Army had launched Op Searchlight. Once the Army action happened and the reports of casualties came forward, everyone (specially the politicans and the liberal media) washed their hands off the whole affair and dumped the ramifications of it in the lap of the Army. Nothing fair about this, yet this is the reality of Pakistan.

 

[SMIQBAL]

Pakistan Faces Threat From Terrorism, Not India, Petraeus Says
Share | Email | Print | A A A

By Brian K. Sullivan

April 22 (Bloomberg) -- The greatest threat facing Pakistan comes from terrorism, not India, U.S. Army General David Petraeus said, as he called on the government in Islamabad to change its mindset toward its neighbor.

Americans have no uniform policy. They keep their interest above and change their statements from time to time. Remember the Musharaf days. The americans were beating drums that Pak Army is involved in Terrorism with Taliban and providing sanctuaries to them. Kindly see the Program sent on air by CNN - in 2008-
"Pakistan a threat within" It was not the above topic but it was said that Pakistan is a threat to Allies of War of Terror.
In view of the above I say - We should not take american statements seriously and prepare our own policies based on facts.
SMIQBAL

 

[Kasrkin]

"The officer corps and the men they command are much closer than they were in the past. This is quite obvious just observing the YOs with their charges..."

This is because many officers have served as NCOs and JCOs before their respective units give them leave (even the fare) to travel to ISSB. If they get commission, their previous service contracts are terminated and they’re sent to Kakul like the fresh civilian candidates. In my ISSB batch the majority of candidates were NCOs or ground crew from the PAF; out of 50+ barely 2 were from commissioned families. CnC General Musa, I believe, was also a NCO once and General Kayani’s father was a Petty Officer. I was pretty shocked to see that the social class divide was almost non-existent in the Army. That’s not to say that the hierarchical commander structure in the Army is not firm as hell, but officers certainly tend to connect very well with the men. There is a reason they say that no one knows Pakistan better, the land and the people, than its Army Chief who has experienced it from all the way down.

 

[muse]

Blain

You are confusing two seperate issues, one is Army the other is Musharraf -- in the LM episode, the media and the politicians made poilitical capital at the expense of Musharraf, not the army.

However; you have not connected the dots between Mr. Musharraf's dithering with regard to LM and not acting earlier than he did and this Army's dithering.

At no time has this army made the case that it can act but that it will cost and that the country needs to be sure that it wants the army to act.

BTW your contention that the army defeated the islamists in 2007, well, I don't know aboujt defeated because if it had defeated them it would not need to fight them over and over again.

I understanding about "good soldier" but I think now is the time to consider Pakistan before any other.

 

[MilesTogo]

How about you try a rebuttal first.

Try again, you really do have 'Miles To Go'.

You know what you sound like...

"We the Pakistani's have huge libido and can not control it. We will continue to rape the rest of the world until we are satisfied. Do not resist us or else we will blow up and you will die with us."

Every Pakistani seems to be throwing that threat since Zardari did it in Japan. Its like the whole nation is a big suicide bomber.

PS: I do have miles to go and am moving towards it but its high time for you and your country to atleast start the journey.

 

[BaburCM]

To put it bluntly, Taliban and India are both huge problems for Pakistan. Both need to be addressed on an equal stance. Period. You can cry or laugh, but it won't change the perception of the common Pakistani. I can sum up a whole list of dislikes about India. India is a sworn enemy of Pakistan and there is no secret about that. India supports terrorists across Pakistan. India is indulged in cross border terrorism aimed at destabilizing Pakistan. India doesn't want to solve the Kashmir issue. India shouldn't expect any favours from Pakistan. Let's just leave it at that and stop the useless one-sided accusations, whining and complaining. It's a waste of time and won't lead anywhere. We cannot change the world. It's a nasty and ugly place. Welcome to the real world. We will have to deal and live with it. No matter how much we disprove or dislike it.

 

[blain2]

Blain

You are confusing two seperate issues, one is Army the other is Musharraf -- in the LM episode, the media and the politicians made poilitical capital at the expense of Musharraf, not the army.

However; you have not connected the dots between Mr. Musharraf's dithering with regard to LM and not acting earlier than he did and this Army's dithering.

At no time has this army made the case that it can act but that it will cost and that the country needs to be sure that it wants the army to act.

BTW your contention that the army defeated the islamists in 2007, well, I don't know aboujt defeated because if it had defeated them it would not need to fight them over and over again.

I understanding about "good soldier" but I think now is the time to consider Pakistan before any other.

Muse,

I do not think that I am confusing the two issues. I remember vividly the abuse that was heaped on the Army by the vocal minority and the majority sat on the sidelines letting Army take the abuse. It was so bad that internally the officers on the Army's CT team complained that they had sacrificed 10 of their colleagues for nothing because it was a thankless job. Maybe the opponents of Musharraf thought that they were getting political mileage out of him but the Army bore the brunt of the critique. Not a very comfortable spot for the Army to be in as I have said before.

BTW your contention that the army defeated the islamists in 2007, well, I don't know aboujt defeated because if it had defeated them it would not need to fight them over and over again.

I did not say "defeated". I stated very factually that the Army had pushed these elements out of Swat and then they came back after the Army vacated. Defeating them on the battlefield is one thing, winning the war entirely an altogether different. Swat (first time around) and Loi Sam are examples of how the Army can push the onslaught back, however the permanent solution would require something more than just military muscle.

 

[Tang0]

Blain2, I'm sorry, but I have read numerous posts to the effect of "Its complicated, we can't just go in there and get them" which spoke in depth of the various cultural and religious aspects of using force against your own people. You spoke of the percentage of PA soldiers who are pashtun, lack of public support, etc, etc.

Now you seem to be implying that the Army dose not have a problem using force, they are just waiting for the politicians to catch up so they can take decisive action .

Are you trying to say "We could do it, but we need the politicians to create an public environment so we don't feel so bad about it?"

If you are, then the PA has a HUGE problem. I don't yet agree with S-2 on this, but it seems like the PA has some discipline and esprit d' corps issues to work on.

I detect a hint of shall we say... Avoidance Behavior here?

Of course, I'm sitting on the sidelines, it is not my country on the line. Civil war is a terrible thing, and not to be undertaken lightly. The shame is that previous inaction has brought it to what it is now, and its looking uglier by the day...

Go with god, and may at least your children live in peace. I'll shut my trap on the subject now.

 

[Hellfire]

blain2

Way off the mark and sorry to say, pulled out of nowhere..

not so

Contrary to common perception, the background of many of the officers is similar to the rank and file they command. This is one of many reasons that the role of the JCO (senior most NCO cadres in the Army), has become redundant.

I have yet to come across as uninformed a post about the PA as this one. You have no idea what our YOs are doing during operations against these militants and in all of the recent campaigns. You folks went around after the Kargil war parading the fact that you lost so many YOs because they led from the front, whereas ours were nowhere around. This was a classic BS campaign. I know about the young officers who fought and died on the mountains of Kargil. There was no shortage of such men and they led from the front and continue to do so to this day.


Right. But have you really tried to find out the reason why the actual time spent by a company/pltoonm commander on a post in PA along LC is hardly a significant portion of his field service for the said duration? I have said that PA is an NCO led unit as its the NCOs who hold together their men and lead (and I mean in LC region). Its nothing to do with Kargil and the so called propoganda. Its to do with day to day adm and moral!!!!
On the other hand IA has policy of ensuring that the officers spend more than adequate time with their men in equally harsh conditions as it is these men they have to lead in battle. That is why on one to one basis, PA is at an advantage as the NCOs are more experienced in comparision to IA NCOs.




The officer corps and the men they command are much closer than they were in the past. This is quite obvious just observing the YOs with their charges.

This must be a recent trend.

Your last sentence is in accordance with the prevailing negative campaign launched against the PA by every Tom, Dick and Harry (the idea is to prod them into action by such negativity,

a national taste for delusions where the whole world is wrong. that the case here right blain2?

it took your Army all of Pakistan's help to get some semblance of peace in IoK, so to talk of brass where its needed is misplaced. CI is a difficult issue, lets not talk as if others have sprung overnight miracles

pure heresay and nonsense. you guys pushed in afghan veterans of soviet days in 1996 to bolster the acts in kashmir when you found you had hardly any volunteers from the local populance for further fighting,

Pakistan has consistently followed policy of pushing in non-kashmiris to fight in kashmir ...... so cut the nonsense of you helping in peace. IA broke the backbone of local militancy in J&K way back in 1996-97 and now the only incidents are from more of foreign origin operatives.

As for CI grid, I shall not be needing lessons in that I assure you.

 

[blain2]

Blain2, I'm sorry, but I have read numerous posts to the effect of "Its complicated, we can't just go in there and get them" which spoke in depth of the various cultural and religious aspects of using force against your own people. You spoke of the percentage of PA soldiers who are pashtun, lack of public support, etc, etc.

Now you seem to be implying that the Army dose not have a problem using force, they are just waiting for the politicians to catch up so they can take decisive action .

Are you trying to say "We could do it, but we need the politicians to create an public environment so we don't feel so bad about it?"

If you are, then the PA has a HUGE problem. I don't yet agree with S-2 on this, but it seems like the PA has some discipline and esprit d' corps issues to work on.

I detect a hint of shall we say... Avoidance Behavior here?

Of course, I'm sitting on the sidelines, it is not my country on the line. Civil war is a terrible thing, and not to be undertaken lightly. The shame is that previous inaction has brought it to what it is now, and its looking uglier by the day...

Go with god, and may at least your children live in peace. I'll shut my trap on the subject now.

Two different issues here. The Pashtun issue is there for all to see. Nobody wants to see them as being singled out for action as it has implications for the state as well as the Army. The Army is a national force and as such takes these issues seriously.

The capability exists within the Army to take on the problem and go the distance. However the cost of doing so is the issue that the entire Pakistani leadership is faced with. Perhaps the following makes my point a little better (specifically the third para):

WITH districts around Swat seemingly falling like ninepins, the state has been shockingly ambivalent about it plans to restore its writ in northern Pakistan. But yesterday it appeared that the Pakistan Army has finally awoken from its slumber. The message from the chief himself, Gen Kayani: the militants will not be allowed to run amok and order will be restored. So far the army’s wait-and-watch policy in Malakand division has had dangerous consequences. Buner is now in the militants’ hands and IDPs are pouring into neighbouring districts, especially Swabi, Mardan and Haripur. Meanwhile, Shangla has been penetrated by the militants and Swabi and Mardan are the next likely targets. Shrewdly taking advantage of the cessation in hostilities in the valley, militants from Swat fanned out into neighbouring areas, expanding the theatre in which they will have to be taken on and ensuring that an even messier fight lies ahead.

Why has the army waited? It claims the ‘operational pause’ was meant to give a chance to the forces of reconciliation and not as a concession to the militants. Now that the army has sensed the panic among the people and seen the militants’ determination to expand their territorial control, it has pledged to achieve ‘victory’ against terrorism and militancy ‘at all costs.’ We hope this resolve will not melt in the days ahead. But two points regarding the overall war against militancy need to be flagged. One, the army has been particularly agitated by the recent spate of foreign comments that Pakistan is on the verge of collapse and that the army is unwilling or unable to defeat militancy. Gen Kayani’s forceful statement that the army ‘never has and never will hesitate to sacrifice, whatever it may take, to ensure [the] safety and well-being’ of Pakistan’s people and its territorial integrity should be noted in foreign capitals. Whatever the suspicions, the Pakistan Army is an indispensable element in any successful strategy against militancy in Pakistan and the region generally, and riling the army high command to score a few public points cannot be part of a sound strategy.

The second point concerns the political component here in Pakistan. While the Pakistan Army isn’t under the full control of the civilians, it has made it clear that it will only fight when there is a political consensus for it to do so. Thus far the politicians have been woefully divided; whether the dissenters blame America as the root cause of militancy or harp on about fuzzy ideas of dialogue, they have not been able to unite on the need to take on the militants militarily. That discord may finally be changing. The PML-N, the PML-Q and the religious parties have voiced concerns about militants on the march, while the MQM has come out as the foremost critic of the peace deal in Swat. It is not clear yet whether they will support the military option, but the army cannot fail to note that the politicians are at last beginning to agree on the seriousness of the threat of militancy.

DAWN.COM | Pakistan | A new resolve?

 

[blain2]

Right. But have you really tried to find out the reason why the actual time spent by a company/pltoonm commander on a post in PA along LC is hardly a significant portion of his field service for the said duration? I have said that PA is an NCO led unit as its the NCOs who hold together their men and lead (and I mean in LC region). Its nothing to do with Kargil and the so called propoganda. Its to do with day to day adm and moral!!!!
On the other hand IA has policy of ensuring that the officers spend more than adequate time with their men in equally harsh conditions as it is these men they have to lead in battle. That is why on one to one basis, PA is at an advantage as the NCOs are more experienced in comparision to IA NCOs.

Post something factual to prove the point. Your assertion about the limited time spent on a post is not factual and neither the comment that IA ensures that officers spend adequate time. Pakistan Army does the same. You have to spend a certain amount of time in the unit and if deployed then with the men in the field, the rest you spend on young officers/special to arm courses etc...nothing contrary to the norm. NCO has a role to play in the sub-continental Armies and actually one of the issues that has been observed by outsiders working with the PA is that the role of the NCO is relegated considerably compared to past as there is much closer interaction between junior officers and the ranks (however what falls under the realm of the duties of the NCO cadres, they perform it). This has been an ongoing process ever since the late 70s and 80s. Since I do not know how much time a typical Indian officer is spending out commanding a company/platoon on average, it is difficult for me to state this. Rotations in Siachen etc. have to be looked at in proper context and should not be used as generalization to suggest that Pakistani officers are still carrying on with the stupid antics of raj and don't mix/spend time with their charges.

Your last sentence is in accordance with the prevailing negative campaign launched against the PA by every Tom, Dick and Harry (the idea is to prod them into action by such negativity,
a national taste for delusions where the whole world is wrong. that the case here right blain2?

Not exactly. I am not taken in by the usual conspiracy theories. However when I see unfair assessment of an institution by those who have absolutely no realistic understanding of it then I cannot help myself.

it took your Army all of Pakistan's help to get some semblance of peace in IoK, so to talk of brass where its needed is misplaced. CI is a difficult issue, lets not talk as if others have sprung overnight miracles

pure heresay and nonsense. you guys pushed in afghan veterans of soviet days in 1996 to bolster the acts in kashmir when you found you had hardly any volunteers from the local populance for further fighting,

Pakistan has consistently followed policy of pushing in non-kashmiris to fight in kashmir ...... so cut the nonsense of you helping in peace. IA broke the backbone of local militancy in J&K way back in 1996-97 and now the only incidents are from more of foreign origin operatives.

As for CI grid, I shall not be needing lessons in that I assure you.

I am glad you see it this way and I differ, however lets leave it at that.

 

[S-2]

"At no time has this army made the case that it can act but that it will cost and that the country needs to be sure that it wants the army to act." Muse

"While the Pakistan Army isn’t under the full control of the civilians, it has made it clear that it will only fight when there is a political consensus for it to do so. Thus far the politicians have been woefully divided; whether the dissenters blame America as the root cause of militancy or harp on about fuzzy ideas of dialogue, they have not been able to unite on the need to take on the militants militarily. That discord may finally be changing." blain2

I've taken the liberty of opening a dialogue with your citizens on behalf of your COAS, assuming you shall be shortly going to war-


My Fellow Citizens,

Today our country is at war with itself. It is undeclared. Equally it is unnecessary to do so. The evidence is before us.

For now we gaze upon a Pakistan fractured physically and it's citizens in doubt while living in a state of impending fear or already experiencing the full measure of terror which has descended upon us.

Your army is about to reverse this condition and restore order under the flag of Pakistan. We will engage our enemies wherever found. These are the men across our country who today pervert the message of Islam to achieve their temporal and very earthly cravings for brute power.

They shall be answered with such. Know this- we shall enter your communities with soldiers of your blood-your sons, cousins, uncles, and fathers. Please do not resist them. Obey their orders and assist where requested as such.

If you know that our arrival shall be resisted-leave for the nearest available refugee camp. Even now, our government is expanding housing, food, and medical capacity to assure your safety. Further, we have pre-positioned building supplies to re-construct your homes and businesses should this prove necessary.

If attacked, your sons shall FIGHT and fight hard. We expect we shall be so we come prepared to make war- hard and unremitting wherever our enemies may be found. Pakistani muslims or otherwise, nobody shall presume the writ of state and it's security functions save those authorized by the government of Pakistan to so. These men are therefore enemies of our country and shall be destroyed wherever found-

-or they may disarm and UNCONDITIONALLY surrender. If so, they will not be harmed nor transferred to any other country but they will be imprisoned and investigated to determine criminal culpability. As such, if you've complaint of crime, legal representatives will accompany our combat forces and take evidence. So too shall our refugee camps be manned.

Nobody accused and found guilty of violation of the laws of our land shall go unpunished.

We fight for our liberty and freedom as Pakistanis. We fight for nobody else. We do so for our country's safety as we are sorely threatened. We promise only our deepest compassion to whatever pain shall be inflicted in what promises to be a long, hard struggle. Success will only be assured by our devotion to overcoming our enemies.

May Pakistan persevere and rise to it's promise of true greatness in these coming dark days. We define ourselves as a people in the coming days and I promise that your armed forces shall do their part and do so with all the compassion for our friends and neighbors as possible.

Pray for us and our success as we battle these enemies and restore our beloved Pakistan's greatness.

Forgive me for this humble stab at what Kiyani might say or write to your citizens. I hope it's something and, if so, he's welcome to use my thoughts to form a template.

Meanwhile you're welcome to re-write the letter or tell me why none should be written to your people.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Your army is about to reverse this condition and restore order under the flag of Pakistan.

Not unless ordered to by the Government of Pakistan, or in the face of the collapse of the Government of Pakistan.

This appeal is the responsibility of the President, Prime Minister and political leadership first and foremost.

Gen. Kiyani's role is to assure the political leadership of being supportive of whatever decision they make, and he went to the extent of providing those assurances in an uncharacteristically publicized statement that leaves no doubt as to its intent.

The responsibility to act decisively rests with the GoP.

 

[Hellfire]

Not unless ordered to by the Government of Pakistan, or in the face of the collapse of the Government of Pakistan.

This appeal is the responsibility of the President, Prime Minister and political leadership first and foremost.

Gen. Kiyani's role is to assure the political leadership of being supportive of whatever decision they make, and he went to the extent of providing those assurances in an uncharacteristically publicized statement that leaves no doubt as to its intent.

The responsibility to act decisively rests with the GoP.

since when has PA been dependant upon directions from GoP to take "necessary steps"?