What's new

Why Taliban cannot take over Pakistan

Neo

RETIRED

New Recruit

Joined
Nov 1, 2005
Messages
18
Reaction score
0

* For reasons of geography, ethnicity, military inferiority, and ancient rivalries, Taliban represent neither the threat often portrayed, nor the inevitable victors that the West fears​

LAHORE: The Taliban are within 60 miles of Islamabad, it was reported. And David Kilcullen, a counter-insurgency expert, said that Pakistan could collapse within six months. US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said if the country were to fall, the Taliban would have the “keys to the nuclear arsenal”. Senator John Kerry warned: “The government has to ratchet up the urgency.”

The military has since launched a major counteroffensive that has sent nearly 3 million people fleeing their homes. Yet Pakistani analysts and officials believe that the infamous threat of an imminent Taliban takeover is overblown.

True, the Taliban threat remains serious. They maintain a presence in more than 60 percent of the northwestern Pakistan and control significant sections along the Afghan border.

But even if the current operation stalls, or the Taliban return to the areas they’ve been ousted from, a Christian Science Monitor report concludes, they may not significantly expand their footprint in the country anytime soon. For reasons of geography, ethnicity, military inferiority, and ancient rivalries, they represent neither the immediate threat that is often portrayed, nor the inevitable victors that the West fears.

“The Taliban have been able to operate in certain [mountainous areas] because of the terrain and the sympathy factor,” says Rifat Hussain of Quaid-e-Azam University. “The moment they begin to move out of the hideouts, they are exposed. If you have 100 truckloads of Taliban on the Peshawar Highway, all you need is two helicopter gunships” to wipe them out.

Coming down from the hills would also expose the Taliban to a more secular, urban world that views them as “a bunch of mountain barbarians”.

It’s a common saying these days that all Taliban are Pashtuns, but not all Pashtuns are Taliban.

The grievances that the Taliban exploit, such as unemployment and tribal feudalism, are not as prevalent even in Haripur. Lush farmland and an industrial centre support relative prosperity.

The notion of a Taliban conquest of Pakistan also bumps up against some simple arithmetic. The Taliban in Swat numbered 5,000, and the total from all factions in Pakistan is estimated in the tens of thousands, at most. The Pakistani military, meanwhile, numbers more than half a million. Until the latest counteroffensive, some analysts questioned the military’s resolve in fighting the insurgency. But the counteroffensive in Swat has convinced many that the Army is serious. The mass displacement of civilians offers grim confirmation of heavy engagement.
 
.
A lot of worry about Taliban has been due to what happened in Iran during the revolution and experiences in Africa.

In Iran after the overthrow of the Shah the religious right overthrew the centrists and came to power. There is a tendency to see Zardari as the weak centrist.
The list of reasons for the Iranian revolution match Pakistan's current situation to a T
-> Widespread anti-US feeling and belief that govt. is favoring US
-> Govt. is seen as corrupt and oppressive
-> Belief that Islam will solve all problems -political and social.
-> Economic problems

Similarly, in Africa there have been countless examples of a (perceived) weak outsider with a lot of guns overthrowing elected governments. I think the worry may have been that military may switch sides and get the democratic govt. into trouble.

Not saying anything is true, just a reason why Western media/govts are worried.
 
Last edited:
.
A lot of worry about Taliban has been due to what happened in Iran during the revolution and experiences in Africa.

In Iran after the overthrow of the Shah the religious right overthrew the centrists and came to power. There is a tendency to see Zardari as the weak centrist.
Similarly, in Africa there have been countless examples of a (perceived) weak outsider with a lot of guns overthrowing elected governments. I think the worry may have been that military may switch sides and get the democratic govt. into trouble.

Not saying anything is true, just a reason why Western media/govts are worried.


sory to say but! IRANIAN islamic revolution , was very different from , TALIBANIZATION. i guss , lack of understanding of the geo-political situation by the west , in both conflict has to be blamed?
iranian revolution was backed by , the almost the whole of the iranian nation, well talibans were the product of the ,last of the militry solutions?
 
.
Well one common thing with IRAN. THe SHAH after his removal in an interview when asked what was his mistake, He regretfully replied : 'I should not have listened to US & Britain that much'
 
.
Well one common thing with IRAN. THe SHAH after his removal in an interview when asked what was his mistake, He regretfully replied : 'I should not have listened to US & Britain that much'
Yea but PPP government is elected by MASSES not by US OF A.You people voted for them in elections.:chilli: Enjoy democracy.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom