US: Expert (Christine Fair - RAND) who infuriated India offered key post

[pmukherjee]

Of course not.

The suggestion to open fronts in Pakistan was cheered on by Ms. Fair. As it SHOULD BE. So Pakistan SHOULD BE blowing up those Indian consulates and promoting the ULFA?

Please approve, S-2.

I am sorry but did Ms Fair suggest blowing up of consulates in Afghanistan? I did not find that anywhere in her testimonies or research papers. The US has suffered more from embassy bombings and attacks than any other nation. An American advocating or even supporting this form of action, is quite incomprehensible.

Besides, hasn't that already been tried out, twice? And to what effect, one may ask? Have Pakistan's 'neuralgic security apprehensions' (to quote Ms Fair), been adequately addressed? Will they ever be?

I am afraid Ms Fair is correct in her assessment when she says that India will not 'reward Pakistan for using state sponsored terrorism in furthering its foreign policy aims in India' only to satisfy nebulous American formulations for possible solutions to the AFPAK issue. India will continue to strengthen its relations with the likes of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Iran, Israel, Russia, USA and so on. If this exacerbates Pakistan's insecurity, it has little choice in the matter. India's foreign policy is not Pakistan centric, it is India centric.

A military solution has never really existed from the Pakistani perspective. Engaging India in an unconventional battle of attrition will not benefit Pakistan. This is pretty obvious.

Encouraging proxies in India's NE is a policy that Pakistan and China has been following for quite some time now. While China has had the dominant role by far in this regard, strong ISI presence in BD and Nepal and linkage of insurgent groups like ULFA, NSCN and HUJI with the ISI is common knowledge. How exactly has this helped Pakistan? Any increased Pakistani involvement in the NE will only be met by a stepped up Indian response. Like I said earlier, nothing new there.

Also my friend, kindly allow me to correct you. In no COIN operation in India, either in Kashmir or the NE, has air power been used. Nor has artillery ever been used. Involvement of the air force has been limited to recon, aerial evacuation of the wounded and the occasional insertion of special forces. All engagements are limited to small arms only. So no one is bombing any one anywhere.

Regards

 

[S-2]

From yesterday's WSJ-

Speaking Of Pakistan: When the U.S. and India Talk About Pakistan - WSJ Nov. 23, 2009

Now Ms. Fair has made it perfectly clear that she's no Delhi mouthpiece. She's AMERICAN through and through. She also recognizes that accepting the job of Assistant Deputy Undersecretary of State for Tedium in S. Asia would muzzle her scholarship and that she can serve my nation so much better from her chair at Georgetown Univ.

Make no mistake, her face time is far higher now than were she buried in the bowels of foggy bottom.

Good thing too. Glad she clarified that lil' matter in F.P. last spring about Balochistan. Her sense of matters align beautifully with my own...

 

[Awesome]

I am sorry but did Ms Fair suggest blowing up of consulates in Afghanistan? I did not find that anywhere in her testimonies or research papers. The US has suffered more from embassy bombings and attacks than any other nation. An American advocating or even supporting this form of action, is quite incomprehensible.

Yeah but she did say whatever the Indians are doing (and its supposedly not what we think they are doing) in PAKISTAN is a good thing.

So we, Pakistanis, should stop that right? Blow up those consulates.

Besides, hasn't that already been tried out, twice? And to what effect, one may ask? Have Pakistan's 'neuralgic security apprehensions' (to quote Ms Fair), been adequately addressed? Will they ever be?

Try, try again. One embassy was bombed, all of em need to be wiped out.

I am afraid Ms Fair is correct in her assessment when she says that India will not 'reward Pakistan for using state sponsored terrorism in furthering its foreign policy aims in India' only to satisfy nebulous American formulations for possible solutions to the AFPAK issue. India will continue to strengthen its relations with the likes of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Iran, Israel, Russia, USA and so on. If this exacerbates Pakistan's insecurity, it has little choice in the matter. India's foreign policy is not Pakistan centric, it is India centric.

No, no, don't deviate. I strictly mean funding and supplying weapons to terrorists within Pakistan. India is not just making friends and asking them to put pressure on Pakistan or something, India is actively engaged in terrorism against Pakistan. If India does that, we should do the same with ULFA.

A military solution has never really existed from the Pakistani perspective. Engaging India in an unconventional battle of attrition will not benefit Pakistan. This is pretty obvious.

Actually not doing so has made India braver and has kept up the wave of suicide bombings, funding and supplying weapons to terrorists within Pakistan. It makes perfect sense to apply the same logic upon India's northeastern states. Keep India busy there so it may not expand its terror network within Pakistan.

Encouraging proxies in India's NE is a policy that Pakistan and China has been following for quite some time now. While China has had the dominant role by far in this regard, strong ISI presence in BD and Nepal and linkage of insurgent groups like ULFA, NSCN and HUJI with the ISI is common knowledge. How exactly has this helped Pakistan? Any increased Pakistani involvement in the NE will only be met by a stepped up Indian response. Like I said earlier, nothing new there.

Actually India has instigated the fight by jumping into the tribal areas and the balochistan issue, the stepped up response of now meddling into the NE states is from our side.

Also my friend, kindly allow me to correct you. In no COIN operation in India, either in Kashmir or the NE, has air power been used. Nor has artillery ever been used. Involvement of the air force has been limited to recon, aerial evacuation of the wounded and the occasional insertion of special forces. All engagements are limited to small arms only. So no one is bombing any one anywhere.

Perhaps we have to fix that and only then would India be given a taste of its own medicine.

If I can think of it, I'm sure strategic planners in better positions of execution of plans have already thought about it.

Seemingly there's no other way. We SHOULD BE doing this.

 

[Awesome]

From yesterday's WSJ-

Speaking Of Pakistan: When the U.S. and India Talk About Pakistan - WSJ Nov. 23, 2009

Now Ms. Fair has made it perfectly clear that she's no Delhi mouthpiece. She's AMERICAN through and through. She also recognizes that accepting the job of Assistant Deputy Undersecretary of State for Tedium in S. Asia would muzzle her scholarship and that she can serve my nation so much better from her chair at Georgetown Univ.

Make no mistake, her face time is far higher now than were she buried in the bowels of foggy bottom.

Good thing too. Glad she clarified that lil' matter in F.P. last spring about Balochistan. Her sense of matters align beautifully with my own...

Now come on, you're a smart guy, you definitely don't buy this:

India and the U.S. share a common vision of a stable, democratic, civilian-controlled Pakistan at peace with itself and its neighbors. But they have often disagreed on how best to achieve this end. It is unlikely that Mr. Singh's visit will yield an immediate consensus, but will likely continue to focus on law enforcement and counterintelligence cooperation.

A stable, economically strong Pakistan can build weapons, can challenge Indian exports, like rice, textiles and can take a small piece out of Indian IT market... Did I mention build more weapons?

A democratic Pakistan would be forced to fulfill the wishes of Pakistanis to pursue the Kashmir Independence option, thats what the entire country wants.

There is no way India wants all that. What India wants is a Pakistan that is on the boil. A Pakistan that has frequent suicide bombings but no takeover from the Taliban. That way Pakistan is engaged with the tribal folk while no one is pursuing Kashmir.

 

[rastor]

A stable, economically strong Pakistan can build weapons, can challenge Indian exports, like rice, textiles and can take a small piece out of Indian IT market... Did I mention build more weapons?

A democratic Pakistan would be forced to fulfill the wishes of Pakistanis to pursue the Kashmir Independence option, thats what the entire country wants.

There is no way India wants all that. What India wants is a Pakistan that is on the boil. A Pakistan that has frequent suicide bombings but no takeover from the Taliban. That way Pakistan is engaged with the tribal folk while no one is pursuing Kashmir.

What India wants or does not want is irrelevant. Pakistan has been "pursuing" kashmir for a long time & let's face it - it has gotten nowhere. Most of pakistan's present problem is self-inflicted.....lack of civic institutions, pseudo-democracy, radicalization, use of extremism for state goals......I see only 2 muslim countries using Islamic extremists for furthering state goals one is Iran & the other is Pakistan.

Given that the kashmir solution will take time.....pakistan should eliminate the radical strain in its polity & work on improving the lot of its people. With the radical strain gone all that you mentioned in the first paragraph will become a possiblity.

 

[toxic_pus]

Yeah but she did say whatever the Indians are doing (and its supposedly not what we think they are doing) in PAKISTAN is a good thing.

So we, Pakistanis, should stop that right? Blow up those consulates.

I am not sure if Ms Fair is saying that 'whatever the Indians are doing in Pakistan is a good thing'. She appears to be saying that India IS doing in Pakistan, what India is expected to do, perhaps even less. Although she hasn't really clarified what is it that the Indians are doing, she has categorically denied, that it is not what the Pakistanis think - that is, not stoking terrorism in Pakistan.

Your entire argument is based on this wrong premise that Ms Fair is advocating India to foment terrorism. She is not. That makes your argument a strawman argument.

...India is actively engaged in terrorism against Pakistan. If India does that, we should do the same with ULFA.

There you go. You have already decided that India is stoking terrorism in your country.

You have to, because it provides you with a justification for your nefarious activities within India. Hence, you are reading Ms Fair's comment in a manner that serves your prejudice.

It is not IF India does something, THEN you will do something. Problem is you ARE doing everything, without any evidence of India doing anything that you accuse India of.

And that is the sign of a 'neurologically insecure' state.

 

[53fd]

Christine Fair is very good at propagating conspiracy theories & speculation of journalists/"think tanks" with providing any semblance of conclusive evidence.

 

[punit]

There is another thing that India hasn't foreseen. We can open up new fronts in Assam, Nagaland and other eastern territories. There too you have your OWN SOBs which are ready to kill Indians for a few pennies. We just have to ensure they are well supplied. It can be India's very own Waziristan situation. We won't have to be involved it will be Indians fighting Indians.

get over>>> BD is no longer part of Pakistan ,, so forget eastern theatre. ur best bet is J&K do whatever we can do .. we will try to pay back with interest and incentives

 

[IND151]

Fair said the US inability to compel Pakistan to stop its funding and support to all extremist groups was actually what was behind the instability in South Asia, and pointed out, "Let's remember,that it was a Pakistan-based and backed terrorist group, Jaish-e-Mohammed, that attacked the Indian Parliament, which brought the largest mobilisation of forces throughout the country, both of them to a near-war crisis with the spectre of nuclear escalation."

"The Pakistan Taliban share overlapping membership with those very same groups that target India," she said, "and obviously, the Afghan Taliban, operating in Afghanistan. So, it can't defeat its own internal security threats -- which brings into question, Pakistan's national integrity and obviously its strategic assets -- until it is compelled to strategically abandon militancy."

Fair argued that the massive aid to Pakistan would not "fix Pakistan's chronically neuralgic sense of insecurity vis-a-vis India."

"I don't think what India does or does not do in Afghanistan is going to make Pakistan stop supporting the Taliban," she predicted. "I think we need to think very hard about what is Pakistan's genuine source of insecurity and put some things on the table that might be out of the box."

 

[IND151]

Actually Pakistan is up to something in India, as they should be. But it is not what the Indians say they are.

If to get Indians to stop terrorism in Pakistan is to support Indian separatist movements, then opening a front in Asom and Nagaland makes perfect sense. If Indians quit from their nefarious activities in Afghanistan and Pakistani tribal areas then Pakistan would have no need to interfere in Indian internal matters.

if Pakistan stops spreading terror in India, we will not poke in your internal matters. its you who started this. you tried to destabilize north east India with Chinese help. you started spreading terror in Kashmir in 1989. but we nearly eliminated terrorists in north eastern corridor. for stopping lal denga, manekshaw used best tactics both military and non military. so lal denga gave up and made negotiations with GOI. it ended mizo terrorist activities.
SAM manekshaw once said " naga insurgency will stop when naga people will start to use shoes."he meant that economic uplift of nagas is only way to end naga insurgencies. we have done it to much extent. so opening front in naga land wont help. for Assam, remember bd is our ally. with its help we will thaw your attempts in Assam .
last but not least, we have lot much ( compared to you ) money. if you open fronts in India, we will simply harras you economically.( like last time we forbid your planes to use our airspace. it cost you very much .)
if you are sill not satisfied then be it. i cant help you more than it. thanks.

 

[Jackdaws]

From an Indian perspective -

a. Does the general Indian public know where Balochistan is? No
On the other hand, do the Pakistanis know about Kashmir - Yes

b. If Indians were aware of Pakistanis plight in Balochistan - would they be happy? Yes. But if they found out that Indian state was involved in formenting trouble in Balochistan - would they still be happy? No. Infact, the media would rile the govt. no end and the govt. would be on the backfoot. Heck, the govt. might even fall