BanglaBhoot
RETIRED TTA
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2007
- Messages
- 8,839
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
Three years ago, a Pakistani military school war-gamed over the question of Indias Baglihar Dam. Civilian and military officials were divided into mock governments that wrestled with the future prospect of India stopping the water flow in Chenab. An assertive mock government went as far as using Pakistani air force to strike down the Indian construction on the river after the collapse of the water treaty with India. That was 2005. Today, India almost controls Pakistans water. Let me also tell you that the in-camera intelligence briefing in Parliament was led by the PPP and not the military. The briefing was meant to align Pakistan behind Americas war in Afghanistan. It is an irony that this governments ambassador to Washington is concerned about anti-Americansim in Pakistan but doesnt have the stomach to say a word about rampant anti-Pakistanism in some U.S. quarters.
By AHMED QURAISHI
Tuesday, 14 October 2008.
WWW. AHMEDQURAISHI.COM
ISLAMABAD, PakistanTwo bearded, traditionally dressed Afghan men stopped the conversation, excused the CIA director, rolled out their rugs, and prayed loudly in one corner of the spy chiefs ultra-secured office in Washington, D.C. The director watched quietly until the two Mujahideen finished and rejoined the meeting.
The setting appears impossible today. But that was 1983. And director William Casey was not appeasing extremists. He was simply doing whatever a nation must do to protect its supreme national interest.
In Pakistan, we are still reluctant to firmly state our national interest. That is why the in-camera briefing in the Parliament failed to tell the truth. The briefing was not that of a military given to politicians. It was a briefing by a PPP-led government, reflecting PPP policies. The military officials were not representing themselves. They are an organization subordinate to the elected government, bound by its policies. Military officers giving the briefing conducted themselves as such. Not more and not less.
There is no question that the military cannot take the lead in making public some harsh truths if the government is not prepared to own the consequences, especially regarding the role of some of our allies in fostering secessionism and terrorism inside Pakistan as part of a wider strategic objective. There is also the question of protecting intelligence sources. Pakistan woke up late to the reality of how Afghanistan has turned into a base of operations to destabilize Pakistan. The effort to counter that will not figure in any public briefing, especially if the government in power is not interested in focusing on this.
The briefing was more about a PPP effort seeking to firmly align Pakistan behind Washingtons war in Afghanistan. The Americans want Pakistan to stop seeing India as the enemy and focus instead on American interests. That was the briefings objective. And that is why Pakistanis are seeing a sudden mushrooming of expensive newspaper advertisements owning the war, seven years after the war actually began. The parliament, by most accounts, did not hear how Washington is drastically changing the strategic outlook in the region in a way that is detrimental to Pakistani interest. There was no discussion about American plans to formalize an expanded Indian intelligence and military presence in Afghanistan, the effort to cut Pakistans ability to influence the future of Kashmir, the near-total Indian control over our waters, or the efforts to reduce Pakistans ability to protest Indian involvement in future joint patrols of Pak-Afghan border, which is also on the cards.
What the parliamentarians and the nation should have heard is what the British ambassador in Islamabad recently heard from a lady Member of Parliament. In brutal honesty, she told the ambassador there are three wars in the region. One is Americas war against the Afghan resistance. Second is Pakistans war against the militants fighting our nation. The third is the low-intensity, undeclared war against Pakistan itself, which takes the shape of exporting terrorism to our country from the Afghan soil with the final aim of cutting Pakistan to size to fit in with Washingtons larger view for the region.
This is not about going to war with America, as some U.S. apologists in Pakistan say. This is about retaining some of our interest and not completely toeing the U.S. line. We should not accept Indian hegemony in Afghanistan on American shoulders. We also should not accept Indian control over our waters. But the current Pakistani government is not taking up these issues. And there is reason to believe that some quarters in Islamabad have gone too soft when it comes to Pakistani interest. Three years ago, a Pakistani military school war-gamed over the question of Indias Baglihar Dam. Civilian and military officials were divided into mock governments that wrestled with the future prospect of India stopping the water flow in Chenab. An assertive mock government went as far as using Pakistani air force to strike down the Indian construction on the river after the collapse of the water treaty with India.
How is the government responding to these challenges? President Zardari has an assurance from India it will not block Pakistans water. Prime Minister Gilani has an assurance from United States it will not violate Pakistani sovereignty. But water blocking continues. So do the violations of our western border. And it must have been embarrassing for President Zardari to warn the Indian prime minister on the water jam after his controversial statement adopting the American line that India poses no threat to Pakistani security.
The Americans are our friends. But Pakistanis should remember that the biggest campaign spreading anti-Pakistani feelings worldwide continues unabated for several months now, led by unnamed quarters in United States. Such demonizing of Pakistan, its people, its defense institutions and its image isunprecedented. The Americans dont dare play these games with the Saudis, the Egyptians and the Turks because these countries do draw a line in the sand. It is an irony that this governments ambassador to Washington is concerned about anti-Americansim in Pakistan but doesnt have the stomach to say a word about rampant anti-Pakistanism in some U.S. quarters.
Lets not mince words about Pakistani interest: We have no interest in eliminating the Afghan Taliban. That is not our job and it should not be confused with eliminating the fake Taliban or the Pakistani Taliban who are armed and supported from the Afghan soil and exclusively assigned to fight Pakistan. America is least concerned about protecting Pakistans back in Afghanistan. Why should Pakistan reciprocate?
© 2007-2008. All rights reserved. The News International & AhmedQuraishi.com.
Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.
By AHMED QURAISHI
Tuesday, 14 October 2008.
WWW. AHMEDQURAISHI.COM
ISLAMABAD, PakistanTwo bearded, traditionally dressed Afghan men stopped the conversation, excused the CIA director, rolled out their rugs, and prayed loudly in one corner of the spy chiefs ultra-secured office in Washington, D.C. The director watched quietly until the two Mujahideen finished and rejoined the meeting.
The setting appears impossible today. But that was 1983. And director William Casey was not appeasing extremists. He was simply doing whatever a nation must do to protect its supreme national interest.
In Pakistan, we are still reluctant to firmly state our national interest. That is why the in-camera briefing in the Parliament failed to tell the truth. The briefing was not that of a military given to politicians. It was a briefing by a PPP-led government, reflecting PPP policies. The military officials were not representing themselves. They are an organization subordinate to the elected government, bound by its policies. Military officers giving the briefing conducted themselves as such. Not more and not less.
There is no question that the military cannot take the lead in making public some harsh truths if the government is not prepared to own the consequences, especially regarding the role of some of our allies in fostering secessionism and terrorism inside Pakistan as part of a wider strategic objective. There is also the question of protecting intelligence sources. Pakistan woke up late to the reality of how Afghanistan has turned into a base of operations to destabilize Pakistan. The effort to counter that will not figure in any public briefing, especially if the government in power is not interested in focusing on this.
The briefing was more about a PPP effort seeking to firmly align Pakistan behind Washingtons war in Afghanistan. The Americans want Pakistan to stop seeing India as the enemy and focus instead on American interests. That was the briefings objective. And that is why Pakistanis are seeing a sudden mushrooming of expensive newspaper advertisements owning the war, seven years after the war actually began. The parliament, by most accounts, did not hear how Washington is drastically changing the strategic outlook in the region in a way that is detrimental to Pakistani interest. There was no discussion about American plans to formalize an expanded Indian intelligence and military presence in Afghanistan, the effort to cut Pakistans ability to influence the future of Kashmir, the near-total Indian control over our waters, or the efforts to reduce Pakistans ability to protest Indian involvement in future joint patrols of Pak-Afghan border, which is also on the cards.
What the parliamentarians and the nation should have heard is what the British ambassador in Islamabad recently heard from a lady Member of Parliament. In brutal honesty, she told the ambassador there are three wars in the region. One is Americas war against the Afghan resistance. Second is Pakistans war against the militants fighting our nation. The third is the low-intensity, undeclared war against Pakistan itself, which takes the shape of exporting terrorism to our country from the Afghan soil with the final aim of cutting Pakistan to size to fit in with Washingtons larger view for the region.
This is not about going to war with America, as some U.S. apologists in Pakistan say. This is about retaining some of our interest and not completely toeing the U.S. line. We should not accept Indian hegemony in Afghanistan on American shoulders. We also should not accept Indian control over our waters. But the current Pakistani government is not taking up these issues. And there is reason to believe that some quarters in Islamabad have gone too soft when it comes to Pakistani interest. Three years ago, a Pakistani military school war-gamed over the question of Indias Baglihar Dam. Civilian and military officials were divided into mock governments that wrestled with the future prospect of India stopping the water flow in Chenab. An assertive mock government went as far as using Pakistani air force to strike down the Indian construction on the river after the collapse of the water treaty with India.
How is the government responding to these challenges? President Zardari has an assurance from India it will not block Pakistans water. Prime Minister Gilani has an assurance from United States it will not violate Pakistani sovereignty. But water blocking continues. So do the violations of our western border. And it must have been embarrassing for President Zardari to warn the Indian prime minister on the water jam after his controversial statement adopting the American line that India poses no threat to Pakistani security.
The Americans are our friends. But Pakistanis should remember that the biggest campaign spreading anti-Pakistani feelings worldwide continues unabated for several months now, led by unnamed quarters in United States. Such demonizing of Pakistan, its people, its defense institutions and its image isunprecedented. The Americans dont dare play these games with the Saudis, the Egyptians and the Turks because these countries do draw a line in the sand. It is an irony that this governments ambassador to Washington is concerned about anti-Americansim in Pakistan but doesnt have the stomach to say a word about rampant anti-Pakistanism in some U.S. quarters.
Lets not mince words about Pakistani interest: We have no interest in eliminating the Afghan Taliban. That is not our job and it should not be confused with eliminating the fake Taliban or the Pakistani Taliban who are armed and supported from the Afghan soil and exclusively assigned to fight Pakistan. America is least concerned about protecting Pakistans back in Afghanistan. Why should Pakistan reciprocate?
© 2007-2008. All rights reserved. The News International & AhmedQuraishi.com.
Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.
