Buner falls without a fight

[muse]

Stumper

I take your point however; I think you have an uphill task when it comes to suggesting that the Pakistan army is playing dutiful to the government. There never has been a so called "democratic" governement in Pakistan that did not keep itlsef out the army's focus and did so by not interferring with policy imperatives of the army, the same is the case with the present government.

As I have argued before the army is playing politics, whether it is to focus the American on consequences or to allow the "politicians" to fail, or to deny the politicians the arguement that the army in confronting the Islamist terrorists was killing fellow Pakistanis or that it is a tool of the "imperialist" (is there any other kind) Westerner. The end result as far as a growing number of Pakistanis are concerned is the perception that a faith, a bond, has been broken by the army.

I invite you read "what's wrong with Pakistan" thread initiated by Enigma - you will note that this is not a perception that I harbor in isolation. My sense is that this perception will grow and is danger to the army and of course the army can do much to help itself, give Pakistanis what they want, which is to "root out" extremists and especially of the "Islamic" variety.

On a side note, the confusion of many Pakistanis is evident in the counter they have suggested, this is not "real" Islam, not "real" Shar'iah", not even the real "Talib", they suggest - well, what then are they?? And how can we tell? (here, get ready for a line up of all the usual suspects, india, Israel, USA, ad nauseum) when it is brought to their attention Religion is what adherents practice, their emotional and intellectual attachment to ideas that animate those who today muder Pakistanis, becomes clear - "certainly not" they object and back to the argument of "real" versus "unreal".

This attachment reveals itself in the objection to labeling these by reference to their motivation and justification that they offer for their behaviour; that right Islamist terrorists they would have us believe are not motivated by Islamism - how vain (read "unrealistic") is the effort to hope to out islam the islamists?? What then must be done?

 

[Stumper]

Stumper

I take your point however; I think you have an uphill task when it comes to suggesting that the Pakistan army is playing dutiful to the government. There never has been a so called "democratic" governement in Pakistan that did not keep itlsef out the army's focus and did so by not interferring with policy imperatives of the army, the same is the case with the present government.

As I have argued before the army is playing politics, whether it is to focus the American on consequences or to allow the "politicians" to fail, or to deny the politicians the arguement that the army in confronting the Islamist terrorists was killing fellow Pakistanis or that it is a tool of the "imperialist" (is there any other kind) Westerner. The end result as far as a growing number of Pakistanis are concerned is the perception that a faith, a bond, has been broken by the army.

I invite you read "what's wrong with Pakistan" thread initiated by Enigma - you will note that this is not a perception that I harbor in isolation. My sense is that this perception will grow and is danger to the army and of course the army can do much to help itself, give Pakistanis what they want, which is to "root out" extremists and especially of the "Islamic" variety.

On a side note, the confusion of many Pakistanis is evident in the counter they have suggested, this is not "real" Islam, not "real" Shar'iah", not even the real "Talib", they suggest - well, what then are they?? And how can we tell? (here, get ready for a line up of all the usual suspects, india, Israel, USA, ad nauseum) when it is brought to their attention Religion is what adherents practice, their emotional and intellectual attachment to ideas that animate those who today muder Pakistanis, becomes clear - "certainly not" they object and back to the argument of "real" versus "unreal".

This attachment reveals itself in the objection to labeling these by reference to their motivation and justification that they offer for their behaviour; that right Islamist terrorists they would have us believe are not motivated by Islamism - how vain (read "unrealistic") is the effort to hope to out islam the islamists?? What then must be done?

Muse, Point taken. On other side i do have a provocative question. How exactly do you "Root" out the Extremism. Twisted interpretation is inherent in almost all religions. But i don't see SWAT people deploring Taliban!! ... So were they conquered because of "Something better than nothing-- Savior's" OR "Peace exchanged for submission" OR are we seeing a stockholm syndrome here?.

I, for one, am not convinced that Evacuation of this pest, will be a linear task.

 

[Kasrkin]

There is no doubt the Army can 'do much' Muse, we both agree on that. We also agree on the fact that the Army is presently disinclined to do so. But what I differ with is your contention that the Army is presently refraining from all out assault because of petty, selfish or malevolent reasons.

While there is no doubt that people like you and I do exist, people who think that terrorists have to be fought no matter what, and our numbers are slowing increasing. The fact of the matter remains that there are not enough of us, thus the government will not condone or direct the Army towards operations that will inevitability mean a serious political and social backlash. And I'm not just referring to the people who live in the terrorist haven regions, but main stream political parties and their supporters.

You say there has never been democracy in Pakistan, well I differ. The Army has been powerful, but that doesn't mean that military leaders have not been forced to go by civilian political assertiveness. The present government will dump all the blame and responsibility on the Army's shoulders and run for it on the first sign of things not working out. There is no 'if' here, its a fact. Anyone who has studied Pakistani political history will know this. So to say that the Army 'decides' everything at the end of the day is not accurate, a lot of factors 'decide' and obviously one of them is domestic public opinion. When the Army came in, it came in riding on the back of public opinion; and that’s also how it went out.

In Musharraf's era the Army got a PR kicking that will take decades to recover, this was Musharraf's greatest failure. He placed not only himself, but more importantly the army, in the line of ideological fire. Everyone from Mullahs to liberals have nothing but contempt for the Army, mainly thanks to all the things Musharraf, who was initially very popular, did in regards to Pakistan's relationship with American, the WoT and 'Enlightened Moderation'. People are still calling for his head on a pole because of Red Mosque, the Judges issue which basically was because some politicized judges were interfering with the government's cohesion in the WoT, summoning Core Commanders and what not for the 'crime' of Red Mosque, etc.

The Army is horrible at PR. They can’t mobilize public opinion and they certainly can’t channel it into a productive median. Thats the job of the politicians and the media, but we all know how that’s working out. Point is that people like you, who should be encouraging the Army and bemoaning the politicians who came with promises of ‘peace’ with terrorists, instead the Army has lost important people like you to the completely opposite, and equally unconstructive polarity. You, similar to many in India and America, are now preaching the Pakistan Army is insincere and involved in an elaborate subterfuge. Brother now you, in your own way, are being sensational and sweeping in your appraisals of the ground situation and in your dismissals of the very genuine and real impediments.

Pakistan can indeed do more in the WoT, but ‘can’ as a term is subject to many variables, one of which is undoubtedly US’s attitude. Pakistan can do more if things change, but that doesn’t mean the US has done enough. Or that they’ve been entirely helpful and productive. We need a balanced and pragmatic approach based on ground realties, otherwise we’re just part of the chaotic and self-loathing popular opinion in Pakistan that lead us to this position in the first place. The terrorists will be defeated through constructive and innovative Pakistani dogma and stands; not American and not Indian...but Pakistani. Tell people they are going to die unless they struggle, they'll argue and won't do it but if you tell them there is something in it for them...something more than mere survival, then they'll have something to look forward to and focus on. Something they can claim to be their own, a proud stand Pakistanis have lacked all too long. It's convenient and tempting to slip into the blaming, self-despising physiological merry-go-round our rivals have prepared for our people. We need to come out of this if we hope to make real solutions.

 

[muse]

On other side i do have a provocative question. How exactly do you "Root" out the Extremism. Twisted interpretation is inherent in almost all religions. But i don't see SWAT people deploring Taliban? ... So were they conquered because of "Something better than nothing-- Kind of Savior's" or "Peace exchanged for submission" or are we seeing a stockholm syndrome here?.

I, for one, am not convinced that Evacuation of this pest, will be a linear task

Why did the politicians decide to buy their safety by selling off Swat? is that what you are asking? Could it be that they realized that the Army was either unwilling or unable to deliver victory?

The very first thing to do is to oppose in all areas where it makes sense to do so, the ideology of the Islamist. To pose questions, to challenege them, it does not have to be an uncivil challenege but it must be serious, that is to say that their positions must be studied and countered. Are Pakistanis Muslims or are they Islamists, help them decide and while it may seem absurd to pose such a question, it no longer is, in fact it's most pertinent.

All those who have up close experience with Islamists are convinced that Islam is merely a "utility" for them, that what they are about is power. Islam as a utility is itself a blasphemous idea, and yet it is argued that so long as one does so peacefully and in a "democratic" process that we ought to tolerate it - as if one could argue that a party that does not believe Pakistani law to be sovereign and rather argues a law other than Pakistani law governs Pakistanis as Muslims, should be allowed to contest to represent Pakistanis and to govern them, under the Pakistani constitution. What was that we were saying about the absurd?

We have argued that Pakistanis need to approach this issue with value judgements in mind - but the state also can build it's position in opposition to this tripe about Islam a cure all and Quran, a new
"little red book" and Shari'ah as a human and not divine endeavour.

But this is one aspect, what is that the islamist extremists is about in Pakistan? What's he want? Burning schools, mistreating women, puishing around any who do not fit their "ideology" - and the sate cannot formulate any position rooted in conscience to oppose these and to position itself and it's laws as holders of conscience?

Oh yes, other than the mayhem and murder, the islamist wants the AMERICAN to deliver him justice in Palestine (read drown dem jews) and elsewhere, places where the insistence on Islamic this and that has meant that in these places strong resistance to the leading ideas of the day, find full and generally violent expression.

Given that while politicians and institutions are at each others throats, the task is very difficult, if not impossible, however; there is no other option - unless ofcourse peoples should lose confidence in Westminster and Pakistan can buy stability, prosperity and hope in modes of governance that while authoritarian, are both representative and free.

It's my sense that Pakistanis are just not the kinds of people who can live with the excesses of fanantics and while they are conservative they genuinely want more just and more equitable society, this ofcourse has implications for governance.

 

[muse]

Kasrkin

In Musharraf's era the Army got a PR kicking that will take decades to recover, this was Musharraf's greatest failure. He placed not only himself, but more importantly the army, in the line of ideological fire. Everyone from Mullahs to liberals have nothing but contempt for the Army, mainly thanks to all the things Musharraf, who was initially very popular, did in regards to Pakistan's relationship with American, the WoT and 'Enlightened Moderation'. People are still calling for his head on a pole because of Red Mosque, the Judges issue which basically was because some politicized judges were interfering with the government's cohesion in the WoT, summoning Core Commanders and what not for the 'crime' of Red Mosque, etc

.


You must equate images on TV with reality. Musharraf is hugely popular, but no so with the inqilabi media, nor with the inqilabi Mullah --the army has a DUTY to perform - you recall DUTY, without reference to politics, DUTY!!!!!!!!! This word is missing from your post, makes me wonder how it is that yoiu have overlooked this - is it because you are preoccupied with politics whereas your focus should be on DUTY?

Perform your DUTY!!! - your duty was and is to safe guard Pakistan,Pakistanis and their property -- Perform your duty without reference to Mullah, media or politics. It is due to these considerations that today criminal are set free while petitions are entertained seeking the trial and conviction of a patriot who served his nation for than 40 years in uniform - if this be a free judiciary, I'll take a less free but more responsible variety.

I am no fan of sham democracy, no fan of majoritarianism masquerading as democracy, and especially not a fan of Westminster - I hope that is clear.

The Army is horrible at PR. They can’t mobilize public opinion and they certainly can’t channel it into a productive median

.

Today it has become a source of pride for some in the Pakistan army to enumerate all things they cannot do, shameful! Earlier we spoke of will, what the Pakistan army cannot seem do is find it's WILL to perform it's DUTY. I note with much regret that even now the commander of the army has not ennunciated what the duty of the army is towrds Pakistan and Pakistanis and their property.

Tell people they are going to die unless they struggle, they'll argue and won't do it but if you tell them there is something in it for them...something more than mere survival, then they'll have something to look forward to and focus on. Something they can claim to be their own, a proud stand Pakistanis have lacked all too long.

Something Else the Pakistan Army cannot do?? If cannot be moved by threats to their survival, it is perhaps because they are no longer alive, or no longer see the need to avoid the inevitable - what can I tell you, if Jinnah's Pakistan is not motivation, maybe energies should be expended on those who do still care about Jinnah's Pakistan.

 

[Stumper]

Why did the politicians decide to buy their safety by selling off Swat? is that what you are asking? Could it be that they realized that the Army was either unwilling or unable to deliver victory?

The very first thing to do is to oppose in all areas where it makes sense to do so, the ideology of the Islamist. To pose questions, to challenege them, it does not have to be an uncivil challenege but it must be serious, that is to say that their positions must be studied and countered. Are Pakistanis Muslims or are they Islamists, help them decide and while it may seem absurd to pose such a question, it no longer is, in fact it's most pertinent.

Muse, I can understand why Mr.Zardari acted the way he did. Also I can understand the Why part of your post. What worries me most is the "How" part. As Kasrkin said, there are very few of your kind, that we as outsider's, can see from our window. I hope, it will be people like you who will keep the marches coming. That people like you will keep on taking the blow of baton, until law of land reigns supreme.

I hope we too have more of your kind in my country.

 

[muse]

there are very few of your kind, that we as outsider's, can see from our window

Stumper


This is just not factual -- I can tell you that a signifcant number of Pakistanis think as I do - however; for reasons best understood by a section of the media, and to be honest, I think it is because they are, well, inqilabi, we do not see or hear much of the opposing point of view.

But let me also say, that the MAJOR reason our voices do not dominate is because Pakistanis are generally confused about what Islam is and equally importantly what it is not.

Pakistanis generally find it very difficult to talk about ideas and especially when it comes to ideas that serve as lens through which we can evaluate ideas. All someone has to do is suggest that something is "islamic", like that idiot Qazi who using marxist idiom goes on to suggest that "islamization" - not islam itself mind you, but Islamization, is a cure all -- a cure for what, only the Qazi knows, oops, sorry, all. The same problem arises when we discuss the differnce between the ideology of Islamism and Islam the religion of Faith in God - unfortunately in our media, given their inqilabi credentials and the de rigeur anti-American stand and ofcourse the whole "U.S at war with islam" (and therby owning Islamist terror by extension of their anti-Americanism) serve to confuse Pakistanis.

I would say even say their behaviour is not just iresponsible but criminal but we have no laws or regulations to hold them accountable.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Muse,

Almost all polls conducted by Pakistani and non-Pakistani organizations have indicated a significant opposition to Musharraf and a significant drop in support for the Army.

The inqualibi media has acted criminally, no question about that - we on this forum who supported the Army's operation against the Lal Masjid were ripping our hair out at the lies, distortions and completely patently wrong 'value judgments' taking place in the media post Lal Masjid.

 

[Hellfire]

IMO what the basic problem lies in the situation is the inability of Pakistan to come out of its India centric insecurities. ( I conceed that the same is there on Indian side too but the number of people who are now obsessed with Pakistan's existence at all is at an all time low due to factors like improving economic and social situation, better lifestyles and more optios of progress for their future generations)

The first courageous decision to be made by GoP should be to accept that today Pakistan has an identity of its own and come out of the shadow of two nation theory and consider itself as the 'second nation'. It is a country that has its own unique place and identity and as such should not allow itself to be tied down to something that was irrelevant by the end of 80s. Come on, how many of the forum members here really care about what happened 61 years back or before?

What basically is today a concern is social and economic development of citizens and the nation alike. A person who has these is least likely to be bothered about anything else (like we have seen in Europe).

This change in basic thought will allow PA to recognise the fact that even if they withdraw additional troops from eastern border, they shall not be facing a threat ( but paradoxically it shall render PA second to civil control, something a person/organisation in power is loathe to allow) from there. Pakistan has a professional army and adequate nuclear assets to maintain a deterrence and in any informed opinion, it is apparent today that an all out war between the two is as likely as sun rising in west. Limited conflicts in terms of time and space may take place but they will not be allowed to snowball.

Also GoP has to recognise that the problem is extensive and if itrs not addressed now, then it shall spread. And if that is the case, it shall be too late in the day to take stern action as then you have a possibility of all out insurrection by these groups against the very authority of GoP and PA>

 

[muse]

You know whats always confused me about this "move troops from the eastern border" bit is if it's really as painful as it is made out to be, why have Pakistan not in these last eiight years built a seperate dedicated force that will do nothing but hunt and kill Islamists terrorists?

This does not have to be a large force, 20k to 25k. I'm not suggesting police duties, just hunt and kill islamist terrorists, that's all

Then no more reason to move troops from the eastern border

 

[Rabbit.Rabbit]

^I'll agree with muse here. It would seem that Pakistan is desperate to link the Kashmir issue with the ongoing conflict, in the hope of forcing Washington to take a pro-Pakistan line.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

You know whats always confused me about this "move troops from the eastern border" bit is if it's really as painful as it is made out to be, why have Pakistan not in these last eiight years built a seperate dedicated force that will do nothing but hunt and kill Islamists terrorists?

This does not have to be a large force, 20k to 25k. I'm not suggesting police duties, just hunt and kill islamist terrorists, that's all

Then no more reason to move troops from the eastern border

I think the policy makers misjudged the potency of the insurgent threat.

Secondly, so long as the back-channel diplomacy was progressing, the East was not as great an issue. We were close to a breakthrough in 2007 before the Indians withdrew from the talks after all.

The policy makers did not predict the Mumbai attacks and the subsequent Indo-Pak crises either. That one event siphoned off a significant amount of resources back to the Eastern front.

The recent suggestions by the GoP of raising a ATF/COIN force of 80,000 to 100,000 seems to be along the lines of what you suggested, though it will take years to get going.

A similar idea, pushed by Musharraf, was that of increasing the strength of the FC to 80,000 and engaging in its capacity building. From what I understand, that project was set to go until serious differences between the Bush Administration and the GoP cropped up close to the Pakistani elections, and the funds were never released.

The FC project is still on the cards, and significant changes and advances (though nowhere near enough) have been made under the new FC IG, and that force is likely going to be utilized in FATA and Swat. The new force mentioned by the GoP seems to be borne out of the realization that 'Islamist' insurgencies may crop up in the other provinces as well, and preparing for that situation in advance may very well avoid a repeat of the complications we see in FATA now.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

IMO what the basic problem lies in the situation is the inability of Pakistan to come out of its India centric insecurities.

Normalization between India and Pakistan requires both to engage, in dialog, CBM's and deescalation - arguing for unilateral policy changes is naive and a 'no go' from the beginning.

 

[Bane Blade]

You know whats always confused me about this "move troops from the eastern border" bit is if it's really as painful as it is made out to be, why have Pakistan not in these last eiight years built a seperate dedicated force that will do nothing but hunt and kill Islamists terrorists?

This does not have to be a large force, 20k to 25k. I'm not suggesting police duties, just hunt and kill islamist terrorists, that's all

Then no more reason to move troops from the eastern border

You know it sounds very naiive on your part to say that we just go aroung hunting Islamists because if they are not offered justice it won't make a difference if it is us holding the guns or them atleast not to the people living on the ground, simply death is not the answer had that been the case Hitler would have overrun the wholde world.

 

[muse]

Now and then one reads the cutest things on the forum and there some super people on the forum and you are one of them