How Afghanistan and Taliban have turned against Pakistan

[haviZsultan]

Of course we will blame you and India for killing civilians in Pakistan. Tit for tat is for us to do, remember we are victims here. We didn't start this proxy war first but Afghanistan with help of India.

What benefit does you and other common Pakistanis support for the Afghan Taliban give us. What the TTP are doing in Pakistan Afghan Taliban are doing in Afghanistan. How can we want something for the Afghans that we do not want for ourselves? I think we need to revisit our Afghan strategy. Its no working even a bit for us.

 

[Kabira]

What benefit does you and other common Pakistanis support for the Afghan Taliban give us. What the TTP are doing in Pakistan Afghan Taliban are doing in Afghanistan. How can we want something for the Afghans that we do not want for ourselves? I think we need to revisit our Afghan strategy. Its no working even a bit for us.

Existence of TTP date back to 1948, Taliban was only government who wanted peace with Pakistan and prosperity for Afghanistan. That didn't work out for obvious reasons but I'm sure Taliban have learned their lessons. Pakistanis need to get this to their heads that TTP isn't blow back. The only blow back Pakistan received was removal of Taliban from Kabul.

Now Pakistan need to fence border and control movement of people, this way TTP will have limited capability to strike from across the border no matter who rule in Kabul. If you noticed Pakistan is already working on that and now don't depend on Kabul being neutral or pro Pakistan.

 

[Kabira]

Do you seriously believe this? Afghans starting the proxy war?

Remember TTP came into the foray around 2006-2008 but you guys have been breeding Talis since 90s

TTP existed since 1948.

 

[Qutb-ud-din Aybak]

1. I would like to differ that talibans are in majority. First of all they are not at all democratic to get an idea of their mass support. If at all they have some support its probably out of fear. Mulla Omar's offer of surrender was at a time when he was on the verge of being defeated. Its more of a military matter than political. Twice the talibans had opportunity to participate in elections but they opted to continue with war.
As regards to Baloch rebels and TTP, your comments support my view that being undefeated does not mean to be in majority.
2. I am surprised at your ignorance. Hamid Karzai and Ashraf Ghani are pashtuns, aren't they? Its a fact that without pashtun votes no one can form govt in Afghanistan. Afghanistan as a nation consists of many sects like pashtuns, tajiks, ujbeks and hazaras and together they form one nation. Its not necessary a national hero has to be from majority ethnic group. For that matter even Jinnah was a shia and yet the hero of sunni majority Pakistan.
3. Northern Alliance was born in 1996 against Talibans. Talibans had support of only three countries namely Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and UAE while northern alliance was supported by Turkey, Iran, India, Russia, China, America and the central asian republics. Talibans were undemocratic and unrecognized rulers with a mindset of terrorists.
4. What was the need to write a book titled "Friends not Masters", somewhere a clarification was needed for the sake of self respect. Wont be surprized if someone writes a similar book on sino-pak relationships.

1. taliban don't kill civilians. even accorrding to UN reports the increase in civilian casualities is due to afghan government forces. afghan taliban including mullah omer had support from majority of afghans that is the only reason they ruled afghanistan with peace. that was the only reason they started with 12 man group and with in a year they captured whole afghanistan. if taliban didn't have people support then they would already have been made weaker by ISAF forces but the ground situation is different,infact opposite.
2. hamid karzai and ashraf ghani are pashtuns because pakistan had already told american that we won't allow any one else to rule afghanistan while rejecting majority. your jinnah example supported my point that mullah omer was supported by tajiks and uzbeks alike. how many percentage of afghan government and afghan army are pashtuns? remember they are 44 percent of total afghans.
3. norther alliance may be born in 1996 due to certain reasons.
a) afghan was under civil war situation with different war lords fighting for domination.
b) on cases of rape afghan taliban was formed to help.
c) afghan taliban defeated many war lords.
d) the war lords got united against taliban to save their power under northern alliance.
e) still they were defeated by afghan taliban with support from majority.
4. US betrayed pakistan in 1965 war. they wanted pakistan to fight only soviets for them and use weapons there.
sino-pak relations are different. china never told us not to use their weapons against india like US.
AYUB KHAN INTERVIEW:
“AT times our American friends seem to question our right even to defend our territory or to take such action that will bring about security. They seem to put right and wrong on an equal level.”

This serious criticism of [the] American attitude towards Pakistan was made by President Ayub Khan in an interview which he gave to The New York Times correspondent at Rawalpindi on May 29, the full text of which has just been received in Karachi.

The president further disclosed that “United States representatives had asked whether Pakistan had used American equipment some time ago in ejecting hostile elements from her territory”.

The president reminded the American correspondent that Pakistan was “not unarmed before American weapons came to us”, and he trenchantly observed that the United States “should be mindful of the fact that if our territory was violated, we would spend our time dealing with the enemy rather than putting the American weapons in cotton wool”.

“The object of these weapons,” said Field Marshal Ayub Khan, “is to defend Pakistan.” The correspondent reported the Pakistan president as “not entirely satisfied” with the military alliances of which Pakistan is a member.
http://www.dawn.com/news/633941

 

[pakistani342]

What good has this brought to Pak? Except that a society that is militant now, loss blood and treasure. An Afghan gov that stands strong and carries strong international commitment and thousands of Pak civilian dead.

Well played indeed.

You question actually is several separate questions and though inter-related they are separate:
1. Should a country (Pakistan) use Proxies [not factoring in of moral compulsions -- is it morally right or wrong to do so]?
The simple answer here is that most countries use Proxy forces -- especially when their rival is a nuclear power. See:
US/USSR in Korea
US/USSR/China in Vietnam
US/USSR in Nicaragua
US/USSR in Afghanistan

Non-Nuclear cases:
India/Pakistan 1948, 1965, 1971, ...
India in Sri Lanka
Afghanistan in Pakistan 1950s
Afghanistan in Pakistan today

2. Did Pakistan execute it's Proxy warfare effectively?
Well in 1948 it can be argued that it went from 0% of Kashmir to 40% of Kashmir by landmass -- which it has held since
Post 1979 it effectively destroyed a hostile Afghanistan government [and pretty spectacularly one can add]
Post 2006 a Kabul collapse could happen if the situation continues for another decade or two

The casualties of 50,000 given the circumstances are minimal for a country of 200 million like Pakistan

The economic stagnation, and religiosity are not the result of supporting proxies. There is no equivalent in other countries that supporting proxy warfare in Afghanistan for example the US in 1989, etc. Has there been religious fundamentalism in India as a result of its support for Tamil Tigers -- I think the answer would be unanimous no -- religious fundamentalism in India is a result of Hindu Nationalism.

Economic stagnation, religiosity are the result of deeper problems in the Muslim world: an overt reliance on religion as opposed to science, poor public policies such as lack of family planning, lack of spending on education, corruption, and lack of liberal economic policies

3. Did Pakistan achieve any tactical objectives using Proxy forces

Yes, Pakistanis are relatively good at tactical victories -- some people argue this is a result of the early structure of the Pakistan army -- all the native Generals in the early Pakistani Army were essentially Colonels who had war experience and were hastily promoted to the rank of General [except perhaps Gen Sher Bhadur Khan (? did I get this right), FMarsh Ayub Khan who were both Brigadiers at the time of partition] -- Pakistani army has never really had the experience of General ship in wartime. And frankly the only people who have that kind of experience are the Americans, British, Chinese, French, to some extent the Egyptians (kind-of) and perhaps Israelis and to some extent India (sheer size of their Army and more senior officers at the time of Partition)

4. Did Pakistan achieve any strategic objective using Proxy forces

This is a very difficult question to answer: traditionally smaller countries have trouble achieving strategic victories

A much simpler question: who won the 1973 Israel Arab war remains much debated: Israel? who encircled the 3rd Egyptian Army and caused Saadat to evacuate Cairo or Egypt who used it to retake all of Saini and negotiate a cold peace with Israel. I've read in the Pakistani staff college it is taught as a victory for Egypt [I've been told the same may be the case in Israel].

Now on your other points: they are simply not true:

1. An Afghan gov that stands strong and carries strong international commitment

This is a joke right?
Afghan government is in tatters internally
The international commitment is such they Europe used coercion to get Afghanistan to sign the refugee repatriation deal (although public denials were issued to the contrary)
Afghanistan to India is extendible -- you can read how Indian hawks talk about using Afghanistan against Pakistan
No Muslim country of note has stepped up to any significant level in support of Afghanistan [primarily because of Pakistan]

2. thousands of Pak civilian dead.
If you look at conflict in national histories 50,000 is a small number -- which equals
0.025% of the Pakistani population. The number of US casualties in Vietnam were much higher (the US is an advanced country where life is worth a lot more and Vietnam was a conflict the US could afford to loose)
10% of the Soviet population died in WWII
1% of Israel's population was lost in 1948

Further extend this: if indeed 50,000 deaths are catastrophic for Pakistan-- how do the 3 million or so Afghan deaths fare for a small country like Afghanistan [?] -- could it be that the social fabric of the country has been torn apart?

Perhaps you asked the wrong question: as I've said before: what has Afghanistan been fighting for, for the past 70 years. What has Afghanistan's hatred of Pakistani people gotten it?

As things look -- Pakistan will continue to have a strong tidal effect inside Afghanistan -- not because it has any friends in Afghanistan but because Afghanistan itself has sever fault lines and Pakistan has a lot of gravity vis-a-vis Afghanistan.

 

[Rasengan]

What good has this brought to Pak? Except that a society that is militant now, loss blood and treasure. An Afghan gov that stands strong and carries strong international commitment and thousands of Pak civilian dead.

Well played indeed.

You are a comedian, please continue the circus show. How many Afghan civilians have died this year? What is the causality rate of Afghan Solders? Have you loss more territory since 2001? You mean diddlysquat to the world because you belong to the cave Like I said to you before just be patient and you will live under Taliban rule

 

[Khan_21]

You question actually is several separate questions and though inter-related they are separate:
1. Should a country (Pakistan) use Proxies [not factoring in of moral compulsions -- is it morally right or wrong to do so]?
The simple answer here is that most countries use Proxy forces -- especially when their rival is a nuclear power. See:
US/USSR in Korea
US/USSR/China in Vietnam
US/USSR in Nicaragua
US/USSR in Afghanistan

Non-Nuclear cases:
India/Pakistan 1948, 1965, 1971, ...
India in Sri Lanka
Afghanistan in Pakistan 1950s
Afghanistan in Pakistan today

2. Did Pakistan execute it's Proxy warfare effectively?
Well in 1948 it can be argued that it went from 0% of Kashmir to 40% of Kashmir by landmass -- which it has held since
Post 1979 it effectively destroyed a hostile Afghanistan government [and pretty spectacularly one can add]
Post 2006 a Kabul collapse could happen if the situation continues for another decade or two

The casualties of 50,000 given the circumstances are minimal for a country of 200 million like Pakistan

The economic stagnation, and religiosity are not the result of supporting proxies. There is no equivalent in other countries that supporting proxy warfare in Afghanistan for example the US in 1989, etc. Has there been religious fundamentalism in India as a result of its support for Tamil Tigers -- I think the answer would be unanimous no -- religious fundamentalism in India is a result of Hindu Nationalism.

Economic stagnation, religiosity are the result of deeper problems in the Muslim world: an overt reliance on religion as opposed to science, poor public policies such as lack of family planning, lack of spending on education, corruption, and lack of liberal economic policies

3. Did Pakistan achieve any tactical objectives using Proxy forces

Yes, Pakistanis are relatively good at tactical victories -- some people argue this is a result of the early structure of the Pakistan army -- all the native Generals in the early Pakistani Army were essentially Colonels who had war experience and were hastily promoted to the rank of General [except perhaps Gen Sher Bhadur Khan (? did I get this right), FMarsh Ayub Khan who were both Brigadiers at the time of partition] -- Pakistani army has never really had the experience of General ship in wartime. And frankly the only people who have that kind of experience are the Americans, British, Chinese, French, to some extent the Egyptians (kind-of) and perhaps Israelis and to some extent India (sheer size of their Army and more senior officers at the time of Partition)

4. Did Pakistan achieve any strategic objective using Proxy forces

This is a very difficult question to answer: traditionally smaller countries have trouble achieving strategic victories

A much simpler question: who won the 1973 Israel Arab war remains much debated: Israel? who encircled the 3rd Egyptian Army and caused Saadat to evacuate Cairo or Egypt who used it to retake all of Saini and negotiate a cold peace with Israel. I've read in the Pakistani staff college it is taught as a victory for Egypt [I've been told the same may be the case in Israel].

Now on your other points: they are simply not true:

1. An Afghan gov that stands strong and carries strong international commitment

This is a joke right?
Afghan government is in tatters internally
The international commitment is such they Europe used coercion to get Afghanistan to sign the refugee repatriation deal (although public denials were issued to the contrary)
Afghanistan to India is extendible -- you can read how Indian hawks talk about using Afghanistan against Pakistan
No Muslim country of note has stepped up to any significant level in support of Afghanistan [primarily because of Pakistan]

2. thousands of Pak civilian dead.
If you look at conflict in national histories 50,000 is a small number -- which equals
0.025% of the Pakistani population. The number of US casualties in Vietnam were much higher (the US is an advanced country where life is worth a lot more and Vietnam was a conflict the US could afford to loose)
10% of the Soviet population died in WWII
1% of Israel's population was lost in 1948

Further extend this: if indeed 50,000 deaths are catastrophic for Pakistan-- how do the 3 million or so Afghan deaths fare for a small country like Afghanistan [?] -- could it be that the social fabric of the country has been torn apart?

Perhaps you asked the wrong question: as I've said before: what has Afghanistan been fighting for, for the past 70 years. What has Afghanistan's hatred of Pakistani people gotten it?

As things look -- Pakistan will continue to have a strong tidal effect inside Afghanistan -- not because it has any friends in Afghanistan but because Afghanistan itself has sever fault lines and Pakistan has a lot of gravity vis-a-vis Afghanistan.

The number of people dead is 25k according to South Asian terrorism portal . Deaths by terrorism are in a decline . This year we had around 600 casualities which is the lowest since 2005 .

There is no economic stagnation as of today in Pakistan. we were hampered with terrorism from 2008-2013 which affected our growth . Terrorism has been wiped out which has brought amazing results . our stock exchange is the best performing in asia (top 5 in the world ) , all major economic entities like Moodys , S & P have updated our outlook as very positive . On the investment front we just got the good news of renault opening up a plant in Pakistan .

 

[pakistani342]

The number of people dead is 25k according to South Asian terrorism portal . Deaths by terrorism are in a decline . This year we had around 600 casualities which is the lowest since 2005 .

There is no economic stagnation as of today in Pakistan. we were hampered with terrorism from 2008-2013 which affected our growth . Terrorism has been wiped out which has brought amazing results . our stock exchange is the best performing in asia (top 5 in the world ) , all major economic entities like Moodys , S & P have updated our outlook as very positive . On the investment front we just got the good news of renault opening up a plant in Pakistan .

yes there may be instances to positive news but let me ask the following layman questions:

1. What is the progress on stuff like population control? How has Pakistan's population growth rate been stabilized
2. I've heard there is an increased rate of children being born stunted -- why is this the case?
3. What about progress on critical issues like marriages within cousins: could Pakistanis and the Muslim world be setting themselves up for a catastrophic event like massive genetic deficit?
4. What about human development indicators -- what is the progress on that front?
5. What about competitive index, ease of doing business?
6. How does Pakistan projected growth rater over the next 10 years look when compared to historical growth rates of Asian tigers?

 

[Khan_21]

yes there may be instances to positive news but let me ask the following layman questions:

1. What is the progress on stuff like population control? How has Pakistan's population growth rate been stabilized
2. I've heard there is an increased rate of children being born stunted -- why is this the case?
3. What about progress on critical issues like marriages within cousins: could Pakistanis and the Muslim world be setting themselves up for a catastrophic event like massive genetic deficit?
4. What about human development indicators -- what is the progress on that front?
5. What about competitive index, ease of doing business?
6. How does Pakistan projected growth rater over the next 10 years look when compared to historical growth rates of Asian tigers?

1. Our birth rates are high . Government is devising policies to curb population growth rate to 1.3 % by 2020 . Numerous programmes are underway to highlight that like Pakistan family planning 2020 .

http://www.familyplanning2020.org/entities/97

Contraceptive use is 35 % now which will increase to 55 % by 2020 .

http://tribune.com.pk/story/918815/...an-champion-the-cause-of-population-planning/

At the 2012 London Summit on Family Planning, Pakistan had committed to increase the contraceptive prevalence rate to 55 per cent by 2020. Five years short of 2020, the world looks on to see if the commitment will be honoured. “Pakistan’s pledge at the London Summit is an opportunity, perhaps the last, to actually ratchet up efforts, drum up the political will and redesign the programs to accelerate family planning in Pakistan,” says Sathar.

2 . Stunting is one area which Pakistan needs to improve . Government along with Unicef will reduce stunting from 44 % in 2015 to 34 % in 2017 . Pakistan has the best sanitation in South Asia which will dramatically reduce Stunting in future .

http://progress4children.org.pk/stop-stunting/

NUTRITION SPECIFIC

1. Integrating nutrition and WASH behavior messages to improve family and community hygiene practices
2. Ensuring UNICEF multi-sector programmes are aligned to leverage the effects on stunting prevention
3. Recent improvements in Pakistan’s improved sanitation figures should also have a positive impact on national stunting figures. This is because poor sanitation can have immediate effects on health, such as diarrhea and other diseases, which can lead to deaths in already malnourished children. There is increasing evidence that it can also cause malnutrition through a gut disorder that leaves the body unable to absorb nutrients

STUNTING – A DECADES OLD PROBLEM
The following graph illustrates persistent high levels of stunting in Pakistan since the mid 1960’s. Note that the country has only once dipped below the global critical level of 40 percent in the early 1990’s.

Trends in stunting

We reduced stunting during the 90's and hopefully we can do it again .

3. Marriages within cousins is prevalent here but its not what it used to be years before . Now i see more marriages to a different race than ever before. With each passing day we and with more awareness we will improve in this department .

4. Human development index suffered from 2008-2013 due to terrorism but is back on track due to peace in the country . Human development has increased by 2 points since 2014 . HDI is not the be all end all . There are other indices in the quality of life where Pakistan has improved . In the United nations Happiness report and Mercers quality of life Pakistan has seen an increase in Rankings . There are many Indices where we have Improved .

Logistics Index

2015 = Ranked 72
2016 = 68

Corruption Index

2015 = 126
2016 = 117

Then there are Environment performance index , Global competitive report ( we improved by 4 spots) , Sanitation ( We are amongst the top 5 in terms of improving sanitation) , MPI ( We have the least poverty amongst the big three of India , Pakistan and Bangladesh ) and many more .

We upgraded to MCSI emerging index recently from frontier , Moodys and S&P are positive about the economy , Stock exchange is amongst the best in the world and all this when CPEC has just kicked off . Good times ahead .

5. Again Pakistan has improved its ranking in ease of doing business and is amongst the top 10 reformers of 2017 .

http://www.dawn.com/news/1292446/pakistan-moves-up-in-ease-of-doing-business-rankings

Pakistan has made some important progress towards the ease of doing business for small and medium-sized enterprises, finds the latest edition of the World Bank Group’s Doing Business report.

As a result, the country has emerged as one of the global top 10 improvers this year, says the report titled ‘Doing Business 2017: Equal Opportunity for All’.

Pakistan’s position in the doing business global rankings improved to 144 out of 190 economies this year under the latest methodology as a result of the reforms programme announced by the government. The country was ranked 148th last year.

The country’s ‘distance to frontier’ score, a measure of distance each economy has moved towards best practice expressed as frontier at 100, also improved from 49.48 to 51.77 this year.

Pakistan had announced a three-year road map to improve its global ranking on doing business earlier this year. Consistent with that, the country completed three reforms in the past year in registering property, getting credit and trading across borders.

6 . Pakistan has a very bright future ahead . Its hard to project growth over 10 years for any country but In the near future things are looking good . Economic growth is around 5 % now which will rise to 5.5 - 6 % next year and 7 % by 2018 .

http://www.dawn.com/news/1238591

ISLAMABAD: World Bank President Jim Yong Kim has said that Pakistan is now on the path of increased economic growth and prosperity.

He was talking to Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and Finance Minister Ishaq Dar in separate meetings held here on Tuesday.

Mr Kim, who is on his first visit to Pakistan, applauded the prudent economic policies of Pakistan government, saying that the country’s economic outlook had become stable which was the result of the efforts of its financial team.

http://tribune.com.pk/story/1220236/imf-backed-reforms-christine-lagarde-congratulates-pm-nawaz/

ISLAMABAD:

International Monetary Fund (IMF) Managing Director Christine Lagarde has congratulated Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif on the completion of country’s IMF-supported economic reform programme.


In a letter addressed to the prime minister the IMF chief said, “Pakistan has achieved a great deal over the past three years, and I congratulate you and your colleagues on the completion of your IMF-supported economic reform programme which helped restore macroeconomic stability and strengthen economy’s resilience.”

http://asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Economy/Economy/Pakistan-Asia-s-next-growth-engine

Pakistan: Asia's next growth engine

Yet despite its troubled image, Pakistan is gradually emerging as an economy with significant growth potential.

It is one of the "Next 11" countries identified as the next emerging forces after BRICS -- Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. Pakistan's inclusion is predicated on a population of 190 million, making it the sixth most populous country in the world.
Apparently MSCI has a renewed positive view on the country now that it has maintained solid economic growth on the back of continued loans from the International Monetary Fund and falling oil prices, and that its stock market has been on a steady rise.

Provided safety concerns continue to be addressed, Pakistan has the potential to become one of Asia's growth engines.

In addition, Pakistan's young population is growing, meaning that it is likely to enter a period of "demographic dividend," in which the percentage of the workforce against total population rises to high levels for the next four to five decades, helping to accelerate economic growth.