'India faces threat of another 26/11, likely to act militarily', says US think tank

[amarnath]

But look at ur govt shivering by just an Indian bark, comeon ur cartoonist are making fun of ur country...

 

[kashith]

What if Pakistanis land at our border?M J Akbar, 17 January 2010, 12:39 AM IST
A good friend from Lahore, an activist deeply committed to people's rights and the integrity of Pakistan's legal structures, asked me a question so startling that it took a while to sink in. What would India do if a million Pakistanis reached the Wagah border, demanding safety in India from the Taliban and its ancilliary ideological warriors?

The prospect is only as unthinkable as an analyst suggesting, over coffee on College Street in Calcutta in 1969, that three million refugees from East Pakistan would descend on the city's maidan within two years, forcing a war that would lead to an independent Bangladesh. Pakistan lost the trust of half its population within a quarter century of its birth. Within another four decades, half of what was left is in mortal fear of the other half.

Just as 1971 could not be contained within the geography of Pakistan, a second existential upheaval will also spill over into India. It cannot seep westwards into Afghanistan, because this is, in a sense, another east-west confrontation: the east is under siege from the frontier west, and the east can only move further east for asylum.

How would India, and, more important, Indians, react? In various ways, surely: shock, smugness, gloating, concern — both for those trying to stream in and for the volatile consequences of their arrival. But at some point, sooner rather than later, this range would have to coalesce into one broad sentiment that could then be translated into official policy. Would that be sympathy or cynicism? Would the human heart prevail as children, women and the young sought the comfort of India, or would antipathy make us dismiss them with a sneer: "You made your bed in 1947, now sleep on its thorns."

Punjab would have the decisive voice. I believe that most of Punjab, though not all, would speak from its heart, perhaps with tears in its eyes, even if a colder Delhi thought it a good idea to consign the refugees to thorns. Is this being sentimental? Perhaps, but it would be a cold life without sentiment. In 1971, West Bengal did not check the religion of refugees. Most of them were Muslims, but that was less important than the fact they were three million frightened and hungry Bengalis.

But there are also significant differences, both in time and space. India had never felt threatened by East Pakistan. Bengali Muslims did not forsake their language or script although there was pressure from Karachi "nationalists", in the early years, to write Bengali in the Urdu alphabet (just as, for instance, Kemal Ataturk made Turks abandon the Arabic script and switch to Roman). The reaction was so severe that such ideas were quickly forgotten. There were riots in Bengal, as bitter if not as widespread as those in Punjab, but links were more firmly maintained. There were riots, and there was discrimination against Bengali Hindus; but East Pakistan was not emptied of Hindus, as happened to Hindus in Pakistani Punjab and Sind. Any anger against Indian "repression" was soon overtaken by the reality of West Pakistani oppression against Bengalis for reasons that can only be described as racist.

Time offers its own angularities. In 1971 Indians were angry at the aggression of 1965. War is a tragedy, but one which is acceptable as part of human experience; there is no lifetime in history that can claim it has not undergone the tension and cleavage of war. The dominant experience of the last four decades has been of terrorism. Terrorism is a sly, surreptitious, contemptible evil that makes no distinction between innocent and enemy. How much will the horror of remembered terrorism faze eyes and ice up veins if, God forbid, there is clamour at the gates of Wagah? War will inevitably follow refugees into India; it is possible that a fifth column might camouflage itself in the misery of a human exodus. When citizens have made borders irrelevant why should armies, state or non-state, uniformed or shadowy, respect lines drawn on water? Who will be where in that war? Will the Pakistani armed forces be as divided as the country, split by ideology? Will half the Pakistanis fight alongside Indian forces? The imponderables chase the unthinkable.

One of the defining images of Pakistan's sense of itself is etched on the walls of its side of Wagah: a depiction of wrecked refugees streaming into the new country after Partition. The calamity was not one-sided; there were traumatized millions entering India as well. But India has not frozen that moment in stone, to remind everyone that this was once the brutal battlefield of a civil war. Perhaps Lahoris will erase that image, wherever it is, before they reach the gates of Wagah.

Well you guys would be welcome if these non state actors push you out of your home

 

[Veer]

AMAN ki AASHA k liyay AMAN ki BHASHA bhi Zaroori hai!

You want this eternal threat to end? Liberate Indian Occupied Kashmir and prosecute the Samjhota Express criminal. Why does not India take the first step? After all, it projects to be more responsible and 'restrained' as you have very naively put!

Let us eliminate the 'main reason of content since 1947 ' behind this threat and progress! Hope this rationale is good for you?

The real reason is hatred how can we eliminate hatred when you don't want to, no doctor can cure a patient who don't want to get well.

If it is about Hindu-Muslim, as many Pakistani says that Hindus in India are dominating Muslims in Kashmir you forget that it is not Kashmir but Jammy & Kashmir and there is a large population of Hindus, Buddhists and Sikhs also what about them.

Even if one go by zaid hamid kind of argument that Hindus are killing Muslims in Kashmir, how many Muslims have been killed in Kashmir.
Here i don't want to prove our secular credential as the world knows truth.

If you are so mush well wisher of Muslims why don't you raise a voice when Chinese kills Muslims (Uighur) in china.

Also, why you have killed Muslims in east Pakistan (Now, Bangladesh) Don't you want to suggest that if you kills 100 Muslim then it is absolutely ok but if we kills a terrorist it is a crime. Then it's becomes a Hindu killed a Muslim, what a Hippocracy.

 

[karan.1970]

Attack on Indian Parliament - INDIAN RESPONSE = 0

Attack on Mumbai - INDIAN RESPONSE = 0

The question here really is that is India stupid enough to impose a war on Pakistan or attack Pakistan based on whim and cooked up evidence of its own internal shortcomings or owing to some loonies gunning down a bunch of Indians, knowing full well that our response will be stone-for-brick laden with uranium based firecrackers?

India is seriously mistaken if it believes in any 'limited' engagement scenarios of any imposed conflict or initiation of war from across its borders. Trust me when I say this; our soldiers and nation will treat Indian Army worse than what it has done to TTP goons in Swat and SWA.

Any initiation of war between Pakistan and India will open a pandora's box of hurt on both sides of the border.

So either if its Chadambarum or Gen Kapoora or MMS; its best that India keep on pushing its usual anti-Pakistan rhetoric than think of throwing an actual bullet across our border in any shape, way of form.

so 2 contradicting views here.. I have read on this forum, umpteen posts from pakistani friends, that India has really been hurting pakistan thru TTP, Baluch insurgency, Bomb blasts routinely blamed on Indian RAW, Indian terrorists etc..There is talk of secret proofs shared with US, Europe and even India without making them public. If all my pakistani's friends believe that then is the above equation about India's response being zero really true. Is it that India has already imposed this war on Pakistan in its own language??

I would like to believe that its not the case, but then to my pakistani friends, choose it one way or the other and stop swinging both ways

 

[The Patriot]

Pakistan already is taking on the TTP in NWFP and FATA. Until and unless we want to open up a country wide front by taking on and arresting the leadership of groups such as JuD, this will have to wait.

The other issue is on what charges do we arrest these folks on? Indians have evidence but it implicates lower cadres. The senior leadership of such groups has not been linked by an concrete evidence so even if we detained these men, on what charges can the government hold them? Given the stand of the judiciary on holding people in jail without evidence, none of these leaders will stay in jail.

The Mumbai attacks have hurt Pakistan's image and cause more than anything. There is no state collusion in such actions and this should be well understood by the Indian side. Pakistani population will overwhelmingly support a very strong reaction to any unilateral strikes against Pakistan and this will result in further escalation.

The only option on the table is for Pakistan to move gradually against such groups so they cannot undermine the inter-state relations between Pakistan and India.

We waited for Taliban and they spread like the jungle fire. We wait for another terror group the same will happen. there was no LeT in Mardan before it was banned in 2002. but now they have taken over several villages by converting people to wahabi or salafi ideology. they have occupied or opened their own mosques. they spread jihadi literature, support Taliban, find them recruits, run illegal FM channels. The guys in Mardan work for both Afghan Taliban and TTP. They send militants to Afghanistan.

are these crimes not enough to implicate them. but no, nobody is doing anything about them. forget about india, they are threat to our society first.

so if we wait, insurgency will never be over in Pakistan.

 

[blain2]

We waited for Taliban and they spread like the jungle fire. We wait for another terror group the same will happen. there was no LeT in Mardan before it was banned in 2002. but now they have taken over several villages by converting people to wahabi or salafi ideology. they have occupied or opened their own mosques. they spread jihadi literature, support Taliban, find them recruits, run illegal FM channels. The guys in Mardan work for both Afghan Taliban and TTP. They send militants to Afghanistan.

are these crimes not enough to implicate them. but no, nobody is doing anything about them. forget about india, they are threat to our society first.

so if we wait, insurgency will never be over in Pakistan.

You pick your battles. You cannot wage wide-frontage fight against an extremist movement that has evolved over 30 years and has active and passive support amongst the population. The day Army goes in after these guys, you will see massive destabilization movement launched by the parties on the right.

Musharraf government was not able to justify a simple AT operation at Lal Masjid due to the frenzied media and public campaign supported by the right and here do we really believe that we can start police, army and civil action against the various groups in Pakistan all in one go?

If they try, they probably will fail because they will open too many fronts. Pakistan has to get at least a handle on the situation in FATA. Once the Army has that issue sorted out to a reasonable level, then you can start making inroads in the Punjab and down south. This is a 5-10 year strategy and it should be executed with care.

 

[blain2]

What if Pakistanis land at our border?M J Akbar, 17 January 2010, 12:39 AM IST
A good friend from Lahore, an activist deeply committed to people's rights and the integrity of Pakistan's legal structures, asked me a question so startling that it took a while to sink in. What would India do if a million Pakistanis reached the Wagah border, demanding safety in India from the Taliban and its ancilliary ideological warriors?

The prospect is only as unthinkable as an analyst suggesting, over coffee on College Street in Calcutta in 1969, that three million refugees from East Pakistan would descend on the city's maidan within two years, forcing a war that would lead to an independent Bangladesh. Pakistan lost the trust of half its population within a quarter century of its birth. Within another four decades, half of what was left is in mortal fear of the other half.

Just as 1971 could not be contained within the geography of Pakistan, a second existential upheaval will also spill over into India. It cannot seep westwards into Afghanistan, because this is, in a sense, another east-west confrontation: the east is under siege from the frontier west, and the east can only move further east for asylum.

How would India, and, more important, Indians, react? In various ways, surely: shock, smugness, gloating, concern — both for those trying to stream in and for the volatile consequences of their arrival. But at some point, sooner rather than later, this range would have to coalesce into one broad sentiment that could then be translated into official policy. Would that be sympathy or cynicism? Would the human heart prevail as children, women and the young sought the comfort of India, or would antipathy make us dismiss them with a sneer: "You made your bed in 1947, now sleep on its thorns."

Punjab would have the decisive voice. I believe that most of Punjab, though not all, would speak from its heart, perhaps with tears in its eyes, even if a colder Delhi thought it a good idea to consign the refugees to thorns. Is this being sentimental? Perhaps, but it would be a cold life without sentiment. In 1971, West Bengal did not check the religion of refugees. Most of them were Muslims, but that was less important than the fact they were three million frightened and hungry Bengalis.

But there are also significant differences, both in time and space. India had never felt threatened by East Pakistan. Bengali Muslims did not forsake their language or script although there was pressure from Karachi "nationalists", in the early years, to write Bengali in the Urdu alphabet (just as, for instance, Kemal Ataturk made Turks abandon the Arabic script and switch to Roman). The reaction was so severe that such ideas were quickly forgotten. There were riots in Bengal, as bitter if not as widespread as those in Punjab, but links were more firmly maintained. There were riots, and there was discrimination against Bengali Hindus; but East Pakistan was not emptied of Hindus, as happened to Hindus in Pakistani Punjab and Sind. Any anger against Indian "repression" was soon overtaken by the reality of West Pakistani oppression against Bengalis for reasons that can only be described as racist.

Time offers its own angularities. In 1971 Indians were angry at the aggression of 1965. War is a tragedy, but one which is acceptable as part of human experience; there is no lifetime in history that can claim it has not undergone the tension and cleavage of war. The dominant experience of the last four decades has been of terrorism. Terrorism is a sly, surreptitious, contemptible evil that makes no distinction between innocent and enemy. How much will the horror of remembered terrorism faze eyes and ice up veins if, God forbid, there is clamour at the gates of Wagah? War will inevitably follow refugees into India; it is possible that a fifth column might camouflage itself in the misery of a human exodus. When citizens have made borders irrelevant why should armies, state or non-state, uniformed or shadowy, respect lines drawn on water? Who will be where in that war? Will the Pakistani armed forces be as divided as the country, split by ideology? Will half the Pakistanis fight alongside Indian forces? The imponderables chase the unthinkable.

One of the defining images of Pakistan's sense of itself is etched on the walls of its side of Wagah: a depiction of wrecked refugees streaming into the new country after Partition. The calamity was not one-sided; there were traumatized millions entering India as well. But India has not frozen that moment in stone, to remind everyone that this was once the brutal battlefield of a civil war. Perhaps Lahoris will erase that image, wherever it is, before they reach the gates of Wagah.

Well you guys would be welcome if these non state actors push you out of your home

No thanks! Pakistanis will live and die in their own country. MJ sahib is entitled to his opinions, however one would need to understand the psyche of Pakistanis a little better before putting up this entire supposition.

No Islamist movement has scared people off to run away. During the rule of Taliban in Afghanistan, Pakistan saw the regular flow of people back and forth. There was no sudden influx of people running away from Afghanistan into Pakistan.

I do not foresee any such scenarios for us Pakistanis God willing.

 

[Nemesis]

You want this eternal threat to end?

Yes, as should you. Recent evidence suggests that they have hurt Pakistani society more.

Liberate Indian Occupied Kashmir

We will indeed liberate Jammu and Kashmir...from all militants engaged in acts of terror. Then perhaps we can work something out with the separatists...to bring peace to the valley.

and prosecute the Samjhota Express criminal.

You should tell your government that. What? not up to date with recent events? Please read UN resolutions regarding which organization was involved in Samjhota express bombing, its called L.E.T.

Or were you speaking of Col Purohit and company? He is responsible for acts of terror in India and is facing prosecution for it. You don't have to worry about him. He is not your concern.

Why does not India take the first step?

First steps? Okay. Lets have a look at recent history, shall we?
- Lahore 99, first step by India. Result - Kargil and IC 814 hijacking.
- Agra 2001, first step India. Result - Parliament attacks.
- Peace processes in 08,09. Result - Mumbai attacks.

And you want us to take the first step? Prosecute the mumbai attack perpetrators and we shall have peace talks.

After all, it projects to be more responsible and 'restrained' as you have very naively put!

We were being responsible. Unlike you, we do not wish to blow... - what was it you said? ah yes, - "uranium firecrackers" on our neighbours. We do not have a suicidal streak. We have no interest in war. But attacks on India cannot continue.

I sympathize with the Pakistani population. They face constant terror strikes, more so than even India. However that does not mean we will let attacks on our citizens to continue. Pakistan is unfortunately paying a huge price for flirting with religious extremist ideology, for its mistake. Why should an average India citizen pay for it also?

We understand it is difficult to guarantee no attacks happen on India. But at least you can make sure those who attack us are punished. You are not even willing to do that. Actions on Pakistan part will help us regain trust. So that the next time a terror attack happens, we can still continue to have a normal relationship.

Let us eliminate the 'main reason of content since 1947 ' behind this threat and progress! Hope this rationale is good for you?

The main reason for antagonism is the rise of extremist religious ideology in your nation, and to some extent ours. Why should we succumb to the balckmail of these people and force ourselves to a solution?

 

[Spitfighter]

You pick your battles. You cannot wage wide-frontage fight against an extremist movement that has evolved over 30 years and has active and passive support amongst the population. The day Army goes in after these guys, you will see massive destabilization movement launched by the parties on the right.

Musharraf government was not able to justify a simple AT operation at Lal Masjid due to the frenzied media and public campaign supported by the right and here do we really believe that we can start police, army and civil action against the various groups in Pakistan all in one go?

If they try, they probably will fail because they will open too many fronts. Pakistan has to get at least a handle on the situation in FATA. Once the Army has that issue sorted out to a reasonable level, then you can start making inroads in the Punjab and down south. This is a 5-10 year strategy and it should be executed with care.

So what you're essentially saying is that Pakistan is incapable of taking on terrorists because it has a)nurtured them for decades and b)the social fabric in Pakistan is too weak to endure a concentrated effort to rid the nation of extremists.

This implies that India will have to suffer because of Pakistan's incompetence. Moreover Pakistan will not allow India to take action against the terrorists because it would supposedly undermine its 'sovereignty'. How is Pakistan a sovereign nation if terrorist groups can run riot across the country, attack other nations, and the government is too weak to take on them? is this not the definition of a failed state?

Why should India suffer? This is Pakistan's ideology, your generals spread throughout your country, your people allowed it to become a political force so shouldn't you have to deal with the consequences?

I sincerely hope the government hunts these terrorists down the next time the attack the country, even if that means chasing them across the border.

If Pakistan wants to shelter the terrorists and escalate the conflict then so be it. What choice do we have? We can't just sit back and watch innocents die for no reason. We can't wait for a decade so Pakistan can gets it's act together.

 

[naved_kam]

Attack on Indian Parliament - INDIAN RESPONSE = 0

Attack on Mumbai - INDIAN RESPONSE = 0

The question here really is that is India stupid enough to impose a war on Pakistan or attack Pakistan based on whim and cooked up evidence of its own internal shortcomings or owing to some loonies gunning down a bunch of Indians, knowing full well that our response will be stone-for-brick laden with uranium based firecrackers?

India is seriously mistaken if it believes in any 'limited' engagement scenarios of any imposed conflict or initiation of war from across its borders. Trust me when I say this; our soldiers and nation will treat Indian Army worse than what it has done to TTP goons in Swat and SWA.

Any initiation of war between Pakistan and India will open a pandora's box of hurt on both sides of the border.

So either if its Chadambarum or Gen Kapoora or MMS; its best that India keep on pushing its usual anti-Pakistan rhetoric than think of throwing an actual bullet across our border in any shape, way of form.

Do you really think that you will be able to use your strategic weapons in a war with India. What do you think is the reason for the increased US presence around your nuclear facilities. Do you actually think that the world will ever allow this region to go to the nuclear brink?

It would be better for your establishment to try to eliminate the terrorist sympathisers in your Army and work together with India to ensure that such incidents are not occuring. At least GoI and GoP should be seen to be working together on this, otherwise there will be no "Non-State Actors" left to hide behind the next time.

Also Sir, at the peril of affronting you: None of your arguments sound more emphatic by distorting names of the Indian officials. Gen. Kapoor, or Home Minister Chidambaram or Prime Minister Manmohan Singh will still do what they have to do to make India secure, even it is to the detriment of Pakistan, then I am sure they will say, SO BE IT. Exactly like the President or the Prime Minister or you Gen. Kiyani would do for securing their nation.

But then may be you feel that by this namecalling you do better justice to your teachers......

 

[blain2]

Why should India suffer? This is Pakistan's ideology, your generals spread throughout your country, your people allowed it to become a political force so shouldn't you have to deal with the consequences?

I sincerely hope the government hunts these terrorists down the next time the attack the country, even if that means chasing them across the border.

If Pakistan wants to shelter the terrorists and escalate the conflict then so be it. What choice do we have? We can't just sit back and watch innocents die for no reason. We can't wait for a decade so Pakistan can gets it's act together.

India will suffer just because it is doing what the Soviets did in Afghanistan. Forcing their will on a people not wanting them there. Kashmiris are no different than Afghans on this count and for as long as the Kashmiris find Indian rule to be an issue, there will supporters for them who would be willing to bear arms. If Pakistan stops them, they will still come from other places. More importantly, Pakistan has already severely clamped down on such people (one should try to get a hold of the numbers of people coming in throughout the 90s and early years of the next decade and compare them to what is going on now...its a trickle).

Your government can do whatever they want to, but the reality is that their options are even more limited than Pakistan's. Your government does not have to wait for a decade, next time something happens, I am sure they will try, and I say by all means do. However after that happens, then be ready for a response too. Both sides are to an extent reaping what they have sown. One side by trying to take advantage of a situation to push through a long festering issue, the other for being obstinate and heavy handed.

At least some of the militancy in Pakistan (the one which will be the hardest to take on) has its origins in the use of force by your country against the Kashmiris. Since force was used to suppress the Kashmiris, post-Soviet withdrawal in Afghanistan saw the fighters there and the next generation seeing the Indian use of force as a reason to pick up a gun and fight your government. While we may have used these people as proxies, your governments also screwed up the affairs badly. Currently the situation is as such that while Kashmiris may not openly say anything in support of the fighters in Kashmir, they tacitly support them for taking the fight to the Indian Army and paramilitaries.

On the issue of militants killing innocent Indians all over, that is outright dastardly and condemnable and Pakistan should do her level best so that there is never a repeat of Mumbai. While this is a challenging task for Pakistan, the GoP has a responsibility to safeguard the country and its people from negative consequences, and as such all measures should be put in place to stop such people from trying to run their own little wars.