John Berlin: Why the US Wants the Collapse of Pakistan + UPDATE

[t-birds]

UNObserver & International Report

A much larger scale

So let’s widen the view. There are those outside of the Pakistani “domain” who benefit, and who benefit on a much larger scale. The White House has long accused President Musharraf (whose Presidency is a tight-rope-act between Westernism and Pakistani Islam) of not doing enough in the “War on Terror”, but they can not intervene as long as Pakistan is a coherent state with a lot of anti-Americanism filling the state structure. So, rather than wait until Ms Bhutto would become Prime Minister and allow US forces under Pakistani “guidance” to hunt al-Qa’ida - and go through all the troubles of having US forces be “associated” with Pakistani politics - the US government would gladly see the state of Pakistan collapse.

That would enable larger deployment of US forces, for example, based upon the argument that Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal would no longer be safe. At the same time, the pretext of “bringing democracy to the Muslim world” would again be used, knowing full well that this would create more terrorists.

American military planning is already under way for a larger-scale intervention, this year; troops are already being prepared; for example, despite the official position that there are less than a hundred US military personnel in Pakistan, in Punjab, there are secret US military bases with troop levels totalling, at present, a few thousand - and Punjab isn’t the only region that has US combat troops present.

Traditional mainstream media are being fed stories that underline the “need” for US intervention. Scenarios are already being floated to carve up Pakistan into “Greater Baluchistan” (which is now Pakistan’s largest province) and some other new “states” in which to install puppet regimes.

All in all, the White House needs terrorism as its blanket excuse for intervention. Since ISI is both strongly CIA-influenced, as well as riddled with al-Qa’ida, it is not only that the Bhutto assassination could not plausibly have been organized without the ISI, it is also ISI which carried out American orders.

If the plan works, the weakening or even collapse of the state of Pakistan will create a new battlefield badly needed by the White House. The “War on Terror” (as the War on Islam is often termed), like most wars, needs expansion or it collapses. If you project an “Enemy”, you also need the “Enemy” to be successful at times.

Don’t be surprised if al-Qa’ida suddenly has nuclear weapons.

Without success for the Enemy, you may no longer be sufficiently able to instill fear in the people and have them follow you.

The White House needs the destabilization of Pakistan to continue the “War on Terror”. Ms Bhutto’s execution is one big step towards that goal.

John Berlin
U.N. OBSERVER & International Report

Please also see:

Benazir Bhutto assassinated + UPDATES
UNObserver & International Report

UPDATE

U.S. Considers New Covert Push Within Pakistan
By STEVEN LEE MYERS, DAVID E. SANGER and ERIC SCHMITT
Published: January 6, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/06/washington/06terror.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

 

[mujahideen]

Well of course they need a divided Pakistan. They know how dangerous this nation is if it is untied.

 

[Energon]

This is nothing more than senseless anti-Bush blabber.

1. History clearly shows that the USA really has no personal interest in Pakistan. It has been important in the past on account of it's proximity to a cold war battlefield and now to the core of physical territories held by radicals. But unlike South America, or oil rich states, there is no incentive for the USA to carve it up or anything of that sort. I doubt if most American policy makers are even aware of Baluchistan or give a hoot about the Baluchis (other than to incite violence against Iran on occasion).

2. USA usually carries out unwarranted military action against states that are rich in desirable natural resources. Unlike Iraq or even Iran for that matter, Pakistan does not have anything substantial to offer. Hence any military action taken in Pakistan is financially a loss making venture for the USA. The main motivation behind the current build up is public pressure where politicians in the White house and those vying for it are being questioned regarding the relatively inefficient relationship with an unstable Pakistan where far too much of the tax payer's money is being spent for very little in return. It is clear that the PA is incapable of achieving what the USA wants; and hence the only option is to take Pakistan out of the equation and do it ourselves.

Well of course they need a divided Pakistan. They know how dangerous this nation is if it is untied.

Nonsense. Pakistan is a rental state and poses no "threat" as such to the USA. An unstable fragmented failed state with nuclear arms on the other hand poses a huge problem. It is far more economical and safer to have one client state that can keep itself together than a bunch of mini rag tag "nations" all within the proximity of nuclear arms.

 

[fatman17]

UNObserver & International Report

for example, despite the official position that there are less than a hundred US military personnel in Pakistan, in Punjab, there are secret US military bases with troop levels totalling, at present, a few thousand - and Punjab isn’t the only region that has US combat troops present.


Don’t be surprised if al-Qa’ida suddenly has nuclear weapons.


The White House needs the destabilization of Pakistan to continue the “War on Terror”. Ms Bhutto’s execution is one big step towards that goal.

John Berlin
U.N. OBSERVER & International Report

the guy is on drugs! no need to comment on this

 

[yarmook]

This is nothing more than senseless anti-Bush blabber.
Nonsense. Pakistan is a rental state and poses no "threat" as such to the USA. An unstable fragmented failed state with nuclear arms on the other hand poses a huge problem.

Rental state????? what do you exactly mean Energon!!!!

First thing first why do Pakistan should pose any threat to USA at first place, any solid grounds for posing threat to USA which thousand miles away from Pakistan?

Unstable fragmented failed state??????I doubt that!!! I guess thats the reason Pakistan survived the most crisis in 2007 including the whole disruption and voilence after death of BB.

Energon! i have drank nothing yet, and i am unable to understand your motives behind your posts.

 

[roadrunner]

The US imo, would prefer a divided Pakistan, not a 4-way division (or 5 wth the Northern Areas), because all they're interested in is Balochistan.

• Geostrategic position at the mouth of the Persian Gulf : Control of oil
• Access to large gas reserves
• Access to possibly huge oil reserves (billions of barrels)
• Access to large mineral resources

But Sindh, Punjab, Northern Areas and NWFP are pretty much useless to them, with the exception of TAP. So a divided Pakistan would suit them.

 

[khanz]

This is nothing more than senseless anti-Bush blabber.

1. History clearly shows that the USA really has no personal interest in Pakistan. It has been important in the past on account of it's proximity to a cold war battlefield and now to the core of physical territories held by radicals. But unlike South America, or oil rich states, there is no incentive for the USA to carve it up or anything of that sort. I doubt if most American policy makers are even aware of Baluchistan or give a hoot about the Baluchis (other than to incite violence against Iran on occasion).

2. USA usually carries out unwarranted military action against states that are rich in desirable natural resources. Unlike Iraq or even Iran for that matter, Pakistan does not have anything substantial to offer. Hence any military action taken in Pakistan is financially a loss making venture for the USA. The main motivation behind the current build up is public pressure where politicians in the White house and those vying for it are being questioned regarding the relatively inefficient relationship with an unstable Pakistan where far too much of the tax payer's money is being spent for very little in return. It is clear that the PA is incapable of achieving what the USA wants; and hence the only option is to take Pakistan out of the equation and do it ourselves.

Nonsense. Pakistan is a rental state and poses no "threat" as such to the USA. An unstable fragmented failed state with nuclear arms on the other hand poses a huge problem. It is far more economical and safer to have one client state that can keep itself together than a bunch of mini rag tag "nations" all within the proximity of nuclear arms.

not sure about the article myself but u put forward a convincing argument.Anyway I don't think anything will happen to pakistan people have been saying it will fall apart for 60 years now and apart from bangladesh pakistan is still here and i don't think it'll change ever.

 

[MastanKhan]

Mujahideen,

Sir, what are you talking about? When was pakistan dangerous---when was pakistan ever united---when were pakistani politicians not up for sale to the highest bidder in the U S.

 

[mujahideen]

Mujahideen,

Sir, what are you talking about? When was pakistan dangerous---when was pakistan ever united---when were pakistani politicians not up for sale to the highest bidder in the U S.

Well it is a fact that our politicians have never been united, they have always been up for sale to the highest bidder. Now when I say a united Pakistan is dangerous this is true. For example Pakistan's nuclear weapons program is a good example. We saw the need to develop this program and the Pakistani nation united to build this program. We said we will eat grass for the sake of the defense of Pakistan and as god as my witness if we ever need to we will eat grass for the sake of Pakistan. This is one example. Another is a long time ago but still worth mentioning. The 1965 war. We saw all organs of the state working together and thus we were able to repel the attack. Another example recently is the Kashmire Earthquake. We saw people from all over Pakistan and might I add overseas Pakistanis rushing to help the peope.
Now lets get to todays Pakistan. Pakistan as we know is the most divided countries when it comes to culture, sect, language and etc. Now keeping all this in mind when I watch the news or a political show, I notice the one the these people can agree on is if that Pakistan does not have a external problem but an internal one. Meaning that someone must be stupid to attack Pakistan, because this will unite the nation and as I have said their is nothing a united Pakistani nation cant do.
Now it is up to you to take my statement anyway you want. But I stand by my statement. I know my points are not as strong are yours, but believe me the faith I have in the Pakistan people you cant even imagine. In my opinion a nations true unity is shown at times of crisis such as a war or natural disaster and we have demonstrated in those times of crisis that we are indeed a untied nation.
But this bond isn't as strong as I want it to be. This bond and you will probably agree with me is weak because of our politicians. In my opinion the most sincere politicians Pakistan has had besides the Quaid-I-Azam and Army Generals were Saheed-E-Millat Prime Minister Nawabzada Laiquat Ali khan Sahib and Prime Minister Khawaja Nazimuddin. If these two men had lived I have no doubt Pakistan today would be a superpower. These two men worked for the country. When Laiquat Ali was assassinated his lasts word were "O Allah Pakistan ki hifazat Karyo"(God please keep Pakistan safe). Do you know what this man was worth. They found 5 rupees in his pocket and his bank balance was less than 100 rupees. Nazimuddin when he was forced to resigne didn't even have a place to live, he was given a placeto live by a wealthy business man. I have a dream, I wish men like these come into our political system, because only men like these can make Pakistan what it was suppose to become.

 

[javvadhaider2006]

Well it is a fact that our politicians have never been united, they have always been up for sale to the highest bidder. Now when I say a united Pakistan is dangerous this is true. For example Pakistan's nuclear weapons program is a good example. We saw the need to develop this program and the Pakistani nation united to build this program. We said we will eat grass for the sake of the defense of Pakistan and as god as my witness if we ever need to we will eat grass for the sake of Pakistan. This is one example. Another is a long time ago but still worth mentioning. The 1965 war. We saw all organs of the state working together and thus we were able to repel the attack. Another example recently is the Kashmire Earthquake. We saw people from all over Pakistan and might I add overseas Pakistanis rushing to help the peope.
Now lets get to todays Pakistan. Pakistan as we know is the most divided countries when it comes to culture, sect, language and etc. Now keeping all this in mind when I watch the news or a political show, I notice the one the these people can agree on is if that Pakistan does not have a external problem but an internal one. Meaning that someone must be stupid to attack Pakistan, because this will unite the nation and as I have said their is nothing a united Pakistani nation cant do.
Now it is up to you to take my statement anyway you want. But I stand by my statement. I know my points are not as strong are yours, but believe me the faith I have in the Pakistan people you cant even imagine. In my opinion a nations true unity is shown at times of crisis such as a war or natural disaster and we have demonstrated in those times of crisis that we are indeed a untied nation.
But this bond isn't as strong as I want it to be. This bond and you will probably agree with me is weak because of our politicians. In my opinion the most sincere politicians Pakistan has had besides the Quaid-I-Azam and Army Generals were Saheed-E-Millat Prime Minister Nawabzada Laiquat Ali khan Sahib and Prime Minister Khawaja Nazimuddin. If these two men had lived I have no doubt Pakistan today would be a superpower. These two men worked for the country. When Laiquat Ali was assassinated his lasts word were "O Allah Pakistan ki hifazat Karyo"(God please keep Pakistan safe). Do you know what this man was worth. They found 5 rupees in his pocket and his bank balance was less than 100 rupees. Nazimuddin when he was forced to resigne didn't even have a place to live, he was given a placeto live by a wealthy business man. I have a dream, I wish men like these come into our political system, because only men like these can make Pakistan what it was suppose to become.

I completly agree with "mujahideen", despite of Pakistan being a multi ethnic society, it has always stood the test of time when it is faced by any threat. Pathans, Balauchis, Sindhis, & Punjabis become one unit and I have no doubt that this time also we will overcome any threat. So no need to consider such stupid, childish comments that Pakistan is heading for disaster, PAKISTAN IS THERE TO STAY.
ALLAH BLESS PAKISTAN
Long Live our beloved Pakistan.