Pakistan Army - All is not well

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Pakistan's growing energy requirements can not alone make for a broad based relationship unless Pakistan finds other customers for the energy being supplied. While it may make one pipeline viable, what you are talking about is much more.
Pakistan is too small a market for the kind of relationship you are advocating.

The ONLY way to achieve what you are advocating is-also sell energy to either India or China. China alone is one of the biggest markets. And selling to India means that there is access to markets like BD as well.

I disagree - the IP pipeline is viable with just Pakistan as a customer, and the amount of power it will generate is a fraction of the total current demand. Looking outside of power generation, household consumption continues to rise as Pakistan's domestic resources continue to shrink, meaning additional demand that needs to be satisfied.

Sales to China and India obviously sweeten the deal, but are not essential. However, as in the case of the IP(I, C) the networks could be expanded to also serve India and China.

While Pakistan is by far the biggest player in Afghanistan, any amount delivered to Afghanistan will have to be looked at relatively. It maybe big in absolute terms, but banking on small amounts like this(relatively) for relationships and influence of the kind you talk about are unreasonable.

The West is the largest player in Afghanistan currently be virtue of the fact that it has a vested security interest in stabilizing Afghanistan. Without that security interest in Afghanistan, investment from the West will plummet barring some new economic opportunity that its businesses can exploit. Pakistan's investment however is tied to long term concerns as are its continuing economic ties and energy needs. If the Afghans have any sense they realize this - the West is there only so long as they have security interests at stake, but they cannot change their neighbor in Pakistan.

Like i said, there are two flaws in your analysis-You assume Iran does not become an international player. Iran with its massive investment in Road and Rail connectivity directly to Afghanistan from its ports plans to make more than a dent in Pakistan's ability to capture that market.
India is also investing in Iranian ports.

Iran has had the opportunity to influence Afghanistan for as long as Pakistan, yet Pakistan continues to be the major trading partner. Despite Kabul's hostility towards Pakistan, the fact is that the ethnic, cultural and religious linkages between Afghanistan and Pakistan are significantly larger than those between Afghanistan and Iran, and have traditionally made Pakistan the preferable route for doing business.

Iran has its own large oil and gas reserves to sell, and can only offer to largely act as a transit country for the CAR energy resources. On the gas side at least, piping gas to Chabahar and then shipping it overseas is an expensive proposition (as seen with how the IPI being turned to the II undersea is currently seen as financially prohibitive) Pakistan offers both a major market and a transit route (Land based to India and China to boot), making it more attractive than Iran as a route, especially for gas.

You realize that its more than just the CAR market that Iran can swing if and when it gets its international relations right.

The second flaw is of economies of scale. Pakistan does not satisfy that criteria by a good margin.

We'll wait for the Iranians to 'right their international relations', and since Pakistan's interest is primarily energy from the CAR's and a neutral Afghanistan, what else 'Iran can swing' is for another thread.

On the economies of scale, I provided my POV on why Pakistan does offer economies of scale through its growing domestic demand earlier.

One more thing- as someone said before, all this talk is subject to a variety of factors that are not being counted. Off the top of my head i can think of atleast one-Russia has a stake in a LOT of energy in that region apart from *significant* influence. They have a LOT of say in where and what pipelines get laid-Russia wants to capture the entire energy market.
Heck they are BUYING energy from other neighbouring countries in bulk so they have more control over where and how the energy flows. They are close with Iran, and India and there are dozens of other things that come into play -which i am not adequately qualified to comment on without research.

Absolutely the Russians have a stake as well, but if the CAR's can sell to multiple consumers they will, especially given the Russian reputation for arm-twisting to get its way.

But its safe to say that you have an idea of why I think what you are proposing is very difficult to happen-the talk about Pakistan buying significant energy to have influence.

Ofcourse, Afghanistan has to listen to what Pak says, but i doubt that listening to Pak means going against Indian interests with the kind of lobbies being present there now and growing.

I have pointed out what Pakistan's interests are - a neutral Afghanistan that has significant common interests with Pakistan through the direct economic ties, already substantial, and through Pakistan-CAR trade, and therefore acts to facilitate the development of such economic ties, as well as respects Pakistan's territorial integrity and refuses to act as a proxy for India.

What are Indian 'interests', that Pakistan would want Afghanistan to 'go against'?

 

[H2O3C4Nitrogen]

So the Afghans are right, that Pakistan is intent on interfering in their country to promote Taliban terror? Or merely, as the U.S. intends, to integrate some "moderate" Taliban into peaceful government?

To promote the peace dialogue and help the Taliban to integerate into a Political system and to participate in the process of stabalizing Afghanistan. Both US and Pakistan have common interest in it. However Pakistan will only comply if theres no such thing as Indian influence in Afghanistan.
Would you like that there should be a Pro Kremlin Gov in Islamabad,certainly not...!!!

 

[mehru]

There is militancy in the kyber paktun khwa also buddy. That is what i am mentioning in that post.

There was militancy in Khyber Pukhtoonkhwa i.e Swat. Right now the army is fighting militants in FATA.

 

[deckingraj]

Pakistan does not use terrorist groups as strategic assets any more than the US and India have used them for their own goals in various Latin American nations and East Pakistan respectively.

So if you are willing to condemn Indian and US use of such groups, then we can approach the Pakistani use of them.

Doesn't matter that you and I are willing to condemn them or not..Fact is simple you do use terrorist as strategic assets.. Period..What matters is International Organization consider Taliban as terrorists and you guys are using them as strategic assets...So lets stick to it..

All i am saying is that when you are trying to explain your point lets not ignore this fact...

Secondly, yes, the two major motives behind Pakistani intervention in Afghanistan have been the desire to stop Kabul's continued interference in Pakistani affairs and claims to Pakistan territory, and later the desire to access the CAR's.There is no evidence supporting any other motive other than the usual canards I referred to.

And did i challenge those motives?? Key word is "two major"... This is what i said

"however calling every theory as brainwashed indian evil ISI supporting terrorist canards won't work and neither i am claiming that your argument is flawed...However it is surely not complete... "...

We don't need to necessarily have 'influence' in Afghanistan, we just need a neutral or pro-Pakistan Afghanistan. Unfortunately, the history out of Kabul has been one of hostility towards Pakistan and of claims on Pakistani territory, to the point where it appears that without some sort of Pakistani influence over Kabul (Pakistani investment in Afghanistan or benefits to Kabul from a energy corridor between CAR's and Pakistan) Kabul will not change its behavior.

I do not see anything wrong in it...

I have already explained why a neutral or pro-Pakistan Afghanistan is to Pakistan's favor and how trade with the CAR's would help encourage positive behavior on the part of Kabul.

You had a very friendly government in form of Taliban...As far as trade is concerned then there are ample examples where people even with their differences have booming trade...However a friendly neighbourhood never hurts...

My assertion is that the major motives for Pakistan wanting influence in Afghanistan and/or a neutral or pro-Pakistan Afghanistan are:

1. The need to put an end to Afghan interference in Pakistan and an end to its claims on Pakistani territory (which have no basis under international law)

2. Trade with and through Afghanistan and the the CAR's, specifically in energy.

If you disagree with the above, then you need to provide some credible long term Pakistani interests that override the benefits from the above two motives to be considered valid.

Again refer to my expert...I never challenged your assetion...I only said they are not complete...

The hijacking was not arranged or planned by Pakistan so raising it does not serve as any sort of justification for your arguments. An event occurred and the hijackers found a country to land the aircraft in where India had little influence. But that does not somehow mean that Pakistan was looking to influence Afghanistan just so that IC 814 could be hijacked years later - that is a nonsensical assertion on your part.

No need to loose calm...I never said that it was planned by Pakistan or Pakistan wanted to have influence in AF to highjack IC814...This is you who are putting words to my mouth. It do not need a genious to find out a relation between Pakistan so called moral support for liberation of Kashmir and AF as the hotbed of Jihadi movements....

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Doesn't matter that you and I are willing to condemn them or not..Fact is simple you do use terrorist as strategic assets.. Period..What matters is International Organization consider Taliban as terrorists and you guys are using them as strategic assets...So lets stick to it..

All i am saying is that when you are trying to explain your point lets not ignore this fact...

Please provide credible evidence supporting your contention that Pakistan IS supporting the Taliban as a Strategic Asset. Provide concrete evidence of material support to the Taliban by Pakistan currently. Otherwise you need to retract your comments.

And did i challenge those motives?? Key word is "two major"... This is what i said

"however calling every theory as brainwashed indian evil ISI supporting terrorist canards won't work and neither i am claiming that your argument is flawed...However it is surely not complete... "...

Your, and RobbieS's theories have nothing supporting them other than the typical Indian brainwashed garbage of 'ISI and terrorism' an example of which you gave above, so that is what they are. If there are any motivations for Pakistan that overshadow the two mentioned by me, and justify your contention, then point them out.

Without justification your and RS's claims are invalid.

I do not see anything wrong in it...

You had a very friendly government in form of Taliban...As far as trade is concerned then there are ample examples where people even with their differences have booming trade...However a friendly neighbourhood never hurts...

How does that negate my argument of desiring a neutral or pro-Pakistan government in Kabul for economic and security reasons?

Again refer to my expert...I never challenged your assetion...I only said they are not complete...

Any other reasons are trivial and side effects of the above two, not a causal factor of seeking influence in Afghanistan.

No need to loose calm...I never said that it was planned by Pakistan or Pakistan wanted to have influence in AF to highjack IC814...This is you who are putting words to my mouth. It do not need a genious to find out a relation between Pakistan so called moral support for liberation of Kashmir and AF as the hotbed of Jihadi movements....

Why bring up IC 814 then if you did not wish to make a connection with the hijacking and Pakistan's desire to seek influence in Afghanistan? And Pakistan did not and does not need Afghanistan to train Kashmiri insurgents, FATA, AK, Punjab etc. can all suffice.

The use of Taliban training camps for Kashmir was a side effect, not a goal, of providing support to the Taliban to seek influence in Kabul.

 

[Solomon2]

Your, and RobbieS's theories have nothing supporting them other than the typical Indian brainwashed garbage of 'ISI and terrorism' -

AM, Kasab was just convicted of terrorism in a trial which even impressed Arab News. And Kasab's trail goes right back to some sort of organization in Pakistan. So you can't justify dismissing the "Indian brainwashed garbage of ISI and terrorism" any more, since the foundation of it, if not probable, nonetheless appears likely.

 

[deckingraj]

Please provide credible evidence supporting your contention that Pakistan IS supporting the Taliban as a Strategic Asset. Provide concrete evidence of material support to the Taliban by Pakistan currently. Otherwise you need to retract your comments.

Your, and RobbieS's theories have nothing supporting them other than the typical Indian brainwashed garbage of 'ISI and terrorism' an example of which you gave above, so that is what they are. If there are any motivations for Pakistan that overshadow the two mentioned by me, and justify your contention, then point them out.



Without justification your and RS's claims are invalid.

How does that negate my argument of desiring a neutral or pro-Pakistan government in Kabul for economic and security reasons?

Any other reasons are trivial and side effects of the above two, not a causal factor of seeking influence in Afghanistan.


Why bring up IC 814 then if you did not wish to make a connection with the hijacking and Pakistan's desire to seek influence in Afghanistan? And Pakistan did not and does not need Afghanistan to train Kashmiri insurgents, FATA, AK, Punjab etc. can all suffice.

The use of Taliban training camps for Kashmir was a side effect, not a goal, of providing support to the Taliban to seek influence in Kabul.

Agno i am not sure why are vehementaly opposing this...I in fact was supporting your theory and only saying that the reasons are not complete...One simple reason would be to have strategic depth.....

I do not want to talk about Haqqani Network and million theories related to it...However this one article i would like to share

http://www.opendemocracy.net/opensecurity/aziz-hakimi/******-what-strategic-depth

"Besides the infamous Durand Line, the concept of Pakistan’s “Strategic Depth” in Afghanistan has always been a source of controversy in the relations between the two countries and the irony is that neither Afghans nor Pakistani politicians have given a clear definition of this term."

Why bring up IC 814 then if you did not wish to make a connection with the hijacking and Pakistan's desire to seek influence in Afghanistan? And Pakistan did not and does not need Afghanistan to train Kashmiri insurgents, FATA, AK, Punjab etc. can all suffice.

I agree..I think i did not do a good job in explaining this part...However what i was trying to portray the strategic depth that one can get by having a puppet government in AF..... That simple highjack make India bend her knees because they cannot cross Pakistan to attack AF or any commando operation and like anyone else in the world did not recognize them...A dangerous situation that can be exploited big time!!!!


P.S : I am a little busy to will reply to our posts in a while...Thanks for sharing your opinion though

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

AM, Kasab was just convicted of terrorism in a trial which even impressed Arab News. And Kasab's trail goes right back to some sort of organization in Pakistan. So you can't justify dismissing the "Indian brainwashed garbage of ISI and terrorism" any more, since the foundation of it, if not probable, nonetheless appears likely.

Kasab's trail goes back to some parts of the LeT perhaps, not the ISI, so yes, the "Indian brainwashed garbage of ISI and terrorism" continues to apply.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Agno i am not sure why are vehementaly opposing this...I in fact was supporting your theory and only saying that the reasons are not complete...One simple reason would be to have strategic depth.....

DR, the problem is that people keep insinuating that there were 'other reasons' but no one is really able to provide credible enough 'other reasons' that were causal in terms of Pakistani attempts to seek influence in Kabul.

This 'strategic depth' is one example. What does strategic depth mean? I am unaware of any plans by the PA that called for a retreat across the Hindukush in case of an Indian invasion. I am unaware of any plans to base Pakistani nuclear assets, or any other military assets, in Afghanistan.

So what did strategic depth signify?

It signified what I outlined above - Pakistan sought influence in Afghanistan to end Kabul's interference (support for terrorism, insurgencies etc.) in Pakistan and its claims on Pakistani territory, along with constructing an energy corridor with the CAR's.

I do not want to talk about Haqqani Network and million theories related to it...However this one article i would like to share

http://www.opendemocracy.net/opensecurity/aziz-hakimi/******-what-strategic-depth

"Besides the infamous Durand Line, the concept of Pakistan’s “Strategic Depth” in Afghanistan has always been a source of controversy in the relations between the two countries and the irony is that neither Afghans nor Pakistani politicians have given a clear definition of this term."

Thats the point, they remain speculation, not fact. So given the lack of evidence supporting your claim of 'Pakistan is supporting the Taliban as a strategic asset', I demand a retraction of your comments.

I agree..I think i did not do a good job in explaining this part...However what i was trying to portray the strategic depth that one can get by having a puppet government in AF..... That simple highjack make India bend her knees because they cannot cross Pakistan to attack AF or any commando operation and like anyone else in the world did not recognize them...A dangerous situation that can be exploited big time!!!!

India would have had to fight Pakistan to get to camps in Afghanistan and it would have had to fight Pakistan to get to camps in Pakistan.

 

[ramu]

The author has expressed his opinion in a fashion that appeals to the Indian audience but he is quite right in his assessment about the critical condition of the Pakistan army. The war for any army is depleting in moral and is not something any army can withstand for long. If the insurgency and extremism spread and the army needs to cleanse its establishments then the Pak army has a mammoth task at hand internally aswell as externally.

It is important to note that the NATO troops have an excellent bench strength and keep changing the forces on ground by bringing the forces back home periodically. This is not the case with Pakistan given its limited numbers and the pressure from its eastern border.

It is pain full as a Pakistani to read this article but it has the untold truth that does not appear in your favourite news channel. Agreed that it could have been handled more gracefully and could have sugar coated it a bit but the truth is bitter after all.

 

[fatman17]

Ajai Shukla - says it all folks - why waste your time - just one point -

while the PA wages war against the militants, it has enough 'energy' and 'capacity' to hold serious 'war games' without affecting its capability on the east and west. - the indian army has always been larger and we know this fact and are taking / taken proper measures to ensure that the frontiers remain safe.

oh yeah! its the indian army that has morale and recruitment issues not the PA!

a recent poll showed 89% pakistanis support the army and the people are lining up in droves at armed forces recruitment centres.

 

[deckingraj]

DR, the problem is that people keep insinuating that there were 'other reasons' but no one is really able to provide credible enough 'other reasons' that were causal in terms of Pakistani attempts to seek influence in Kabul.

This 'strategic depth' is one example. What does strategic depth mean? I am unaware of any plans by the PA that called for a retreat across the Hindukush in case of an Indian invasion. I am unaware of any plans to base Pakistani nuclear assets, or any other military assets, in Afghanistan.

So what did strategic depth signify?

Strategic Depth does not only have military terms....However this phenomenon is not only suffred by so called ISI obsessed Indians but is a common theory relevant inside Pakistan as well... Have a look at this article

DAWN.COM | Columnists | Defining ?strategic depth?

It signified what I outlined above - Pakistan sought influence in Afghanistan to end Kabul's interference (support for terrorism, insurgencies etc.) in Pakistan and its claims on Pakistani territory, along with constructing an energy corridor with the CAR's.

I would again advice you to read this article...Here the author has given an unbiased opinion...

http://www.opendemocracy.net/opensecurity/aziz-hakimi/afpakwhatstrategicdepth (Just add "-" in every word otherwise link wont work...PDF is not allowing me to use af - pak without spaces)

Thats the point, they remain speculation, not fact. So given the lack of evidence supporting your claim of 'Pakistan is supporting the Taliban as a strategic asset', I demand a retraction of your comments.

Sorry but seems like you are asking for a lot...I do not have the luxuary to provide you credible proofs ...and can provide supporting articles based on which i am sharing my POV...

India would have had to fight Pakistan to get to camps in Afghanistan and it would have had to fight Pakistan to get to camps in Pakistan.

That's the problem and causing all these "OTHER" reasons to pop up...

 

[Mauryan]

Well in that case if our army is so weak then why the "formidable" Indian army has not attacked Pak yet. Ideal opportunity. Isn't it?

India is not a war monger nation unlike others. Having a look at the past wars after independance or before that,India never invaded any country-but just retaliated.

If Invasion and occupying territory was the main aim, then the demo-graphics of south-asia might have been a lot different by now.

After all,India is not like a country to invade some peace loving monks with hordes of soliders.

 

[ramu]

Ajai Shukla - says it all folks - why waste your time - just one point -

while the PA wages war against the militants, it has enough 'energy' and 'capacity' to hold serious 'war games' without affecting its capability on the east and west. - the indian army has always been larger and we know this fact and are taking / taken proper measures to ensure that the frontiers remain safe.

oh yeah! its the indian army that has morale and recruitment issues not the PA!

a recent poll showed 89% pakistanis support the army and the people are lining up in droves at armed forces recruitment centres.

Ya given the only viable and recession proof sector is the defence.

 

[vandemataram]

Orgasms of the aforementioned hawkish Indian analysts aside consider this other scenario.

Pakistan regains strength in Afghanistan. Over the course of the next decade, Pakistan gets in another pro-Pakistani government, builds in roads into Central Asia for itself and China and blocks India out. Pakistan with a revived economy would challenge India further.

India meanwhile is stuck on the east and bound to sea routes.

The only thing India has gained is an ally in Afghanistan and sending in terrorists to Pakistan. Take that out of the picture and India is back to square one and buddy, this is not 2001 any more.

1) Another Pro-Pakistani Government in Afghanistan aka the Talibs and do you even know what are you talking about?

Another Talib type government, another hotbed for global jihadi terrorism, even more powerful now with the now overt aid of Pakistan in Afghanistan and will culminate into another 9/11 kind of thing and again the GWOT and again..it mean the events are still underway and I think it too soon for repeating the order....

2) Revived Economy - If it is Indian analyst's orgasms then in your case it is a senior member indulging in mental masturbation privately...So it is not a crystal ball that you mend the economy after so much of abuse all these years and that too within a blink of an eye.

3) How can you take that picture out of that. India with her superior natural resources, budget and planning hasnt been able to stop insurgency in Kashmir, so can Pakistan get respite so easily.

The spurt in terrorist activities across Pakistan has to be stepped up. R&AW must get larger funds to work with and must cultivate the assets back in Pakistan and Afghanistan as it did during the 1980 and 1990s when it was the stupid PM of India Mr Gujral painstakingly diluted everything.

AA, there must be a level playing field, India must have a composite strategy to raise the cost of operation for Pakistan and it must end where Pakistan ends it.

After all we have the Khalistani success story and a potential customer credential to bank upon and follow as well..isnt it?