Pakistan crackdown to backfire: Imran

[Ratus Ratus]

MODS:
Not sure if this is elsewhere, if move this or delete.


Pakistan crackdown to backfire: Imran | The Australian

Christina Lamb | June 15, 2009
Article from: Times Online
PAKISTAN'S military offensive against the Taliban will backfire and fuel extremism and bomb attacks, Imran Khan has warned.

"I have never been so depressed in my life," the cricketer-turned-politician said. "Pakistan is on a suicidal course."

Mr Khan was speaking in London, where he was visiting his two sons by former wife Jemima Goldsmith before going to the US to raise funds for refugees displaced by the fighting.

The 56-year-old leader of Pakistan's Movement for Justice Party has been branded pro-Taliban for speaking out against the military crackdown, which has forced 2.5 million people to flee from their homes.

"I'm not pro-Taliban," he said. "But my point is, shouldn't we have looked at other options?

"How do you justify using heavy artillery, helicopter gunships and F-16 fighter-jets on civilian areas? Who in the world does this? Meanwhile, all the top Taliban leaders have escaped. It's so inhuman what the military has done. It will backfire."

Mr Khan said the launch of the offensive coincided with President Asif Ali Zardari's visit to Washington in late April, after which the US agreed to a five-year aid package of $US1.5billion ($2bn) a year.

"Was this operation to save the people of Swat or to get dollars from the Americans?" he asked. "Only 10 days earlier parliament had passed a resolution endorsing a peace deal in Swat with the Taliban. Why was there no discussion? A military operation should have been the last resort."

Pakistan would never contain extremism as long as US troops were fighting across the border in Afghanistan. "Hatred of America is much more than of the Taliban," he said.

The first EU-Pakistan summit will be held in Brussels this week, when Mr Zardari will call for more aid for the refugee crisis.

The Sunday Times


One thing I keep noting with this gentleman is that he objects to the fighting but offers little as an alternative.

It would appear he is very good at doing the necessary things like social service concerns, raising funds for the displaced people, but as a politician he appears very weak.

 

[s90]

lol i hate this idiot!

 

[PeacefulIndian]

IMO, he does have some valid points.

Meanwhile, all the top Taliban leaders have escaped. It's so inhuman what the military has done.

Now from where did he get this information? If true, then the current operation holds little if no meaning at all. With their top brass alive, they are surely going to come back strong one day, or backfire, in Imran's words.

"Was this operation to save the people of Swat or to get dollars from the Americans?" he asked. "Only 10 days earlier parliament had passed a resolution endorsing a peace deal in Swat with the Taliban. Why was there no discussion?

Now this is something that the outside world has been suspicious about. There is nothing wrong with military operation against Taliban, but the points mentioned above make it smell a lot more fishy.

 

[nabeel190]

hey guys
i think that imran is repeating the same thing over and over again. he always say that army should not be killing taliban and the government should be negotiating with taliban.

i don't know why doesn't he understand that the government tried their best to nagotiate with taliban and make some kind of deal but they r not keeping up with any kind of deal. they banned female teachers and students from schools. they want their own law so this kind a crap can't happen when on the other hand the countries and the world's economy is going down. i know in this case its america's fault that they invaded these countries and now it become our war for no reason.

Beside i really like imran khan because he is honest maybe because he haven't got in power yet...lol. but still he is gud beacause he wants young people to stand for themselves and he thinks that younger youth could change the world. And he also help in the restoring the chief justise. u know at the end i just want to say that he is gud in some cases and he is bad in some.....

 

[ajpirzada]

well Ratus Ratus has ritly mentioned that this guy does object a lot but offers no other solutions.
if the top leadership has escaped then should we stop fighting till they come back?

this guy has done a big blunder by going against the military operation which has been supported by ppl of swat.
i was seein him at the top in next 5 to 10 yrs but now i doubt if he ll even win more than few seats in the elections

 

[Lockheed F-16]

MODS:
Not sure if this is elsewhere, if move this or delete.


Pakistan crackdown to backfire: Imran | The Australian

Christina Lamb | June 15, 2009
Article from: Times Online
PAKISTAN'S military offensive against the Taliban will backfire and fuel extremism and bomb attacks, Imran Khan has warned.

"I have never been so depressed in my life," the cricketer-turned-politician said. "Pakistan is on a suicidal course."

Mr Khan was speaking in London, where he was visiting his two sons by former wife Jemima Goldsmith before going to the US to raise funds for refugees displaced by the fighting.

The 56-year-old leader of Pakistan's Movement for Justice Party has been branded pro-Taliban for speaking out against the military crackdown, which has forced 2.5 million people to flee from their homes.

"I'm not pro-Taliban," he said. "But my point is, shouldn't we have looked at other options?

"How do you justify using heavy artillery, helicopter gunships and F-16 fighter-jets on civilian areas? Who in the world does this? Meanwhile, all the top Taliban leaders have escaped. It's so inhuman what the military has done. It will backfire."

Israel, America, NATO

 

[TalibanSwatter]

MODS:
Not sure if this is elsewhere, if move this or delete.


Pakistan crackdown to backfire: Imran | The Australian

Christina Lamb | June 15, 2009
Article from: Times Online
PAKISTAN'S military offensive against the Taliban will backfire and fuel extremism and bomb attacks, Imran Khan has warned.



One thing I keep noting with this gentleman is that he objects to the fighting but offers little as an alternative.

It would appear he is very good at doing the necessary things like social service concerns, raising funds for the displaced people, but as a politician he appears very weak.

I could'nt agree more - Imran Khan has truly become the village idiot.

 

[Energon]

Although having rightly addressed the brutal and depressive nature of this conflict, Mr. Khan has entirely missed the central point. By taking the radicalized militias head on, Pakistan has for the first time instituted a paradigm shift in its outlook and policy which has up until now done the nation a lot more harm than good. Pursuing the current course as difficult as it may be will categorically alter Pakistan's prognosis for the future; not only in terms of its internal health, but also its relationship with other nations and the international community at large.

 

[fatman17]

ANALYSIS: Misplaced sympathies —Ijaz Hussain

The fact of the matter is that given their obscurantist outlook and fascist ideology, the Taliban are an infinitely greater threat to Pakistan than America. But that is not so for Imran Khan

Imran Khan, chairman of the Pakistan Tehreek-e Insaf, is a vocal and relentless opponent of the ongoing military operation in Malakand. He believes that, lured by dollars, the Pakistani government has undertaken the operation in pursuance of the American agenda. In his opinion, the solution to the ongoing strife lies in the termination of military operations, withdrawal of security forces from the troubled areas and seeking a political settlement with the Taliban.

Imran Khan’s stance is not new. It goes back to the period when President Musharraf decided to send the Pakistan Army into Waziristan. Khan opposed it at that time for the same reasons as he is doing now. Musharraf was so miffed by his opposition that in the course of a press conference he called him a “terrorist without a beard”. Many Pakistanis are today so disenchanted with Imran Khan’s politics on the issue that they tend to agree with this description. Does he deserve the title?

To address the question we need to understand Imran Khan’s views on the Taliban and the reasons for his opposition to military operation. As for the Taliban, he does not consider them a threat to Pakistan because in his opinion they are trying to get sharia law introduced in the country, which is commendable. Khan has often lambasted secular liberals for opposing this objective, which he ascribes to their intellectual slavery of the West. Describing their apprehensions about sharia law as utterly unfounded, he has advised them not to oppose it.

That does not mean that he supports Taliban excesses. such as burning of schools, slitting of soldiers’ throats, flogging of women, etc., for which he has denounced them. Nor has he supported Sufi Muhammad’s rejection of Pakistan’s Constitution and democracy, which he has condemned. Khan is, however, reluctant to call the Taliban terrorists because he thinks that by doing so he would condemn about two million madrassa students, which he thinks would be unjustified. He prefers to describe the present wave of violence as Taliban militancy rather than terrorism.

As to the military operation, Imran Khan opposes it because he is against all military operations, be they in Afghanistan, Iraq, former East Pakistan, Balochistan or elsewhere. He does so because in his opinion they offer no solution to conflicts. He cites in this regard a RAND Corporation report based on the study of the last forty years of terrorist and asymmetric conflicts (1968-2008), according to which only 7 percent of them were resolved through military means.

Khan contends that when Musharraf sent the army into Waziristan, there were no militant Taliban in Pakistan. In his opinion, it was the military operation that created them. He admires the recent Swat peace deal but criticises the government for abandoning the path of political process. He is of the view that the government should have called a national conference of all stakeholders before starting the operation. He believes that it failed to do so and instead mounted the operation to please the Americans.

As to Imran Khan’s views on the Taliban, we find that they are quite close to those of the religious parties, particularly the Jama’at-e Islami. Both consider America rather than the Taliban as a threat to Pakistan.

America is undoubtedly, in many ways (such as their designs against our nukes), a threat to Pakistan. However, to say that the Taliban are no threat to us is understandable from the perspective of religious parties (because they share the same worldview), but is indeed surprising when it comes from an enlightened individual like Imran Khan.

The fact of the matter is that given their obscurantist outlook and fascist ideology, the Taliban are an infinitely greater threat to Pakistan than America. But that is not so for Imran Khan, who decries them for their fascist ideology and their excesses but shares their passion for sharia law. (No wonder that the Taliban are joining PTI, as Khan has himself revealed.) Honestly speaking, he is an utterly confused man because he does not understand that the achievements of the Taliban government during 1996-2001 in Afghanistan (which he eulogises) resulted from its fascist ideology, which he decries.

As to military operations, it is true that the RAND report concludes that in only 7 percent of cases, they succeeded in ending terrorist groups and insurgencies, while in 93 percent of the cases local police, intelligence agencies or the political process took care of them.

However, in the case of Swat, Imran Khan needs to understand that the police and intelligence agencies were not in a position to play that role. The police, for example, became sitting ducks for terrorists who attacked and killed them, in addition to looting their weapons at will. Similarly, the intelligence agencies’ role too has been disappointing, as evidenced by the statement of ISPR spokesperson that poor intelligence was responsible for the failure of previous operations. Incidentally, the same phenomenon is again visible in the ongoing military operation as intelligence agencies are failing to pinpoint locations of the top Taliban leadership.

As far as the political process is concerned, the central and provincial governments did their best to use it to take care of the situation. Thus, the latter entered into a peace deal with the Taliban through Sufi Muhammad and subsequently introduced the Nizam-e Adl Regulation, despite vehement opposition from the United States.

While the people of Swat and Pakistan, who were hankering for peace, were naively elated with these steps, the wily Taliban had other ideas. Taking advantage of this opportunity, they not only consolidated their positions but also refused to lay down their arms. Further, in violation of the peace deal, they moved into Buner and Dir and threatened to extend their sway to other areas.

In this backdrop, the military operation had become inevitable. Imran Khan however favoured the political process to continue, whether or not it delivered. This shows the extent of his naiveté. Besides, he fails to mention the RAND finding that is most relevant here: military operations are most effective when used against terrorist groups “engaged in insurgency in which the groups were large, well armed and well organised”.

It is amazing that while our soldiers are laying down their lives to protect us from the evil Taliban, Imran Khan is fulminating day and night against the military operation. This is not all. During a recent television programme, while condemning the Taliban for targeting innocent civilians, he advised them instead to target our soldiers. This shows that the sympathy that he expressed, in an article titled “Where I stand” (The News, May 23), for dying soldiers was nothing more than lip service.

It is noteworthy that while in the West there is absolute freedom to oppose a military operation before it starts, it is considered unpatriotic to do so once it gets underway. Had Imran Khan been living in a Western country, his opposition to the ongoing military operation would have terribly hurt him politically. No wonder that when a TV host questioned the ethics of his criticism of the military operation by reminding of the foregoing norm in the West, Khan looked absolutely sheepish. It is also noteworthy that while he has a soft corner for the Taliban, whom he does not want to call terrorists, he has no sympathy for our valiant soldiers.

Imran Khan may not be a ‘terrorist without a beard’, but he is certainly an apologist for the Taliban.

The writer is a former dean of social sciences at the Quaid-i-Azam University. He can be reached at hussain_ijaz@hotmail.com

 

[fatman17]

I could'nt agree more - Imran Khan has truly become the village idiot.

friend - you r being too nice - he is famously known as IM the DIM!

 

[third eye]

Have no love for this man but he is not far from the mark.

Whats stopping GOP being put to the same stage of near premanent conflict by the talibs as US has been put to in Af ? What is being seen as victories may turn into bleeding sores.

Add to this the dimension that there exist ppl / parties in Pk who not only sympathise with the Talibs for their anti state activities but support them.

These ppl may be in the PA too. This rot should have been snuffed at the 1st instance. Striking deals etc with them has led them to ' taste blood'.

If in times to come all G'sOP follow the same line with equal fervor they may suceed to keep them down ( not eliminate them). Can't see it happening though.

 

[blain2]

Neither extremes will work (I.e. no Talking and only guns blazing OR talks only).

PA just have to do enough damage to the other side for them to understand that they have a cost to pay and its better for them to not carry on with their anti-state activities. There is no problem for as long as people carry on like Imran Khan (oppose but do so vocally, not at gunpoint).

I do not care much for Imran Khan's comments because like many others, I too think that he usually goes for the easy way out and has a very simplistic outlook. His very general suggestion is "lets not fight, lets talk and in case you do not, then there will be repercussions". I think everyone knows that anytime force is used there will be repercussions. However the issue is, would the repercussions of not doing anything be greater or those from taking action?

I do not think he has been very clear on it. Whenever he notices the public opinion turning into a greater anti-Taliban sentiment, he says things like since the ops have begun, they must go on, but end quickly. When the field is wide open, he falls back to his old argument, "this op should have never occurred".

For those who are giving credence to his points by saying that these actions are not yielding much because the Taliban leadership has escaped should realize that nobody with an inkling of the terrain and the way these groups operate believed that PA would roll in and arrest their leaders. The first ones to leave are the leaders. The PA's role is to go into the area and make their presence known to these folks. They have been unchallenged for far too long and now its time to call their bluff. When locals see the Army pushing in, the Taliban influence and threat to the locals would also reduce. That in itself is a big improvement over the past in Swat and FATA.

 

[waraich66]

I could'nt agree more - Imran Khan has truly become the village idiot.

Being Pakistani we should learn to respect our leaders.There is no doubt about his sincerity and honesty.

He has opposed Musharaf decisions to attack WAZIRISTAN,WANA in 2003 and 2004 and his stance was right at that time.PA could not achieved results because general public was not behind this action.


GoP should not take hasty decisions and parliment should not be by passed.

 

[zubair723]

Being Pakistani we should learn to respect our leaders.There is no doubt about his sincerity and honesty.

He has opposed Musharaf decisions to attack WAZIRISTAN,WANA in 2003 and 2004 and his stance was right at that time.PA could not achieved results because general public was not behind this action.


GoP should not take hasty decisions and parliment should not be by passed.

IMRAN KHAN is totally on the right course. GOP was not sincere in its negotiations. An ARMY OPERATION of this scale requires few months to plan & move requires regiments to pre-launch positions. The PEACE ACCORD was doomed from the begining, both sides knew it.

 

[pak avatar]

I will always support the PA.
But i believe IK is right on this point.
The army operation was not planned thoroughly, no provisions were made for the IDPs,heck no one thought abt IDPs. Half the provinces dont want them to come in their territory.(such unity)

We have lost priceless soldiers on one side and gained angry relatives of lost ones on the other side. NO need to guess were they will go to seek revenge.
I thk a covert ops using the ISI and SSG commandos should have been a much less costly and thought out approach.But the Army wanted media attention and wanted to show the world tht we r crazy,dollar hungry ppl who will do anything for dollars and killing our own ppl is a small price to pay for a few dollars
(currency converter 1 pak citizen= $100)
Chalo if they wanted to send the army atleast they shouldn't have used artillery or aircraft.I like to thk tht our army is capable enough on its own to defeat a few 100 poorly trained uneducated militia.
And half of this aid which we r going to get is going to be used to build a $850million new US embassy in islamabad.