Pakistan - Doomsday Reporting

[Torpedo]

There are number of threads on the same topic. But the thing which amazes me is similarity in Pakistani members' responses. Almost all of them are more or less like a one liner, starting or ending on "Inshallah!".

Such naive things look good on common people. But we expect more from the members of this forum. As we (PDF members) are supposed to be thinking on the more 'practical' level, it looks bad when even Think Tanks and Administrators / Moderators don't bother to take as worth a thought.

Please understand that I am not supporting any claims here. But these (so called) experts put their say with some logic and evidences that we can't deny. There may be difference of opinion about the inference from the facts. But nobody can deny the presence of such facts tempting these inferences.

What reasons do you have to rub out their claims? Statements like "It has never happened in history", "USA claims about Iraq didn't come out to be true", "US intelligence could not work out Osama's location", "Pakistan will never fall" etc etc are only good in scoring some browny points. Everyone here knows that. But, they can hardly in a logical debate.

So, they have given the reasons for what they think, you must do the same if you want others to believe you.

 

[RescueRanger]

There are number of threads on the same topic. But the thing which amazes me is similarity in Pakistani members' responses. Almost all of them are more or less like a one liner, starting or ending on "Inshallah!".

Such naive things look good on common people. But we expect more from the members of this forum. As we (PDF members) are supposed to be thinking on the more 'practical' level, it looks bad when even Think Tanks and Administrators / Moderators don't bother to take as worth a thought.

Please understand that I am not supporting any claims here. But these (so called) experts put their say with some logic and evidences that we can't deny. There may be difference of opinion about the inference from the facts. But nobody can deny the presence of such facts tempting these inferences.

What reasons do you have to rub out their claims? Statements like "It has never happened in history", "USA claims about Iraq didn't come out to be true", "US intelligence could not work out Osama's location", "Pakistan will never fall" etc etc are only good in scoring some browny points. Everyone here knows that. But, they can hardly in a logical debate.

So, they have given the reasons for what they think, you must do the same if you want others to believe you.

Pakistan is not going to collapse, i am quite tired of replying to such audicious claims made by retired analysts sitting in instututions that carry little or no weight in the real world of geo - strategic politics.

Pakistan is very important to regional security, ASB realise that, the US realise that, the Indian's even though the dont admit it, realise that.

Pakistan is fighting a "War on terror" and yes we have lost the maximum, we have fought the maximum, we have killed the maximum and arrested the maximum.

Reuters AlertNet - Pakistan says 1,000 militants killed in Bajaur campaign

25 militants, seven troops killed in Bajaur

BBC NEWS | World | South Asia | Winning the peace in Pakistan's tribal areas

In NWFP or "PukhtunKhaw" as it is now known, we have displaced a shocking 500,000 of our own people in the fighting... Does that not show the feirce nature of the fighting that half a million people have become internally displaced? Refugees in their own land?

Read this article:

Foreign Policy: Seven Questions: Pakistan’s War on Terror

Read this article, it is an eye opener for those who do not live in our land:
Public-security forces bond strengthening

SO, no Pakistan is not going to collapse. These audacious wet dreams emanating from the rotund backsides of analysts sitting on a couch with a glass of brandy and a Cuban cigar discussing nations and complex dynamics with their rather vague and clouded understanding of what constitutes a rising nation and what constitutes a falling one.

Is there some sort of national benchmark? If Zimbabwe has not collapsed, if Botswana has not collapsed, if Iran has not collapsed if Darfur has not collapsed, if Taiwan has not collapsed then how the hell is Pakistan going to collapse?

Like i said once before, we are not some sort of effervescent pill that will simply dissolve into nothingness in this sea of turmoil...

 

[fatman17]

Date: Wednesday, April 15, 2009, 9:26 AM

Pakistan is a Molotov cocktail just waiting for a match

By David Ignatius

Daily Star staff

Tuesday, April 14, 2009



Pakistan seems like a Molotov cocktail waiting for a
match. Its ruling elite bickers over politics, while out on
the streets Taliban insurgents step up their suicide
attacks. Its military plays the role of national conciliator
even as it worries about Muslim revolutionaries in its own
ranks. Meanwhile, the United States , Pakistan 's historic
friend and benefactor, is symbolized in the popular mind by
unmanned drones that cruise over the Western frontier
assassinating Taliban militants by remote control.
Which is why two top Obama administration emissaries,
Ambassador Richard Holbrooke and Admiral Michael Mullen,
paid an urgent visit to Islamabad this week to explain the
administration's new Afghanistan-Pakistan strategy.
During a brief tour, they gathered evidence about
Pakistan 's crisis, and explored ways to help the country
move back toward stability.


A hint of Pakistan 's troubles came soon after
Holbrooke and Mullen arrived Monday night. Anne Patterson,
the highly regarded US ambassador, had assembled some of the
nation's political elite to welcome the visiting
Americans. During a question-and-answer session, a shouting
match erupted between a prominent backer of President Asif
Ali Zardari and a supporter of dissident Supreme Court Chief
Justice Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry. The dispute, reported
later in the Pakistani press, was a snapshot of a country so
busy quarreling that it is failing to solve its problems.
The next morning brought fresh evidence of the dangers
facing Pakistan . Holbrooke and Mullen met a group of young
tribal leaders who had traveled, at great personal risk,
from Waziristan and other frontier areas. Some were dressed
in the colorful turbans of the frontier; others in Western
clothes. If Taliban leaders back home knew they were meeting
with Obama's special envoy and the chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, they could be killed.
"We are all Taliban," one young man said -
meaning that people in his region support the cause, if not
the terrorist tactics. He explained that the insurgency is
spreading in Pakistan , not because of proselytizing by
leaders such as Baitullah Mehsud, but because of popular
anger. For every militant killed by a US Predator drone, he
says, 10 more will join the insurgent cause.
"You can't come see the people because they
hate you," he warned. Listening to them speaking
through a translator, you realize that "drone
attack" has become a vernacular phrase in Urdu.



In truth, I heard more clarity from the young tribesmen
than from the elite at the embassy reception. The young men
advised that America should channel its aid through the
tribal chiefs, known as maliks, rather than the corrupt
Pakistani government. It should help train the Frontier
Corps, a rough-hewn tribal constabulary, rather than rely on
Pakistani army troops who are seen as outsiders. To curb the
militant Islamic madrassahs, the US should help improve the
abysmal public schools in the region.
Later that day, Zardari met us at his palace overlooking
the city. He was convincing when he discussed the legacy of
his late wife, Benazir Bhutto, who was killed in December
2007 by what he called the "cancer" of Muslim
terrorism. But on some major security and intelligence
issues, he claimed no knowledge or sought to shift blame to
others, and the overall impression was of an accidental
president who still has an uncertain grasp on power.
Zardari did offer an intriguing proposal for what to do
about the Predator drones. "We would appreciate it if
the technology was transferred," he said, so that the
Predators could become "our hammer against the
[terrorist] menace. Then we could justify it." US
officials said later that Zardari's comment could offer
a step forward.



As so often in pro-American countries on the brink, part
of the problem in Pakistan is the gap between what officials
say in private and what they can admit openly. Pakistani
leaders know the Predator attacks help combat the Taliban in
remote Waziristan , but they don't want to seem like
American lackeys. So they protest in public the very
strategy they have privately endorsed. One way or another,
that gap has to be closed.


If there's a positive sign in all this chaos,
it's that the Pakistani army isn't intervening to
clean up the mess. General Ashfaq Kiyani, the army chief of
staff, has been telling the feuding politicians to get their
act together. But he seems to understand that the route to
stability isn't another army coup, but in making this
unruly democracy work before it's too late.


Syndicated columnist David
Ignatius is published regularly by
THE DAILY STAR.

 

[Gabbar]

Pak in danger of fracturing into Islamist fiefdom: Report

Washington: With extremist elements gaining ground every passing day, Pakistan is in an imminent danger of disintegrating into a fiefdom controlled by Islamist warlords, having "disastrous" implications, a media report has said.

"It's a disaster in the making on the scale of the Iranian revolution," an unnamed intelligence official with long experience in Pakistan was quoted as saying by the
McClatchy newspaper.

There is little hope to prevent nuclear-armed Pakistan from disintegrating into a fiefdom controlled by Islamist warlords and terrorists, who would then pose a far greater threat to the US than those in Afghanistan, intelligence officials keeping a close watch on the situation in the region told the paper.

They said Pakistan's government is in the danger of being overrun by Islamic militants and the development of such a situation could be dangerous not only for the US but also for the entire region.

"Pakistan has 173 million people and 100 nuclear weapons, an army which is bigger than American army, and the headquarters of al-Qaida sitting in two-thirds of the country which the government does not control," David Kilcullen, a counterinsurgency consultant to the Obama administration was quoted as saying.

"The implications of this are disastrous for the US," he said.

Unlike Afghanistan, which is a backward, isolated, landlocked place, officials said Pakistan is a developed state with a major Indian Ocean port and ties to the outside world, especially the Persian Gulf that Afghanistan and the Taliban never had.

Another Pentagon advisor told McClatchy that Pakistan's government in the next 10 years would be overrun by Islamic militants.

"The place is beyond redemption," he was quoted as saying. "I don't see any plausible scenario under which the present government or its most likely successor will mobilise
the economic, political and security resources to push back this rising tide of violence," the advisor said.

"I think Pakistan is moving towards a situation where the extremists control virtually all of the countryside and the government controls only the urban centers," he said.
The report said such a pessimistic view of Pakistan's future has been bolstered by Islamabad's surrender this week of areas outside the frontier tribal region to Pakistan's
Taliban movement for the first time. Growing militant infiltration of Karachi, the nation's
financial centre and the industrial and political heartland province of Punjab, in part to evade US drone strikes in the tribal belt, also strengthens the view, it said.

 

[dabong1]

Pak in danger of fracturing into Islamist fiefdom: Report

Washington: With extremist elements gaining ground every passing day, Pakistan is in an imminent danger of disintegrating into a fiefdom controlled by Islamist warlords, having "disastrous" implications, a media report has said.

"It's a disaster in the making on the scale of the Iranian revolution," an unnamed intelligence official with long experience in Pakistan was quoted as saying by the
McClatchy newspaper.

There is little hope to prevent nuclear-armed Pakistan from disintegrating into a fiefdom controlled by Islamist warlords and terrorists, who would then pose a far greater threat to the US than those in Afghanistan, intelligence officials keeping a close watch on the situation in the region told the paper.

They said Pakistan's government is in the danger of being overrun by Islamic militants and the development of such a situation could be dangerous not only for the US but also for the entire region.

"Pakistan has 173 million people and 100 nuclear weapons, an army which is bigger than American army, and the headquarters of al-Qaida sitting in two-thirds of the country which the government does not control," David Kilcullen, a counterinsurgency consultant to the Obama administration was quoted as saying.

"The implications of this are disastrous for the US," he said.

Unlike Afghanistan, which is a backward, isolated, landlocked place, officials said Pakistan is a developed state with a major Indian Ocean port and ties to the outside world, especially the Persian Gulf that Afghanistan and the Taliban never had.

Another Pentagon advisor told McClatchy that Pakistan's government in the next 10 years would be overrun by Islamic militants.

"The place is beyond redemption," he was quoted as saying. "I don't see any plausible scenario under which the present government or its most likely successor will mobilise
the economic, political and security resources to push back this rising tide of violence," the advisor said.

"I think Pakistan is moving towards a situation where the extremists control virtually all of the countryside and the government controls only the urban centers," he said.
The report said such a pessimistic view of Pakistan's future has been bolstered by Islamabad's surrender this week of areas outside the frontier tribal region to Pakistan's
Taliban movement for the first time. Growing militant infiltration of Karachi, the nation's
financial centre and the industrial and political heartland province of Punjab, in part to evade US drone strikes in the tribal belt, also strengthens the view, it said.

american psy ops are getting more and more childish.

 

[Ratus Ratus]

Three blind mice,
Three blind mice
See how they run,
See how they run!

They all ran after
Taliban and al-Qaida
She cut off their tails
With a carving knife
Did you ever see
Such a sight in your life
As three blind mice?
Read India, Afghanistan and Pakistan for the mice.

Perhaps if they all stopped 'foreign handing' themselves they might not be so blind.

 

[S-2]

"I don't see any plausible scenario under which the present government or its most likely successor will mobilise the economic, political and security resources to push back this rising tide of violence,"

This is a succinct summation and likely correct. I'm of the frank view that any civil or military aid will be too late to effect positive change.

 

[Torpedo]

Pakistan is not going to collapse, i am quite tired of replying to such audicious claims made by retired analysts sitting in instututions that carry little or no weight in the real world of geo - strategic politics.

Pakistan is very important to regional security, ASB realise that, the US realise that, the Indian's even though the dont admit it, realise that.

That's why we are concerned. Dunno why all Pakistanis think that Indians dream about failed Pakistan every night? We know, we can't afford Pakistan collapsing.

Pakistan is fighting a "War on terror" and yes we have lost the maximum, we have fought the maximum, we have killed the maximum and arrested the maximum.

Reuters AlertNet - Pakistan says 1,000 militants killed in Bajaur campaign

25 militants, seven troops killed in Bajaur

BBC NEWS | World | South Asia | Winning the peace in Pakistan's tribal areas

Again the naive reasoning I was talking about. How the hell 'efforts more than others' can claim for stability? Pakistan is a nation 'suffering more than others'. So, 'maximum efforts' hardly matter.

In NWFP or "PukhtunKhaw" as it is now known, we have displaced a shocking 500,000 of our own people in the fighting... Does that not show the feirce nature of the fighting that half a million people have become internally displaced? Refugees in their own land?

Read this article:

Foreign Policy: Seven Questions: Pakistan’s War on Terror

Read this article, it is an eye opener for those who do not live in our land:
Public-security forces bond strengthening

SO, no Pakistan is not going to collapse. These audacious wet dreams emanating from the rotund backsides of analysts sitting on a couch with a glass of brandy and a Cuban cigar discussing nations and complex dynamics with their rather vague and clouded understanding of what constitutes a rising nation and what constitutes a falling one.

And again! How many troops can surely stop collapse? Don't try to fool yourself.

Is there some sort of national benchmark? If Zimbabwe has not collapsed, if Botswana has not collapsed, if Iran has not collapsed if Darfur has not collapsed, if Taiwan has not collapsed then how the hell is Pakistan going to collapse?

Again baseless examples. What Pakistan has to do with that? Its a new game. What happened to others can't decide what happens to Pakistan.

I am expecting good practical reasons from you, not the unrelated numerical facts everyone knows.

 

[hj786]

Dunno why all Pakistanis think that Indians dream about failed Pakistan every night? We know, we can't afford Pakistan collapsing.

There are many Indian posters on many forums, comment sections and blogs who disagree with you. That's why. Even your own military people disagree with you. I have read posts on an ex-InAF pilot's blog and on a forum by an IA officer saying "god speed" to Pakistan.

Again the naive reasoning I was talking about. How the hell 'efforts more than others' can claim for stability? Pakistan is a nation 'suffering more than others'. So, 'maximum efforts' hardly matter.

It means Pakistan isn't sitting around doing nothing. It just isn't focusing all of its resources on the problem.

And again! How many troops can surely stop collapse? Don't try to fool yourself.

How many terrorists can surely cause collapse? How many terrorists can stop ~500,000 troops from stopping collapse?

 

[Gabbar]

'Next generation of dreaded terrorists will come from Pak'


FULL PDF OF THE ORIGINAL REPORT:
http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/POP_AfPak_to_PakAf.pdf

If rapid Talibanisation of Pakistan continues, the next generation of the world's most sophisticated terrorists will be born, indoctrinated, and trained in the nuclear-armed Pakistan, an American think tank on Tuesday said in a report.
"Today, Al-Qaeda's [Images] top leadership is most likely based in Pakistan, along with top Taliban [Images] leaders, both Afghan and Pakistani," said the report 'From AfPak to PakAf: A Response to the New US Strategy for South Asia' prepared by the Council on Foreign Relations.


The "Talibanisation" of Pakistan's Pashtun belt is gradually moving eastward into settled districts, creating new terrorist safe havens in once-tranquil locales such as the Swat valley, said the report authored by Daniel Markey.



"Pakistan's non-Pashtun extremist and sectarian groups, some of which were historically nurtured by the state as a means to project influence into India and Afghanistan, also have the potential to prove deeply destabilising," it added.


Further groups like the banned Jaish-e-Mohammed or Jamaat-ud-Dawah are well resourced and globally interconnected. Some appear to retain significant influence within state institutions and enjoy public sympathy, in certain cases because of the social services they provide, the report said.


It said over the past two years, the security environment in Afghanistan and Pakistan has taken a significant turn for the worse. The spread of militancy, whether by terrorists connected with the Al-Qaeda, the Taliban of Mullah Omar [Images] or Baitullah Mehsud, criminal gangs, narco-traffickers, or sectarian extremists, among others, has destabilised the Pashtun belt in southern and eastern Afghanistan as well as western Pakistan.


"At the same time, a range of other violent actors from Punjabi anti-Indian extremists to Central Asian warlords-operate in the non-Pashtun areas of Pakistan and Afghanistan," the report said, adding Pakistan and Afghanistan offer these groups an unusually hospitable environment, one that complicates and magnifies the danger.


"The geographic proximity of Pakistan's nuclear program to these sophisticated terrorists and the recent history of illicit transfers of material and know-how also pose a unique threat," it said.


The report said fragile state institutions, weak leadership, and inadequate resources limit the ability of Islamabad [Images] and Kabul to fight militancy in the near term or to foster moderation over the long run.


Not sure where this belongs!!!

 

[Trisonics]

Ok so what is a "Failed State"? Subjective, but however you look at it, there may be common grounds when you think about economy, Governance, reputation etc. IMHO, when we read all these articles about Pakistan being a failed state, I don't think they mean Pakistan will vanish from the world but the inability to control their own country. Regardless of how USA can make a difference, the inability of a country to solve a problem or even contain it constitutes a failure!!!
Well, it may be natural to deny or be in denial but when you step outside of it and view the situation as an outsider you will see it in different light. While this WOT may be Pakistan's biggest problem, it has snowballed into other problems, namely economy. Regardless of how other countries may be helping or hindering your attempt, the inability to solve something in your own soil, in my book constitutes a failure.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

^^^ The issue isn't one of 'denial', but of disagreements over the quantification of parameters used to arrive at 'failed state' conclusions.

Economic slowdown, insurgency in parts of the country etc. are all negative variables that should be considered while analyzing Pakistan, but at the same time political, economic and institutional reforms and progress towards stabilizing the economy and providing stability in a large part of the country should also be considered.

Weighing both progress and regress, I am as of yet unconvinced of the 'failed state' argument.

 

[muse]

I like this thread - I will keep it going a day or two or longer - I just really like the name of the thread

Booo Booo - Scary, huh? Whose scared now??:cheers:

american psy ops are getting more and more childish.