Pakistan’s ISI from the inside

[muse]

I can talk about this in great detail, unfortunately, that would be a very long discussion. We would have to go over each & every event that has transpired in Pakistan & South Asia since 1947. I really don't want to go into that, but there were times when the Army was in the wrong, at other times, there was justification for their actions.



Pakistan nurtured the monster created by the US in 1979 by Carter & Brzezinski, & yes, it continues to bear the brunt of that decision, as well as the whole region. However, nations do 'favor' extreme elements if they are serving some 'sort of interest': for example: the US gave money, supplied weapons to the same people they are fighting today in Afghanistan; India trained LTTE terrorists against Sri Lanka, but in 1991, the same LTTE suicide bomber who got training in India blew up Rajiv Gandhi; & Pakistan is in the process of slaying the monster it helped nurture in the 80s. What cannot be doubted is the resolve of the Pakistan Army & the tribal people who have joined forces, & are eliminating this monster in Kurram & Mohmand. The Pakistan Army & the people have showed extreme bravery, & are busy eliminating the threat nurtured by Pakistan in the 80s.



First of all, if the ISI is not accountable to the Supreme Court or the Law of Pakistan, does not make the ISI at fault, but the civilian legal institutions/bodies. If the civilian government cannot do its job & govern the country, & the Army does the wrong thing by overthrowing that civilian government (& does a better job), the root cause of the problem is the inept government. It is wrong for the Army to overthrow democratic civilian rule, that is not their job: their job is to be on the battlefield; but the root cause of the problem is the inept civilian institutions.



There are 3 intelligence gathering bodies in Pakistan: the MI, the ISI & the IB. The MI is under the jurisdiction of the Army. The ISI is a foreign intelligence gathering agency under the jurisdiction of the civilian government, not the Army. The IB is a domestic intelligence gathering agency under the jurisdiction of the civilian government as well.

The Pakistan Army & intelligence recognize the facts on the ground, & work for Pakistan's safety. The fact is that very little is known about the ISI, it is an extremely efficient, a very powerful & discreet agency; & most people (Islamists or secular people) only pass their opinions about the ISI, & know very little about it.

Bilal

The above quoted post is ill informed and poorly argued - Let me come back to a stronger position, a little later in my response.

First, note that you have not been able to highlight a single victory -- now, instead of learning from this, you are choosing a "depends what the meaning of "is" is" position - it's a disservice to your position, because it challenges the intelligence of those who may be persuaded by your position.

I strongly encourage you to research further, why, the Pakistani choose "Islamism" as a state policy - suffice to say that in the context of the loss of East Pakistan and a endemically weak state, it was argued that Islamism would provide the state with legitimacy and allow the state to become relevant to lives of Pakistanis -- Now, as you research this, you will find that Malaysia adopted the same general path, but was their version of "Islamism" was informed by very ideas, Pakistan adopted the Jamaati version, rooted as it was in the corrosive Marxist anti-colonial narrative relevant to the 30 and 40's, with a strong dose of Wahabi ideology, complete with clerics from Saudi to create legislation that formed the Huddood laws, of which, Blasphemy laws still blight the Pakistani conscience.

Alright, so they choose Jamaati Islam, what of it? Easy, lets first ask who choose it - is that fair? If you agree that's fair to ask, then of course you must accept the answer, Army did. And then of course you cannot deny that it's equally fair to ask, if this project was "successful"? And of course, only those of murderous intent, will conclude that this was successful.

To date, the Pakistan army is allied with Jamaatis and their vision, this is a reflection of the intellectual and ethical bankruptcy of the Army - lets be clear, we are not arguing that Pakistan should not have a strong state or legitimacy, quite the contrary, we are strong proponents of this, we are questioning the the quality of ideas that inform policies to arrive at that objective.

Yes, it's a fact that Pakistan army is fighting islamist insurgency, but lets be clear, the same Pakistan army was arming and making deals with the same islamists insurgents, pointing them westward and eastward - and the same islamists have now seen that the core of Pakistan is itself rotten and Pakistan is for the taking - another army success??

You concede that the ISI is beyond the law and offer that this is the fault of the government, you fault the government for being weak -- Would you similarly argue that criminals are not to blame for being criminals and that police are to blame for the existence of criminals because police have failed to make them convicts???

You then offer that ISI is not a army organization - even the Inter-SERVICES part is not persuasive to you? But reality is that it is an army agency, headed by a uniform, accountable to the army -- now if as you say ISI is beyond the law, can the institution to which it belongs be other than "beyond the law"???


Ok, so lets make a stronger argument --- first look at the suggestions that the author of the lead article offers -- then ask, how would we get that done??

See, brother man, we all want a SMARTER more effective, more efficient army, one that is national in it's orientation, not one dedicated to an international Jihad nor one sectarian in nature - lets never abandon conscience, Our country, right or wrong. When right, to be kept right, when wrong to be put right.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

thanks for sharing the article...a good read

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Stick to the topic boys and girls. I shouldn't have to delete posts by senior members.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

My personal answer to the problem was emigration!

if it worked for you, then bravo.

After all defining a problem is half the solution, just as admitting ignorance is the first step to the knowledge.

nahhh

the other half is where things get harder......defining a problem is not so hard. Overcoming them with minimal externalities is the hardest part.

The real problem is a Hydra, of which the ISI is only one head.

that is not ''defining a problem''

that is just rhetoric




over-used rhetoric

 

[VCheng]

..............................

First of all, if the ISI is not accountable to the Supreme Court or the Law of Pakistan, does not make the ISI at fault, but the civilian legal institutions/bodies. If the civilian government cannot do its job & govern the country, & the Army does the wrong thing by overthrowing that civilian government (& does a better job), the root cause of the problem is the inept government. It is wrong for the Army to overthrow democratic civilian rule, that is not their job: their job is to be on the battlefield; but the root cause of the problem is the inept civilian institutions.
..............................

Okay, let me try again:

Is it not hypocritical to first destroy the very institutions that you mention and then lay the blame on their doorstep for not being able to do their jobs?

This could be translated as the famous verse:

Pehlay to hosh chheen liye zulm-o-sitam se
deewangi ka phir humein ilzaam diya he

 

[53fd]

Bilal

First, note that you have not been able to highlight a single victory -- now, instead of learning from this, you are choosing a "depends what the meaning of "is" is" position - it's a disservice to your position, because it challenges the intelligence of those who may be persuaded by your position.

You are right, depends on what you would call a 'victory'.

I strongly encourage you to research further, why, the Pakistani choose "Islamism" as a state policy - suffice to say that in the context of the loss of East Pakistan and a endemically weak state, it was argued that Islamism would provide the state with legitimacy and allow the state to become relevant to lives of Pakistanisp

Actually, Islamization of Pakistan started long before 1971. After all, Pakistan was the "Islamic Republic of Pakistan" in 1956, as per the constitution of Pakistan. Personally, I like to distinguish two terms: "Islamization" & "Radicalization" as per policy. The policy objectives of "Islamization" were different from that of "Radicalization", but "Islamization" was one of the reasons why Pakistan 'lost its way'. "Islamization of Pakistan" was a means of giving Pakistan an Islamic ideology, a distinct one from India, which had adopted a secular path. Some people in Pakistan thought that if Pakistan adopted the same secular approach that India did, there would have been no need for a separate Pakistan in 1947. That is where the slogan: "Pakistan ka matlab he La Illaha Illalah" came from. This was when the Deobandi elements from India (who had opposed the creation of Pakistan) started eroding into Pakistan, & 'corrupting' Pakistani society. It had nothing to do with the Army.

-- Now, as you research this, you will find that Malaysia adopted the same general path, but was their version of "Islamism" was informed by very ideas, Pakistan adopted the Jamaati version, rooted as it was in the corrosive Marxist anti-colonial narrative relevant to the 30 and 40's, with a strong dose of Wahabi ideology, complete with clerics from Saudi to create legislation that formed the Huddood laws, of which, Blasphemy laws still blight the Pakistani conscience.

I would call the period of Zulfiqar Bhutto from 1971 onwards Islamization as well. Islam was a means of keeping the different ethnicities together, it was a unifying factor, the glue that stuck the different ethnic groups in Pakistan together, especially with Sindhudesh, Baloch separatism, Mohajir problems & Pakhtunistan problems on the rise after the independence of Bangladesh.

Alright, so they choose Jamaati Islam, what of it? Easy, lets first ask who choose it - is that fair? If you agree that's fair to ask, then of course you must accept the answer, Army did. And then of course you cannot deny that it's equally fair to ask, if this project was "successful"? And of course, only those of murderous intent, will conclude that this was successful.

From 1979 onwards, the Zia regime focused on the policy of "radicalization", which some can argue stemmed from "Islamization", although it was used for a different purpose. The Pakistan Army nurtured the monster created by the US in 1979, trained them, taught them how to fight. These radicals were specifically used to break down the Soviet Union.

Let's test my theory of "radicalization" vs "Islamization". There were no terrorist groups, not much sectarian violence in Pakistan pre-1979. There were lots of ethnic clashes, violence sure. But look at the dates of formation of various terrorist groups in Pakistan, or in Kashmir or Afghanistan. All of them were formed post Soviet Union Afghan war. The Pakistan Army was never infested with extremist elements before the Soviet war. Pakistan had no choice but to deal with these monsters by itself once the US fled from the region after the breakup of the Soviet Union. Pakistan made mistakes in its policies during & after the Soviet Union-Afghan war, sure. It has been rectifying its mistakes since then.

 

[muse]

Bilal

Islamization in Pakistan is radicalization --- it's because of the quality of ideas that inform that Islamization -- so pervasive and corrosive has this project been that today, Pakistanis such as yourself are ashamed of it - and prefer to call it "radicalization" -- because it so bereft of the Islam of your fore fathers.

You are right that Ayub's army was not infested with Islamists, but Zia's army was deliberately infused with the Islamist ethic - to undo it will take another 30 years, but that presupposes an entire shift in the framework of the ideas that inform the state - and really, who is hopeful of such an eventuality? The same army that on one hand takes US monies and gives targeting information for drone attacks, demonizes the US and drone attacks, and the politicians are worse.

But I can't see what the point of losing hope is, though we must be realistic in our expectations - only a reorientation of the army, in the same manner that Zia did, will begin to solve the problem of Islamization, which is radicalization

 

[VCheng]

Bilal

Islamization in Pakistan is radicalization --- it's because of the quality of ideas that inform that Islamization -- so pervasive and corrosive has this project been that today, Pakistanis such as yourself are ashamed of it - and prefer to call it "radicalization" -- because it so bereft of the Islam of your fore fathers.

You are right that Ayub's army was not infested with Islamists, but Zia's army was deliberately infused with the Islamist ethic - to undo it will take another 30 years, but that presupposes an entire shift in the framework of the ideas that inform the state - and really, who is hopeful of such an eventuality? The same army that on one hand takes US monies and gives targeting information for drone attacks, demonizes the US and drone attacks, and the politicians are worse.

But I can't see what the point of losing hope is, though we must be realistic in our expectations - only a reorientation of the army, in the same manner that Zia did, will begin to solve the problem of Islamization, which is radicalization

Yes, but his whole point is that all of what you just described is NOT the fault of the ISI/PA, and thus not theirs to rectify.

 

[53fd]

Yes, it's a fact that Pakistan army is fighting islamist insurgency, but lets be clear, the same Pakistan army was arming and making deals with the same islamists insurgents, pointing them westward and eastward - and the same islamists have now seen that the core of Pakistan is itself rotten and Pakistan is for the taking - another army success??

Pakistan is destroying the monster it helped nurture. It isn't a new concept, the US & India have done the same as well. That's the kind of world we live in.

You concede that the ISI is beyond the law and offer that this is the fault of the government, you fault the government for being weak -- Would you similarly argue that criminals are not to blame for being criminals and that police are to blame for the existence of criminals because police have failed to make them convicts???

I believe criminals are to be blamed for being criminals, but if the civilian authorities had been capable enough & doing their jobs, we wouldn't be seeing this problem. The fact that a criminal gets away with crime he/she commits makes me doubt the system & its effectiveness.

now if as you say ISI is beyond the law, can the institution to which it belongs be other than "beyond the law"???

I used the word "if" before, as in supporting your assumption. I believe that the ISI is accountable for its actions, which is why the ISI chief was grilled by the Supreme Court for 12 hours in the aftermath of the OBL raid, & rightly so. But there is a difference between baseless accusations against the ISI (such as the Saleem Shahzad murder), & intelligence failures of the ISI (OBL raid, drone strikes on innocent civilians, tribals etc). The Supreme Court also demanded the ISI to 'make the US' stop the drone strikes, & the ISI did tell the CIA that, albeit unsuccessfully.

Ok, so lets make a stronger argument --- first look at the suggestions that the author of the lead article offers -- then ask, how would we get that done??

See, brother man, we all want a SMARTER more effective, more efficient army, one that is national in it's orientation, not one dedicated to an international Jihad nor one sectarian in nature - lets never abandon conscience, Our country, right or wrong. When right, to be kept right, when wrong to be put right.

We all know that the terrorists are an inherent threat to Pakistan. The Pakistan Army is fighting valiantly in Kurram & Mohmand to defeat them. Pakistan's Army is not dedicated to international Jihad, which is why Al-Qaeda is against the Pakistan Army & the Pakistan authorities, & asking the Pakistani people to stand up to them. The Pakistan Army dealt with international terrorists in the 80s created by the US, & in the 90s when the US left the region, leaving Pakistan at their peril. The international Jihad is coming from Kunar/Nuristan in Afghanistan; & if you see the IMU & the other Al-Qaeda affiliate groups, they are based in North Afghanistan (Kunduz, Balakh, Takhar, Badhgis). These provinces are geographically far far away from Pakistan, & don't have to do anything with Pakistan. The threat of international Jihad (Al-Qaedaism) comes from the Central Asian states (Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan) than Pakistan.

 

[muse]

Yes, but his whole point is that all of what you just described is NOT the fault of the ISI/PA, and thus not theirs to rectify.

See, you seem unwilling to acknowledge that it was the army that put Pakistan on the course of Islamization - and you refuse to acknowledge that ISI has been an instrument of the Islamization policy of the army -- Even now, brother man, tell us what is the motto of the army - Go ahead tell us all

See, I don't doubt where your heart is, but the arguments you offer, do not stand up to reality - that army motto tells you all you need to understand about this army's relationship to Islamization (read Radicalization of society)

 

[VCheng]

See, you seem unwilling to acknowledge that it was the army that put Pakistan on the course of Islamization - and you refuse to acknowledge that ISI has been an instrument of the Islamization policy of the army -- Even now, brother man, tell us what is the motto of the army - Go ahead tell us all

See, I don't doubt where your heart is, but the arguments you offer, do not stand up to reality - that army motto tells you all you need to understand about this army's relationship to Islamization (read Radicalization of society)

Excuse me Sir, but I said this was HIS (bilalhaider's) point, NOT mine.

 

[muse]

Pakistan army's relationship with Al-Qaida

So why is Al-Qaida against the Pakistan army?? --- But this was not always the case - when the Pakistan army decided to accept US money, Al-Qaida turned against it

See, what about all those years in which Al-qaida and what are now TTP were building bases in Waziristan? Who enabled that? There is just no getting around this uncomfortable reality, no excuse will make this reality disappear.

The re-orientation of the army into a national army is the only way to kill the monster of Islamization/radicalizaation in society - it's a signal that the state recognizes this ideology as a threat.

Taliban are bad but Jamaatis who support this ideology are good??????????????
taliban are bad but Madaress who create these are good????????

Some Pakistanis are confused, they want both khar and khurmah - but reality is that good is not a companion of bad.

 

[VCheng]

Pakistan army's relationship with Al-Qaida

So why is Al-Qaida against the Pakistan army?? --- But this was not always the case - when the Pakistan army decided to accept US money, Al-Qaida turned against it

See, what about all those years in which Al-qaida and what are now TTP were building bases in Waziristan? Who enabled that? There is just no getting around this uncomfortable reality, no excuse will make this reality disappear.

The re-orientation of the army into a national army is the only way to kill the monster of Islamization/radicalizaation in society - it's a signal that the state recognizes this ideology as a threat.

Taliban are bad but Jamaatis who support this ideology are good??????????????
taliban are bad but Madaress who create these are good????????

Some Pakistanis are confused, they want both khar and khurmah - but reality is that good is not a companion of bad.

Well, some (not me) would say that is all the "bloody civilians" fault, and that the PA/ISI sarfaroosh jiyalas did a marvellous job defending the realm in spite of this handicap.

 

[muse]

Well, some (not me) would say that is all the "bloody civilians" fault, and that the PA/ISI sarfaroosh jiyalas did a marvellous job defending the realm in spite of this handicap.

Count on it.

 

[53fd]

Bilal

Islamization in Pakistan is radicalization --- it's because of the quality of ideas that inform that Islamization -- so pervasive and corrosive has this project been that today, Pakistanis such as yourself are ashamed of it - and prefer to call it "radicalization" -- because it so bereft of the Islam of your fore fathers.

You are right that Ayub's army was not infested with Islamists, but Zia's army was deliberately infused with the Islamist ethic - to undo it will take another 30 years, but that presupposes an entire shift in the framework of the ideas that inform the state - and really, who is hopeful of such an eventuality? The same army that on one hand takes US monies and gives targeting information for drone attacks, demonizes the US and drone attacks, and the politicians are worse.

But I can't see what the point of losing hope is, though we must be realistic in our expectations - only a reorientation of the army, in the same manner that Zia did, will begin to solve the problem of Islamization, which is radicalization

If you are arguing that Islamization and radicalization are one & the same thing, then Islamization/radicalization started since Pakistan's inception, with the "Pakistan ka matlab he La Illaha Illallah" slogans, with the Deobandi influence creeping into Pakistani society, & was not the responsibility of the Pakistani Army, but the civilian government. You admit that Ayub's army was not infested with Islamists, meaning the Army was not responsible for the radicalization/Islamization.

What do you mean that "Zia's army was deliberately infused with the Islamist ethic"? The Pakistan Army is comprised of people from Pakistani society. The Pakistani Army is a product of the society we live in. The Army officers during Zia's time had to deal with fighters (from Afghanistan, Arab world, Pakistan) against the Soviet Union. There was radicalization as a result of that, sure. And if you read the initial article posted by AM, the ISI chief says that the extreme elements in the intelligence agency (the Jihadi lovers) were let go, & the organization was cleansed. The cleansing is a continuous process, it's coming through slowly, but at least it's continuing, & that is what is important. The arrest of the Brigadier with Hizb-ul-Tahrir links is a clear indication of the cleansing process taking place.

The policy on the drones is clear. Drones are a double edged sword. Intelligence must be shared between the ISI & CIA, to minimize collateral damage & maximize terrorist elimination. However, if the intelligence is not shared, there is a higher chance that the collateral damage will be high (like the tribals & innocent people getting killed previously), & the terrorist networks remaining in tact. This is not acceptable to Pakistan. Now that Pakistan & the US are collaborating, the collateral damage is minimized, the terrorist networks are getting strained, & the tribals & the Pakistan Army are joining hands to eliminate the threat from terrorists. This is what Pakistan wants.