What's new

Russia, China and Pakistan: An Emerging New Axis?

When a hand gun does the job :triniti:, why should I bring my machine gun :guns::sniper:out :) your comments have no logical substance buddy. It is just filled with bullshit of a jealous guy who can't face the reality of the future.
Yea beggers talking about the future with there begging bowl. Sounds really estounding:smitten::D you people have been saying that for 13 years and your predictions have been delivered to you totally on the scale and there isn't anything to extract, keep blabbering your pockets are getting empty while you fart out another opinion of your.:partay:
 
When a hand gun does the job :triniti:, why should I bring my machine gun :guns::sniper:out :) your comments have no logical substance buddy. It is just filled with bullshit of a jealous guy who can't face the reality of the future.
My comment is still valid. You are burning with jealousy and hilariously watch you burn with jealousy and anger and foam coming out of your mouth.....but you are helpless and coward
 
My comment is still valid. You are burning with jealousy and hilariously watch you burn with jealousy and anger and foam coming out of your mouth.....but you are helpless and coward
Oh cry me a river babyboy, no one cares about your self continously righteous behavior syndrome. Now sleep on it and do more predictions we will be awaiting upon there deliverance which you know is just hollow self appeasement technique you inherited. Not your fault you were programmed this way.
 
May comment is even more valid.......keep burning and barking....nobody listens to you in this world.
 
You sound like a Facebook hoe asking for likes, "my comment is more valid give me likes". Funny your feminine side reveals it's self. That's why you left a comment like a 6!+(#
 
Russia, China and Pakistan: An Emerging New Axis?
Regional realities are shifting fast, with some significant ramifications for India.

ByJoy Mitra
August 18, 2015

In geopolitics, strategic realities can change with surprising speed, and even before countries realize it, decisive shifts occur that shape the future for the years to come. That seems to be the case with traditional Cold War rivals Russia and Pakistan, which have of late seen a gradual warming of ties. Traditionally an ally of India and hitherto supportive of India’s stance on Kashmir, Russia has shown clear signs of cozying up to Pakistan.

Having earlier lifted its self-imposed arms embargo on Pakistan, in November 2014 Russia signed a landmark “military cooperation” agreement with Pakistan, which spoke about “exchanging information on politico-military issues, strengthening collaboration in the defense and counter-terrorism sectors, sharing similar views on developments in Afghanistan and doing business with each other.” There have been reports that Pakistan may purchase Mi-35 combat helicopters apart from directly importing the Klimov RD-93 engines from Russia rather than via China for its JF-17 multi-role fighters. This could also mean a significant role for Russian equipment and spares in future development of the fighter. In addition, Russian state-owned firm Rostekh Corporation is planning to build a 680 mile gas pipeline in Pakistan in 2017 at an estimated cost of $2.5 billion.

The mutual overtures between Russia and Pakistan are part of a greater shift in international relations. In Europe, Russia is embroiled in a showdown with the West over Ukraine, with Moscow’s military adventure in Crimea being followed by Western sanctions. In the Asia-Pacific, China’s encroachments in the South China Sea have inflamed tensions with other Asia-Pacific countries allied with the U.S. These developments have forced Russia and China to look for allies, which explains the bonhomie between the two powers of late. Some analysts question whether a partnership motivated by external factors could lead to an alliance of countries that formerly distrusted each other. But the old adage “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” fits perfectly well here; the single most important factor that overrides all others is their concurrent perception of the U.S.and its “policy of containment” towards them. China needs allies to change the world order and it begins with Asia.

The China-Pakistan link is well known and is the most formidable leg of the Russia-China-Pakistan triangle. China has been a traditional ally of Pakistan and has historically supported it against its arch rival India both in terms of military equipment and diplomacy. Chinese have been involved in building nuclear reactors for Pakistan; Pakistan is the largest importer of Chinese manufactured defense equipment, is involved in co-production and co-development of JF-17 fighter jets and now is slated to buy almost eight Chinese’s S20 or Yuan-class diesel-electric submarines (SSK). China has also significantly invested in Pakistan’s Gwadar Port and in the Karakoram corridor. The imperative here is not just for China but for Pakistan as well. The burgeoning relationship between the U.S. and India, with their extensive trade ties and cooperation on strategic issues of mutual concern in the sphere of defense technology and equipment, does unnerve Pakistan from time to time. Since Pakistan’s failed misadventure in the Kargil heights, it has lost the support of successive U.S. administrations on the Kashmir issue and its own relationship with the U.S. has been rocky.

It is from here that the congruence of interests between the three states of Pakistan, China and Russia stems. For China and Russia, the U.S. is an anathema, which must be dethroned from its hegemonic position for their own security. Pakistan has enough of an incentive to be a willing partner in an Asian security architecture that is shaped by China. With India having diversified its military suppliers to include countries like the U.S. and Israel, Russia no longer sees any impediment to establishing a strategic relationship with Pakistan. In the future one could see signs of integration between the three states, as their abilities complement each other: Russia is an alternate source for Western military technology and energy supplier, China is economically more potent than the other two, with considerable foreign exchange reserves looking to invest and in need of energy supplies,Pakistan despite its structural problems is a growing economy with young population in need of both of both energy supplies and defense equipment. Already importing equipment from China, Pakistan will have access to Russian technology, which was in fact the source for many Chinese products as well. Sanctions-hit Russia will have a new market for its defense equipment, although this may well in the future see some competition between Russia and China. It is possible that Russia will continue to arm India along with China and now Pakistan. Both EU and US have followed the strategy of supplying defense equipment to both India and Pakistan. But Russia arming Pakistan is still significant because that implies that Russia will no longer give preferential treatment to its historical friend India.

It is true India is still economically too big to be overlooked and Russia has an interest in preserving its relationship with India. But India has estranged security ties with China and Pakistan, and with Russia drawing ever closer to China, its divergence of interest with India in the world order it perceives is growing more apparent. The Russia-Pakistan-China triumvirate is a reality in the offing and has a far greater convergence of security objectives in Asia than a similar Russia-China-India grouping (also subsumed within BRICS). It is important to note here that the Chinese economy is visibly slowing and this could lead to some internal turmoil, the Russian economy may very well see further contraction, while that of Pakistan, albeit showing signs of improvement, is external aid dependent and beset by internal security concerns. Aggression on the part of this triumvirate to deflect attention from internal problems cannot be ruled out. The strategic ramifications will be for India as much as they will be the U.S. and other countries in the region. As the contours of the alliances in Asia harden, India will have to shed its reluctance to take a firmer stand in Asia and work more closely with the U.S. and Japan.

Joy Mitra is post-graduate scholar of international relations from Jindal School of International Affairs and a researcher with Wikistrat.

Damn what could've been...
 
.,,..

Pakistan opts out of democracy summit in Washington

Dawn.com
March 28, 2023

Pakistan on Tuesday chose not to participate in the democracy summit taking place in Washington this week, opting instead to engage with the US on a bilateral basis to encourage democratic values.

The virtual summit, led by the United States, begins today. China and Turkiye have not been invited to the summit.

The issue of Pakistan’s participation in the Second Summit for Democracy in the US had been under discussion for some time, particularly because it could potentially upset its “all-weather friend” China, which had not been invited to the summit. The decision had been a challenging one, with Pakistan weighing the benefits of participation against the potential risks to its diplomatic relationships.

China would be closely monitoring these overtures as the US has already annoyed Beijing by inviting Taiwan, China’s longstanding nemesis.

Like the first democracy summit in 2021, both India and Pakistan were invited to the summit this time. India attended the last meeting and may do so this year as well. Pakistan had opted out of the first summit, reportedly on back of the Biden administration’s refusal to reach out to the then-prime minister Imran Khan.
 
Lol Dawn getting it's news bits from the US Consulate in Karachi still?

Recommended reading. This explains in detail why the slave army removed Imran Khan.

Imran Khan wanted to forge ties with the Global South led by China and Russia and shun the west.

GHQ boys decided no.


Pakistan Armed Forces - Origins of Arrogance & Civilian Disdain

On the day Prime Minister Imran Khan was is Moscow meeting with President Putin at the Kremlin, little is known that senior representatives of the Pakistan Armed Forces were in Washington meeting with Pentagon officials.

While the Government of Pakistan was busy building a Eurasian alliance (with China and Russia) and strengthening its geopolitical position in an increasingly vocal "Global South" (Asia and Africa), the Pakistan Armed Forces were busy trying to undermine Pakistan's sovereignty and ouster PM Imran Khan.

It's clear as crystal where the loyalties of our armed forces are, and they certainly are not with Pakistan, despite several ISPR music videos which pretend that they do.

Today's announcement by the COAS where he termed Russia's military operation as an "invasion" should clearly explain to you the mentality of our armed forces. They are a problem...and we need to discuss where this problem originated from.

> Jinnah's Visit To Army Staff College
On 14 June 1948, Jinnah visited the Army Staff College in Quetta where he met with high ranking officers and made a public speech at the Officers Mess. To make a long story short, he was shocked by the mentality of the officers and expressed his alarm at their casual disdain for civilian leadership. There is no record of what discussions took place in private between the senior officers and Jinnah, but it does appear that Jinnah was put off by what they said. Interestingly, the senior-most officer present, next below the British commandant, was none other than Lt. Col. Mohammad Yahya Khan. Two participants of that training course, Major Sahibzada Yaqub Ali Khan and Major Abdul Majid, who later rose to the rank of lieutenant general, were also present. Jinnah's view of the military wasn't hidden and upon making his public speech at the Officers Mess, he made his point clear:

“One thing more. I am persuaded to say this because during my talks with one or two very high-ranking officers I discovered that they did not know the implications of the oath taken by the troops of Pakistan...I want you to remember...that the executive authority flows from the head of the Government of Pakistan, who is the Governor General and, therefore, any command or order that may come to you cannot come without the sanction of the executive head. This is the legal position.”

Interestingly, Jinnah's visit is highlighted on their official website, but make no mention of the contents of his speech.

The military were aware of Jinnah's stance on meddling into the affairs of government. On the very day of Pakistan's independence on 14 August 1947, Jinnah, who had just become Governor General, scolded one young army officer who claimed to have said:

“Instead of giving us the opportunity to serve our country in positions where our natural talents and native genius could be used to the greatest advantage, important posts are being entrusted, as had been done in the past, to foreigners. British officers have been appointed to head the three fighting services, and a number of other foreigners are in key senior appointments. This was not our understanding of how Pakistan should be run.”

Jinnah was not amused and replied back bluntly:

“Do not to forget that the armed forces are the servants of the people and you do not make national policy; it is we, the civilians, who decide these issues and it is your duty to carry out these tasks with which you are entrusted.” And he added “I should like you to study the constitution, which is in force in Pakistan at present and understand its true constitutional and legal implications when you say that you will be faithful to the constitution of the Dominion.“

What both these incidents indicate is that some army officers had developed extra-constitutional ambitions within less than a year of Pakistan's independence, even while the father of the nation was alive. How and why did that happen? Although a universal feeling of disdain for civilian leadership is almost universal in military brass around the world, the situation in Pakistan was a little different. Disdain was coupled with arrogance and a superficial superiority complex. To understand the origins of this, we need yet another history lesson.

> Colonial Origins
Contrary to popular belief, the Pakistan Army was not formed in 1947, but rather 1920. How is that possible? The same reason why the Pakistan Railways was established in 1861 - we simply inherited it from our former colonial rulers. In the case of Pakistan Railways, we inherited it from the North Western State Railway. But where did the Pakistan Army come from? Here's a brief timeline:

>1857:
- British Raj established; dozens of "Presidency armies" formed throughout the colony.

> 1895:
- Presidency armies abolished.
- Replaced with 4 commands; the Punjab, Bengal, Bombay and Madras commands.

> 1908:
- Punjab Command and Bengal Command merged into Northern Army.
- Bombay Command and Madras Command merged into Southern Army.

> 1920:
- Northern Army and Southern Army abolished.
- Reverted back to four commands; this time as Northern, Eastern, Southern and Western commands.

> 1942:
- Northern and Western commands merged to form the North Western Army.
- This was done to better guard the frontier regions of North West Frontier and Baluchistan.

> 1945:
- North Western Army reverted to Northern Command.

> 1947:
- Northern Command renamed to Pakistan Army.

So the Pakistan Army was essentially inherited from the former colonial force present in what would become Pakistan. Similarly, the remaining commands (Western, Eastern and Southern), in what would become the Republic of India, were inherited by the Indian Army. This is why Frank Messervy is considered the first General of the Pakistan Army. He was made General Officer Commander-in-Chief of the Northern Command in 1946. In 1947, when it was renamed to the Pakistan Army, he was granted the honourary rank of general until 1948.

> North Western Army Culture
The imperial culture of the British Indian Army was one of divide and control. Firstly, British officers, who were always high ranking, were kept separate from "native officers", who were normally low ranking. Secondly, interaction between officers and civilians was discouraged, especially after 1857, where resentment and distrust against civilians had been further entrenched. The common people of British India were seen as its biggest enemy, and hence the military wanted to ensure that officers were kept separate as much as possible from the civilian population. This is why the British Indian Army, apart from hospitals, decided to build their own gated neighbourhoods, clubs, golf courses, resorts etc. These were very well maintained and among the best in the entire colony, and naturally the civilian population ended up viewing officers living a luxurious lifestyle. Furthermore, the North Western Army had a particular daunting task as it had to regularly come in contact with rebelling Pashtun tribes, Baloch tribes and skirmishes in Punjab and Sindh. Of all the commands, the North Western Army was the most stretched and heavily utilized. You would well imagine what the average officer thought of civilians during this period.

> Pakistan Army Inheriting A Mess
Unfortunately in 1947, the Pakistan Army inherited this culture and nothing was done to expunge the new Pakistan Army of its colonial arrogance and disdain for civilians. Even prior to independence, there was minimal interaction between the political leadership and the future leaders of the Pakistan Army. After independence, the interaction remained cold and was not helped by the unwise administrative decision to keep civil and military leadership separated, with Karachi as the capital and Rawalpindi as the army headquarters. Even the nearest provincial capital (Peshawar) was about 200 kilometers away. The farthest provincial capital, Dhaka, was light years away. This perhaps explains why the people of East Bengal hardly ever figured in the calculations of the army, except as an irksome nuisance. This geographical factor only perpetuated and enhanced the feeling of being strangers that was inherited at the time of independence in 1947.

Hence the two sides, civilian and military, began with some hostility and suspicion that strangers tend to have towards each other.

> Questions To Ask Yourself
So I ask you this first – let's go back to 1857 when the British Raj was established.

Place yourself there and ask yourself, why would a colonial power want to establish a military force in its colony? Would it be to protect the common people (the colonized) and serve them? Or would it be to protect the integrity of the colony (the colonizer)?

The answer is obviously the latter. The British formed many military forces across its colonies to keep the common people (or “natives”) in line by any means necessary. The 1857 War of Independence obviously played a big role in this, but what happened following the Bolshevik revolution in Russia also scared the British. Then World War 1 and subsequent rise of Nazi Germany and Colonial Japan leading to World War 2 is what maintained an extremely strong British military force being formed here.

So, if we inherited this colonial military, why today are all of you surprised at the history of military coups? Why are you surprised by arrogance of military generals or gated communities like DHA or the fact English is still the official language of the military? Has ISPR ever heard of a language called Urdu? In contrast, the Turkish Army to this day has maintained some of its Ottoman traditions going back over 900 years. Why couldn't the Pakistan Army similarly adopt changes in 1947 to rid itself of colonial disparagement and become a truly independent military force for the people?

We need to have a serious discussion on the role of the Pakistan Armed Forces in politics and where the loyalties of this military actually are.

70 years have past, yet GHQ still thinks it's 1945.

Now do you understand why drone attacks were allowed on Pakistan's territory?

Now do you understand why no PAF jet ever intercepted drones in our airspace?

Now do you understand why the Abbottabad raid was allowed to happen?

Now do you understand?
 
Back
Top Bottom