There is no unity among people in Pakistan.

[vsdoc]

I mean, imagine bashing them and insulting them constantly almost to the point of provoking them to form SIMI and similar scatter-brained groups.

Sir SIMI and Indian Mujahideen grew out of a Congress led India.

Surely your ire is misdirected politically if not socially here.

 

[Joe Shearer]

So they remain a great lot in spite of arseholes. On both sides, might I add, in the interest of being fair.

Why do you think they are so great then?

Did an imaginary line on a piece of map paper change the collective people mass on two sides of it?

Magically?

No.

Before I go off to remind some baulky twenty-something year olds that they have a mid-term coming up, a few words from our sponsors.

I think the difference is that we were all forced to keep other people in mind, to take other people's sensitivities into account.

 

[vsdoc]

I think the difference is that we were all forced to keep other people in mind, to take other people's sensitivities into account.

Bingo.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Sir SIMI and Indian Mujahideen grew out of a Congress led India.

Surely your ire is misdirected politically if not socially here.

Yes, you're right, it started in a Congress-led India, which was riven by idiocies like the Rath Yatra by that senile old douche bag, and the Babri Masjid thingy, aided and abetted by a state government led by the other douche bag Kalyan Singh.

That by no means absolves that used douche bag Arun Nehru, or his fatuous cousin. But it was due to the idiots who kept playing around with the sentiments of people till it all became too late and too strong to be contained.

Sir SIMI and Indian Mujahideen grew out of a Congress led India.

Surely your ire is misdirected politically if not socially here.

Why've you started 'Sir'ring me, Doc? Don't worry, your, ummm, strategic assets are safe with me.

OK, it's twenty past four, a most significant time on the clock, and I'm off, dragging my feet, to meet my draggy-footing class.

Try not to burn the place down while I'm away.

 

[Spectre]

Here's the catch.

If you had been Indian, your problems would have been Indian. The TTP problem would have been Indian. India has faced and curbed similar movements, not so violent, not so powerful, but similar, in Nagaland, in Mizoram for a short while, in Chhatisgarh and Jharkhand, currently still going on, and earlier, in the Punjab. I leave aside Kashmir; in terms of your specialisation, it is quite different.

As it stands, I personally believe that it is worth our while to help Pakistan in any way possible to fight the TTP. The TTP is a cancer, and idiots within India don't understand that the (possible but unlikely) succumbing of Pakistan to this cancer will mean an existential threat to India. The TTP winning puts the equivalent of an ISIS on our border; that is several orders of magnitudes worse than the Pakistan Army, which is still a disciplined military force.

There are hedge scholars and armchair strategists who will squeal in shrill tones for support to terrorists who terrorise Pakistan, with complete disregard for the need for all nations to unite against terrorism, wherever and however it occurs; they need not occupy our attention. Even without your being Indian, then, I believe that the TTP problem should be an area of concern for India, and that there exists a need for India to help Pakistan in whatever way it is possible. That help will be difficult to offer, given the history of mutual suspicion, and the deep-rooted anger within India at the blatant way in which terrorism in parts of India is supported by the Pakistani establishment. Unfortunately, giving in to our baser feelings and hoping that the TTP, or, for that matter, the Baloch nationalists will undermine Pakistan is cutting off the branch on which we ourselves sit.

Yes, we should help Pakistan now, with the TTP insurgency. Hypothetically, we should be ready to take direct responsibility for combating this deadly insurgency, in the imaginary case that we were considering a confederated nation.

Now wait for the screams of outrage.

There are multiple problems here, kindly bear with me while I elaborate

1. Indian Support to TTP - I have seen majority of our neighbors infer that this is a reality no matter hard proof and various other pesky details needed to level such an allegation. This is akin to denial which further exacerbates the issue and first step in tackling any problem is clearly identifying it and going into root cause for it's elimination. When the basic premise is erroneous then having a sustained solution is nigh impossible. India also is unable or reluctant to involve itself in a solution as long as our neighbors keep insinuating the offending party is India

2. De-linking Kashmir Terrorism - This is a very tricky proposition. I have seen multiple proponents of this new theory being bandied around in International Diplomatic Circles and Think Tanks. The inherent assumption is India should de-link Kashmir and other assorted terrorism if not sponsored then at least condoned by Pakistan.Most of the arguments are as follows:

a. Talk on main streaming Pakistan in Nuclear Community - De-link it with terrorism being patronized by Pakistan

b. Talk about letting pressure of Pakistan on it's eastern border so that it can deal with ISIS and TTP - De-link it with proxies or other malcontents in Kashmir and in essence give them a free run.

c. Talk about culture and trade - Delink it with Terrorism

and so and so forth.

My argument is Why? This is exactly the kind of thinking India should be very careful of discouraging publicly. One sad fact is there is a huge trust deficit which is continuously enforced by certain parties in Pakistan - Kargil, 26/11 etc being the prime cases. There is direct correlation b/w India and Pakistan peace and and a major terrorism or military action against India. So for once may be we should be clear that there can be no de-linking of issues. For once we have to be clear that Stopping Infiltration is the necessary and sufficient condition for any engagement.

Best India can do and has been doing is to not return the favor to Pakistan in the same coin, rest is asking for too much.

Regards

 

[Icarus]

In that case, the LOC is a unique border in the world. There is no other border in this world (between major countries) where there is a realistic chance of major hostilities. Korea is an exception because North Korea has repeatedly made its intentions clear. Sporadic shelling is not the same as invasion, which is what both sides seemed geared against. What is the realistic scenario as far as LOC is concerned? And why would it be forced upon Pakistan unless Pakistan makes the first move? Have we been assuming something that does not stand up to careful scrutiny?

Its far from being unique, border disputes are common around the world. Yes sporadic shelling is not the same as a full scale invasion but India does not need to mount a full scale invasion. They can simply take the positions that Pakistan occupies on dominating features and need not advance further, their objectives will have been met already.
The only realistic scenario we have on the LoC at the moment is a stand-off. The time to secure an alternative arrangement through confidence building has passed.

Maybe if you had been (remained) Indian, there would never have been a TTP.

Just a thought.

There is that possibility.

 

[Spectre]

The only realistic scenario we have on the LoC at the moment is a stand-off. The time to secure an alternative arrangement through confidence building has passed.

Delayed not passed. I am optimistic once TTP is dealt with attention would turn towards other elements who are still are indulging in terrorist activities though not necessarily within the borders. This would be the biggest CBM and would go a long way in narrowing the trust deficit.

 

[Icarus]

Delayed not passed. I am optimistic once TTP is dealt with attention would turn towards other elements who are still are indulging in terrorist activities though not necessarily within the borders. This would be the biggest CBM.

That might be the case but the mounting aggression along the LOC and WB during the critical moments of ZeA and Khyber-II have generated a very negative perception that India WANTS the TTP to continue wreaking havoc in Pakistan and that is why it is giving them a fighting chance by diverting PA's focus from the Western front by shelling the Eastern front.
Since this TTP issue began, India had become a secondary threat and Pakistan was moving away from the "India is our sworn enemy, they always wanted to destroy Pakistan" narrative. There was an entire generation that had not seen hostility between the states and there was enormous potential to use this impasse to improve relations but the shelling on the eastern border has brought that feeling rushing back and that's why people have again started to equate Indian actions as a bid to defer Pakistan from achieving its internal security objectives by keeping it fixated with its external security.

 

[Spectre]

That might be the case but the mounting aggression along the LOC and WB during the critical moments of ZeA and Khyber-II have generated a very negative perception that India WANTS the TTP to continue wreaking havoc in Pakistan and that is why it is giving them a fighting chance by diverting PA's focus from the Western front by shelling the Eastern front.
Since this TTP issue began, India had become a secondary threat and Pakistan was moving away from the "India is our sworn enemy, they always wanted to destroy Pakistan" narrative. There was an entire generation that had not seen hostility between the states and there was enormous potential to use this impasse to improve relations but the shelling on the eastern border has brought that feeling rushing back and that's why people have again started to equate Indian actions as a bid to defer Pakistan from achieving its internal security objectives by keeping it fixated with its external security.

I concur, However if India is really instigating tensions at LoC and there is a big if - then it is just plain stupidity with no tactical and strategic benefits to India.

I keep scratching my head because from a purely objective and logical reasoning it doesn't do any good to Pakistan to make the borders hot unless the reasoning is to continuously flame anti-India hate within the populace even at it's own detriment. India can harm Pakistan by making borders active but can gain no benefit.

I am at loss to explain what is the reason for so much tension at LoC, can it be just over-zealous soldiers acting without orders - misunderstandings - communication barrier etc?

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

What is you racial identity? Or the thread that binds you together?

What racial link does a Pashtun have with a Sindhi?

Or a Baloch with a Punjabi?

Versus

What is the racial link between a Pakistani Pashtun and an Afghan Pashtun.

Or a Pakistani Baloch and an Iranian Baluchi/Sistani?

I'm not gonna lie... We have a lot of issues (all of political nature).

I'm Baloch ... From a rural/tribal background but raised in a military family... Born in Potohar .. A garrison ... I've lived in all provinces .. I have friends from all ethnic backgrounds... My fiancé is Pashtun .. By best friend is a seriki ... My room mates in univ was Sindhi,Kashmiri and a Panjabi from rural pindi bhattia (sandal bar - the most conservative region in central punjab)... My driver is a gilgiti...I'm living in a multicultural city..

We as a nation fight over dumbest shyt... Politicians fuelling regional issues like water distribution etc.

But amazing how we as a people unite whenever time tests us ...we gladly give our lives to save our fella countrymen ... When somebody criticises us we all unite (even though we love to bash eachother)...

The older generation didn't have exposure .. They were born and raised in their small villages or towns ... Only visiting the other provinces for some important work ... (Yet they joined the military or defended the country from invasions - FATA tribesmen fighting of invading afghan troops in the 60s).

Today Pak is one probably the most urbanised and connected state in South Asia...

I can't define our "racial nationalism" because we probably have none ... But we are proud of our country .. Country that we built ...

When we Pak I abroad .. A Pashtun , a Baloch , A Panjabi , a Sindhi,Balti,Shina,Brusho,Wakhi,Hazara,Kashmiri,Sindhi considers himself Pakistani..

A Pak Pashtun is more happy to find a Pakistani in Finland or Italy than an Afghan.. A Baloch is more happy to find a Seriki or Sindhi.. Coz we can connect more .. We have shared interests,memories in general.


We are a nation .. A people who have lived with eachother for centuries ... You will find Baloch and Pashtuns in southern Panjab ..Living there for generations ... You will find Panjabis living in KPK ...

We have lived,traded and fought shoulder to shoulder for thousands of years ...

Any Pakistani irrespective of his ethnic background will rush to help his countrymen during a situation irrespective of his ethno background .. There won't be any biasness ... When there is a cricket match .. A Baloch or Panjabi will cheer for Pashtun Afridi or Younas... A Pashtun will pray for Misbah or Bhatti to win the match in the last over ... Thts PAKISTAN...

 

[Maarkhoor]

I'm not gonna lie... We have a lot of issues (all of political nature).

I'm Baloch ... From a rural/tribal background but raised in a military family... Born in Potohar .. A garrison ... I've lived in all provinces .. I have friends from all ethnic backgrounds... My fiancé is Pashtun .. By best friend is a seriki ... My room mates in univ was Sindhi,Kashmiri and a Panjabi from rural pindi bhattia (sandal bar - the most conservative region in central punjab)... My driver is a gilgiti...I'm living in a multicultural city..

We as a nation fight over dumbest shyt... Politicians fuelling regional issues like water distribution etc.

But amazing how we as a people unite whenever time tests us ...we gladly give our lives to save our fella countrymen ... When somebody criticises us we all unite (even though we love to bash eachother)...

The older generation didn't have exposure .. They were born and raised in their small villages or towns ... Only visiting the other provinces for some important work ... (Yet they joined the military or defended the country from invasions - FATA tribesmen fighting of invading afghan troops in the 60s).

Today Pak is one probably the most urbanised and connected state in South Asia...

I can't define our "racial nationalism" because we probably have none ... But we are proud of our country .. Country that we built ...

When we Pak I abroad .. A Pashtun , a Baloch , A Panjabi , a Sindhi,Balti,Shina,Brusho,Wakhi,Hazara,Kashmiri,Sindhi considers himself Pakistani..

A Pak Pashtun is more happy to find a Pakistani in Finland or Italy than an Afghan.. A Baloch is more happy to find a Seriki or Sindhi.. Coz we can connect more .. We have shared interests,memories in general.


We are a nation .. A people who have lived with eachother for centuries ... You will find Baloch and Pashtuns in southern Panjab ..Living there for generations ... You will find Panjabis living in KPK ...

We have lived,traded and fought shoulder to shoulder for thousands of years ...

Any Pakistani irrespective of his ethnic background will rush to help his countrymen during a situation irrespective of his ethno background .. There won't be any biasness ... When there is a cricket match .. A Baloch or Panjabi will cheer for Pashtun Afridi or Younas... A Pashtun will pray for Misbah or Bhatti to win the match in the last over ... Thts PAKISTAN...

I am living in UAE for past 9 years and believe me we all live together sharing our stories, cooking each other favorites and celebrating 14 August like eid infact more than eid.

 

[Icarus]

I concur, However if India is really instigating tensions at LoC and there is a big if - then it is just plain stupidity with no tactical and strategic benefits to India.

I keep scratching my head because from a purely objective and logical reasoning it doesn't do any good to Pakistan to make the borders hot unless the reasoning is to continuously flame anti-India hate within the populace even at it's own detriment. India can harm Pakistan by making borders active but can gain no benefit.

I am at loss to explain what is the reason for so much tension at LoC, can it be just over-zealous soldiers acting without orders - misunderstandings - communication barrier etc?

Here's my two cents on what goes on at the Eastern border:

India, by firing at the Eastern border can pull a double whammy. Firstly, they assert their military superiority over Pakistan because they know that PA is outnumbered as it is and with forces diverted to the west, can't respond with the same intensity as India, that scores a huge psychological point on the PA. Secondly, the firing can be used to draw attention to alleged instances of border crossing that India can highlight to mount further pressure on Pakistan.

A lot of people here think that Pakistan would start firing on the Eastern border but that doesn't make sense as by doing so, the PA hurts its own fighting strength in the west which is a more pressing matter as we have more casualties now thanks to the TTP than India. Some would suggest that it allows the PA to keep its prestige intact by highlighting the Indian threat but we cycle back to the same issue, the nation was already convinced of a threat in the form of TTP and any efforts to supplement that would be counterproductive and would in turn allow the TTP to pull a brownie point, as in the aftermath of 26/11, TTP declared that if Pakistan and India went to war, the TTP would fight with PA arm in arm, that declaration sent shock waves in the society and lead people to question whether the TTP were actually as bad as they had been made out to be, thereby undermining PA's efforts and the public approval of action against TTP.

 

[Spectre]

Here's my two cents on what goes on at the Eastern border:

India, by firing at the Eastern border can pull a double whammy. Firstly, they assert their military superiority over Pakistan because they know that PA is outnumbered as it is and with forces diverted to the west, can't respond with the same intensity as India, that scores a huge psychological point on the PA. Secondly, the firing can be used to draw attention to alleged instances of border crossing that India can highlight to mount further pressure on Pakistan.

A lot of people here think that Pakistan would start firing on the Eastern border but that doesn't make sense as by doing so, the PA hurts its own fighting strength in the west which is a more pressing matter as we have more casualties now thanks to the TTP than India. Some would suggest that it allows the PA to keep its prestige intact by highlighting the Indian threat but we cycle back to the same issue, the nation was already convinced of a threat in the form of TTP and any efforts to supplement that would be counterproductive and would in turn allow the TTP to pull a brownie point, as in the aftermath of 26/11, TTP declared that if Pakistan and India went to war, the TTP would fight with PA arm in arm, that declaration sent shock waves in the society and lead people to question whether the TTP were actually as bad as they had been made out to be, thereby undermining PA's efforts and the public approval of action against TTP.

Fair enough however the reality can be a middle ground - Applying Occam's Razor and cutting down on assumptions is the surest way to arrive at the least in-accurate conclusion in presence of contradictory claims.

1. Indian side claims are in a nutshell that firing is to aid infiltration and highlighting India threat
2. Pakistan Side Claims India initiates Firing for the purpose of Aiding TTP by diverting attention, Psychological victory, international brownie points, highlighting Pakistani Threat.

The best I can conclude is that there is truth to both sides claims the difference being in the degrees.

 

[Spring Onion]

And Dr Christophe Jaffrelot, you must be wondering how these disunited Pakistanis have pissed the super powers and our enemy, so fear the time when Pakistan becomes united in your own view using your yardstick for unity.

You must be wondering how this disunited nation has managed its survival and fighting all against odds with so much unity

 

[Icarus]

Fair enough however the reality can be a middle ground - Applying Occam's Razor and cutting down on assumptions is the surest way to arrive at the least in-accurate conclusion in presence of contradictory claims.

1. Indian side claims are in a nutshell that firing is to aid infiltration and highlighting India threat
2. Pakistan Side Claims India initiates Firing for the purpose of Aiding TTP by diverting attention, Psychological victory, international brownie points, highlighting Pakistani Threat.

The best I can conclude is that there is truth to both sides claims the difference being in the degrees.

Obviously, the truth always lies somewhere close to the middle of two opposing narratives.