Rupee News

Special Weapons Observation Reconnaissance Detection System. Image via Wikipedia

Its not the gun but the man behind the gun that matters.

Depite the latest technology the US has been unable to kill the Talibs fast enough. According to press reports there are more than 5000 Talon Swords (Special Weapons Observation Reconnaissance Detection System) weaponized military robots in Afghanistan. Many of them look like little tanks which are used to track down the Talibs. The US military is also testing small “eagle-sizeds” drones which can go and look beyond the hill.Foster-Miller makes these robots. They are expensive now but thier price could drop. When it enters mass production the price may be between $150,000 and $180,000. Foster-Miller points out that in comparison, to train a US soldier to a basic level of expertise with BCT and/or AIT would cost $50,000 to $100,000. The Talon system consists of a weapons platform mounted on a Talon robot, a product of the engineering and technology development firm Foster-Miller.

Different weapons that can be placed on the SWORDS; M16 rifle, 5.56 mm SAW M249, 7.62 mm M240 machine gun. These bots have to be controlled by a soldier using a small X-Box sized console to remotely direct the device and fire its weapons. Foster-Miller claims the Talon was used for a classified mission by US Special Forces in the war against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Talon robots have been used in about 20,000 missions in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to Foster-Miller reports.

In a recently published Defense Department booklet, “Facing the Future: Meeting the Threats and Challenges of the 21st Century,” the DOD lists the Defense Department’s transformation since 2001. The booklet describes how America the wars are being fought with the new weapons of war.

The human killers will take on more deadly forms. These weapons will be mounted on balloons and on lfying machines that may be small or large.

Afghanistan is the testing ground for these intelligent machines. Russia and China is also building these sorts of machines.

Mr. Karzai has once again tried to blackmail the Americans with his “I will join the Taliban” bluff. The bone of contention is the $5 billion in US Aid which Karzai wants to distribute to his family and his cronies. This time his cry is “if the foreigners don’t stop meddling in Afghanistan“. Mr. Karzai knows that the US needs Mr. Karzai’s unstinted support in this summers crucial adventure in Afghanistan.

Kazai may have gotten some confidence after meeting the Turks, Iranians, and Pakistanis in Istanbul. Mr. Karzai is also positioning himself in front of the Afghan population as a brave Afghan who is also resisting the occupation.

This new found belligerence creates colossal problems for the US which wants a viable partner in Kabul to fight the Taleban. A failing partnership puts the Obama’s plan into jeopardy. Karzai wants the US backoff. Is his chagrin real?

The US response has been described as “troubling”.

“Afghanistan is the home of Afghans and we own this place. And our partners are here to help in a cause that’s all of us. We run this country, the Afghans.” The rhetoric seems to blame the Americans for Mr. Karzai’s corrupt government and is in response to the US tongue-lashing against this government.

Mr. Karzai seems to have kept a grudge against the US for supporting his opponent in the Afghan runoff.

Karzai’s recent outbursts over the past week came after the parliament overturned decree which would have destroyed the anti-corruption body in Kabul. This move was seen by the president as a US strategy to remove  him.

While Turkey, and Pakistan have supported Karzai’s reconciliation with the Taleban the US has not warmed up to the moves. The Obama administration has its own plans to decapitate the leadership by offering incentives to rank-and-file Taleban fighters to switch sides. The Taleban are not taking the bait–they know that they are winning.

On Sunday, President Hamid Karzai flew to Kandahar with a delegation of top NATO figures for a meeting with about 2,000 officials and tribal leaders. To appease the local warlords and druglords he once again promised that there would be no offensive without community support.

Related articles

• Afghanistan: US vs EU (rupeenews.com)

Bharati analysts are full of frustration at the inability of Delhi to strike at Pakistan and neutralize its military capacity. The admission by another Bharati writer that “Rawalpindi is fully aware that India is nowhere near acquiring the conventional military capability to punish Pakistan” clearly describes the impotence of the Bharati defense establishment beset with corruption and and incompetence. The colossal failure of the Kevari and the LCA and the Armiral Gorshkov are classic cases on what Bharat should not be doing–throwing money and getting little for it. Various DRDO reports from the Bharati department of defense describe the failures and the impotence of the Tri-Coloreds to design or build defense equipment–in other words its a replay of the CWG.

After the impotence of Operation Parakarm destroyed by Pakistan’s Uzm e Nao, Bharat tried to play with Cold Start etc. Pakistani retaliated by perfecting small, medium-range and long range missiles which would put the brakes on Bharat’s rapid deployment units. Now Bharat denies having a Cold Start Strategy–even Stephen Cohen one of its authors eventually disowning it.

Unable to produce the Migs, Bharat then went on a buying spree–the only problem is that most of the jets ordered won’t be part of the IAF for a decade. In the meantime almost half of the IAF is grounded–the obsolete Migs add up to many planes, but very few combat-ready fighters. Thus the level of anger displayed by the DRDO, the Ministry of Defense and the Ministry of External Affiars. The “risen” Superpower does not have a capacity to intimidate its nemesis–and that a colossal loss of face in a tough neighborhood. So what does Bharat do to make up for its imminent eviction from Kabul–send terror squad to Pakistan

Raja Mohan has written an article dripping with irritation, letdown, resentment, setback, and vexation.

Rawalpindi is fully aware that India is nowhere near acquiring the conventional military capability to punish Pakistan. To deter the Pakistan army from facilitating future cross-border terror attacks, India needs to act on a range of fronts.

These include more purposeful modernisation of the armed forces to generate some military pressure against Rawalpindi and strengthening India’s nuclear arsenal which continues to lag behind that of Pakistan. India must also focus on building up a serious missile defence programme that can introduce some uncertainty into Rawalpindi’s strategic calculus.Finally, on the diplomatic front, India has had some success and a lot more frustration.

Delhi knows the limits to international pressure on Pakistan. Despite giving nearly $20 billion in civilian and military aid to Pakistan during the last decade, the US is still having trouble getting Pakistan to act against groups that directly target American troops in Afghanistan. It was logical then for India to find ways to directly engage Pakistan to bring the Mumbai plotters to book.

But all indications are that India is unlikely to get any satisfaction on terrorism from its current talks with Pakistan. Our interlocutors across the border have no control over the terror machine, which is run by the Pakistan army. The real challenge for India, then, is in finding ways to compel Rawalpindi to change its calculus of support for cross-border terrorism. This in turn means exploring Rawalpindi’s own weak points.

The ISI’s influence over the Pashtuns across its western frontiers is at the heart of Pakistan’s success in holding the international community hostage in Afghanistan. It is also potentially the weakest element of Rawalpindi’s strategy, for the Pashtuns, including the Taliban, have never recognised the legitimacy of the Durand Line that is supposed to be the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan. India must step up its engagement of the Pashtuns and put the question of the Durand Line’s future on the international agenda.

India must also begin to focus on Pakistan’s civil-military relations and step up its support for genuine democratic change. While Rawalpindi’s dominance over Pakistan’s polity is real, it is no reason why India should not make it a political issue. Further, Delhi must take a more disaggregated view of our neighbour.

Instead of negotiating with the civilian government that is sat upon by the army, India must consider a direct engagement with the political parties in Pakistan both at the federal and provincial level. Capacity-building holds the key to India’s progress in the areas of defence and deterrence against terrorism. That will take time, persistent effort and strong political leadership in Delhi. On the diplomatic front, India will have to continuously look for bold approaches to contain the Pakistan army. Indian Express. raja.mohan@expressindia.com

Raja Mohan is typical of Bharaits who have gotten caught iIn flagrante delicto over-reach. They have purchased Viagra pills in the shapes of Nuclear Subs which don’t have Nuclear power plants, hundreds of Migs that turned out be Flying Coffins, and Aircraft Carriers that don’t have planes.

Unable to defeat the Pakistan or wish it into oblivion, the huffed and puffed in 2001–marching their entire army to the Pakistani border, and then withdrawingin ignominous defeat. They huffed and puffed in 2009, but faced with “loss of Territoty”, the took the advice of the Bharati Army and did not try out any of the silliness that was tried in 2001.

Now they wish to place a wedge between the PPPP and the Army and resurrect old skeletons from the closet. Reaching far back into 1893 they want Afghanistan to talk about dead issues which even the US isn’t ready to touch.

Despite the bluster in Lisbon, the planet knows that the withdrawal of US and NATO forces will begin in 2011 and way before 2013.

Related articles

• Why Bharat couldn’t cross into Pakistan in 2009 and can never attack Pakistan ever (rupeenews.com)
• How Pakistan defeated India’s Operation Parakram in 2001 (rupeenews.com)
• 2001: Why Bharat’s Operation Parakram failed (militarystrat.wordpress.com)
• ‘No’ to India on MFN (pakistanledger.com)
• The case against MFN status to India (rupeenews.com)
• Rear Admiral (retd) K R Menon called Operation Parakram a politico-military failure for Bharat (militarystrat.wordpress.com)
• Operation Parakram was a politico-military failure: Rear Admiral (retd) K R Menon (rupeenews.com)
• You: Pakistan, US, India face common enemy: Holbrooke (nation.com.pk)
• Strategi headache: USA’s India problem in Afghanistan (pakistanledger.com)
• Pakistan’s national nightmare over: Obama leaves Delhi (rupeenews.com)
• USA’s realises that the problem in Afghanistan is India (rupeenews.com)

If the Taliban in Afghanistan will not be vanquished or reconciled, how on earth, the public wonders, does it benefit Pakistan to earn their ire and dash prospects of having an equable relationship with the most powerful grouping in neighbouring Afghanistan. Especially when taking on the Afghan Taliban, in cahoots with the Americans, would invite immediate retaliation

The 28-member NATO alliance spends over a trillion dollars annually on defence. An astronomical amount, considering how desperately strapped members are for cash nowadays, and for what? To fight off the likes of penniless North Korea, nuke-less Iran and homeless terrorists of the bin Laden gang? Actually, there are few threats to NATO that good intelligence, a modicum of prudence, imaginative use of modern technology and international cooperation cannot avert at a fraction of the cost. Hence, when recalling the trillion dollars that are spent annually by NATO for keeping ‘the dear leader’ et al at bay, Shakespeare’s caution comes to mind: “Heat not, a furnace for your foe so hot that it do singe yourself. We may outrun by violent swiftness that which we run at and lose by over-running.” And, one could add, not only ‘over-running’ but also overreaching.

What was meant to protect the North Atlantic now functions on three continents and is primed to go wherever the US takes it, and to stay as long as Washington wants “to make America safe” (Obama). NATO has indeed become “the ultimate transformer global Robocop, consigning, in the process, the helpless UN to a New York sand box,” as one analyst said, judging by the importance Washington attaches to NATO summits as compared to the annual humdrum UNGA sessions.

Consider the decisions taken at Lisbon earlier this week to which none of the battleground states or the regional countries were asked to contribute. NATO decided that there would be no let up in the Afghan war till 2014 — actually longer — if the US continues to feel ‘unsafe’. As the US is never likely to feel ‘safe’ in a region where ill will for it is exploding, its occupation of Afghanistan, under whatever guise or headdress, seems endless. Confirmation was forthcoming from the British Army chief, Sir David Roberts, who let the cat out of the bag by saying that the British are “planning for a 30-40 year scenario”.

It bothers NATO not a wit that such a posture would be hotly contested. In any case, NATO listens only to local leaders who are in hock to the west, and then not very attentively. It cares a fig for the vast segment of their population who have rejected western imperialism as much as western norms and values; whose disillusionment with western concepts such as socialism, capitalism and democracy is profound and who far prefer systems more suited to the basic concepts of Islam.

Instead, the public worry that their flaccid and corrupt leadership will be unable to withstand the pressure exerted by the US to ‘do more’.

All this worries the public not because of their fondness for the Taliban, far from it, or because they believe that India is the ‘eternal enemy’. Indeed, were relations with India on the mend they would have no objection to the relocation of forces to ward off the new danger. Alas, that is far from what is happening. India-Pakistan relations remain stuck in the old rut with India ever on the qui vive to inflict harm on Pakistan at the first opportunity.

Similarly, if the American cause in Afghanistan had been popular or a winning one, that too may have been reason enough to back Washington, but it is not. Actually, it is a lost cause for sundry reasons, including history, which shows that in the past 50 years no nationalist-based insurgency against a foreign force anywhere has ever been defeated.

If then the Taliban in Afghanistan will not be vanquished or reconciled, how on earth, the public wonders, does it benefit Pakistan to earn their ire and dash prospects of having an equable relationship with the most powerful grouping in neighbouring Afghanistan. Especially when taking on the Afghan Taliban, in cahoots with the Americans, would invite immediate retaliation. Were, for example, the Haqqani suicide bombers to be unleashed on Pakistan, it is doubtful if there would be much trace of commerce and industry in any of our major cities.

Of course, that is not to say that Pakistan must live in dread of the Taliban and their pernicious version of Islam. We are taking on the Pakistani Taliban and would take on their Afghan ilk, if they prove recalcitrant or try and inflict their pernicious ideology by force on Pakistan. But only in a manner and a time of our choosing and, most importantly, on our own and not as part of some American-led effort ‘to make the US safe’.

While welcoming American assistance, the public rejects US dictation. They know that it will not earn them either the respect of the enemy or their own people. Allowing drones to bombard Quetta, for example, would amount to the kind of capitulation that would rob Pakistan of all self-respect. The mere notion that such a request is being canvassed by Washington says much for the utter lack of feel that the US has of the current mood and Pakistan’s predicament. But when has the US ever been anything but indifferent to our feelings when its interests clash with ours?

Unfortunately, an inordinate amount of Pakistan’s energy is consumed not so much in fending off the extremists, whose measure we should have in due course, but the US, which seems recklessly determined for its own reasons to pit us in battle when we are neither psychologically ready, popularly willing, or militarily able to do so. That we must resist Washington’s pressure and the outcome of Lisbon goes without saying. But does the present bunch at the helm have the guts? Nothing thus far suggests that it does. The Lisbon effect —Zafar Hilaly. The writer is a former ambassador. He can be reached at charles123it@hotmail.com

Related articles

• Post-Nato Afghanistan: Pakistan cautions against civil war in Kabul (rupeenews.com)
• Retreat and a Song and Dance in Lisbon (pakistanakhbar.com)
• NATO: Surge and Cut, Transition and Run (rupeenews.com)
• Another retreat for the US (pakpunch.com)
• Clinton’s Pakistanphobic rhetoric creates Anti-Americanism in Pakistan (thedawn.com.pk)
• Quetta shopkeeper dupes NATO, MI6, CIA, RAMA, Karzai (rupeenews.com)
• Najam Sethi: The cat is out of the bag (azadkashmirtimes.com)

The US spin doctors at the various agencies are trying to put up a nice face to the episode of the Taliban impostor. Apparently the entire might of America, Europe and Afghanistan could not discover the true identity of a Quetta Shopkeeper who posed as a major Taliban leaders. How can the US bring credibility to Kabul, when even the Afghan don’t know who the Taliban are.

Islamabad is chuckling!

Karzai aide blames British for bringing Taliban impostor to talks: WP

President Hamid Karzai‘s chief of staff on Thursday said that British authorities were responsible for bringing a Taliban impostor into the presidential palace and that foreigners should stay out of delicate negotiations with the Afghan insurgent group.

In an interview, Mohammad Umer Daudzai said that the British brought a man purporting to be Mullah Akhtar Mohammad Mansour, a senior Taliban leader, to meet Karzai in July or August but that an Afghan at the meeting knew “this is not the man.”

Afghan intelligence later determined that the visitor was actually a shopkeeper from the Pakistani city of Quetta, he said.

“This shows that this process should be Afghan-led and fully Afghanized,” Daudzai said. “The last lesson we draw from this: International partners should not get excited so quickly with those kind of things. . . . Afghans know this business, how to handle it. We handle it with care, we handle it with a result-based approach, with very less damage to all the other processes.”
The episode has embarrassed Afghan and Western officials, and it has undercut the notion circulated earlier this year by senior U.S. officials that there was some momentum toward possible peace talks.

Daudzai’s comments were the most direct assignation of blame so far, though U.S. officials have also said that the fake Mansour was primarily a British project. U.S. officials have long characterized the British as more aggressive than the Americans in pushing for a political settlement to end the war.

The false Mansour was “the Brits’ guy,” said a senior American official familiar with the case. “It was the British who brought him forward.”
A spokesman for the British Embassy in Kabul declined to comment.
The story of how this man came to sit across from Karzai, and who he actually is, remains the subject of considerable dispute.

Daudzai said Afghan authorities first made contact with a man claiming to be a representative of Mansour about six to eight months ago. He was ready to arrange peace talks, and he said Mansour wanted a timeline for foreign troop withdrawal and a constitutional change to incorporate Islamic law. But the palace, Daudzai said, chose not to meet with Mansour’s associate “because he was unknown, very junior.”

But then the British took over, he said, and used that contact to arrange for Mansour to visit Kabul. Daudzai said British representatives, but not Americans, were present during the meeting with Karzai.

Americans were skeptical

American officials said they had doubts from the beginning. Mansour is well known, having served in the former Taliban government as minister of civil aviation. But this visitor was a few inches shorter than their intelligence indicated Mansour is, and he didn’t come with the people he said he would bring. CIA officers, including the Kabul station chief, were particularly skeptical, but British intelligence believed that the contact was real, according to the senior American official.

“The agency expressed skepticism early on that this was Mullah Mansour,” another U.S. official said. “There was very healthy skepticism.”

A former senior Afghan official who was involved in the case disputed that the British did anything more than provide logistical help to bring Mansour to Kabul. He characterized Daudzai’s position as a political attack on the West when in fact the Afghans were responsible for the meeting.
The former official said that the public discussion of the case risks the life of the man who attended the meeting, as well as those of Afghan agents in Pakistan, and has “ruined the entire process.”

“And if he’s not the person – and there has never been evidence produced that he is not that person – then they jumped to a conclusion before looking at the evidence,” the official said, adding that the man who attended the meeting passed identification screening tests with 95 percent certainty.
The senior American official cast doubt on the Afghan claims that the Taliban impostor is a shopkeeper. The man’s comments indicated that he knew Taliban positions on issues and that he seemed to have some knowledge of the movement’s inner circle.

Daudzai said the impostor may have been dispatched by Pakistan’s spy agency to “test the system,” but “we can’t say for sure.”

Either way, he said, Britain and other European countries “are in haste” to move peace talks with the Taliban forward, perhaps to speed up their troops’ departure. Afghanistan‘s 70-member peace council, which includes former Taliban officials, should be leading the process, Daudzai said, because it is familiar with the enemy.

‘Very bad things going on’

Daudzai also weighed in on the political turmoil surrounding the Sept. 18 parliamentary elections.

In the palace’s first extended comments on the final results of the vote, Daudzai said that he supports the attorney general’s investigations of fraud allegations and that some election officials – among the 96,000 recruited for the task – appear to be involved in wrongdoing.

“That’s not to say that the commission, and the leadership of the process, are involved in it. As far as we know, they did a good job. But within the system, there have been very bad things going on,” he said.

On Thursday, the Afghan attorney general’s office announced that authorities had arrested nine people on allegations of participating in voting fraud. Six of the suspects work with money-exchange companies, and three are construction company owners who were parliamentary candidates.
Afghan authorities have also issued an arrest warrant for a United Nations official who allegedly promised the construction company owners that they would be elected in return for tens of thousands of dollars, money that was entrusted with the money-exchange officials, Nazari said.

Four election officials have been summoned for questioning on Saturday.
The crackdown on the election officials, along with harsh criticism from the attorney general’s office of the legitimacy of the results announced this week, threatens a prolonged crisis.

Deputy Attorney General Rahmatullah Nazari said in an interview that the investigations will probably “come up with a result which will definitely question the legitimacy of the recent parliamentary elections.”

The Independent Election Commission (IEC) announced final tallies for 33 of Afghanistan’s provinces on Wednesday but said technical problems had prevented it from certifying the results in the eastern province of Ghazni.
Karzai’s supporters fared poorly in the elections. His ethnic group, the Pashtuns, suffered particularly in Ghazni, a majority-Pashtun province, because the Taliban insurgency prevented many people from voting. The top 11 finishers there are from the Hazara minority.

Daudzai said that the attorney general “may have meant that his assessment, his investigation, may change the result.”

If the legal system finds “serious wrongdoing” in Ghazni and other provinces, Daudzai said, “then the IEC will have no choice but to announce reelection there.” (Washington Post)

Related articles

• You: British faulted for Taliban impostor (washingtonpost.com)
• British faulted for Taliban impostor – Washington Post (news.google.com)
• You: Karzai aide blames British for bringing Taliban impostor to talks: WP (nation.com.pk)
• Britain Keeps Silent on Afghan Impostor Claim (nytimes.com)
• Karzai Aide: Britain Brought Taliban Impostor to Peace Talks (news.antiwar.com)
• Smart Diplomacy: Afghans and NATO Duped by Lowly Shopkeeper? (hotair.com)
• MI6 ‘blamed for Taliban impostor’ (telegraph.co.uk)
• Nato ‘duped by impostor who posed as Taliban negotiator’ (independent.co.uk)
• Britain Keeps Silent on Afghan Impostor Claim – New York Times (news.google.com)
• You: Karzai aide blames British for bringing Taliban imposter to talks (washingtonpost.com)
• Britain Keeps Silent on Afghan Impostor Claim (nytimes.com)
• UK blamed over Taliban impostor (bbc.co.uk)
• MI6 ‘blamed for Taliban impostor’ (telegraph.co.uk)
• Taliban Leader in Talks Was an Impostor- Petraeus: U.S. Skeptical ‘All Along’ (foxnews.com)

Image via Wikipedia

DUSHANBE: Prime Minister Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani while reiterating Pakistan’s sincere desire for active participation in the economic development of region under the SCO on Thursday called for early upgradation of the country’s status as full member of the important regional group.

“Development is high on Pakistan’s priorities. We are keen to participate actively in promoting SCO’s economic agenda. We wish to associate ourselves with SCO’s Entrepreneurs Council, the SCO Inter-Bank arrangements, and closely link up with SCO’s transportation, communication and customs cooperation.

“We also look forward to early upgradation of our status as full member of the SCO,” Gilani said while addressing the 9th Shanghai Cooperation Organization Heads of Government Council (HGC) meeting hosted by Tajikistan here on Thursday and attended by the member as well as observer states of the SCO.

Besides the President and the Prime Minister of host Tajikistan, the HGC meeting was attended by the Chinese Premier, the Prime Ministers of Russia, Kazakhstan and other representatives of the member states as well as observers.

Pakistan is among the four countries having observer status in the SCO, which was created in Shanghai in 2001 by its member states including Kazakhstan, China, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.

Iran, India and Mangolia also have the observer status in SCO, with Belarus and Sri Lanka as dialogue partners. Afghanistan is also invited in the SCO moots as a special guest.

Prime Minister Gilani in his wide-ranging speech at the SCO moot spoke at length on various issues of common interest to the region and SCO countries including the economic potential and future prospects through enhanced regional cooperation as well as on tackling the challenges particularly peace and security of the region.

He said Pakistan takes great pride in associating itself with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which has made remarkable progress in a short span of time and in the process, has emerged as a dynamic organization that has great potential to shape the future of this region.

“Most of all, it (SCO) binds us together in a unique partnership to promote peace, security, prosperity and development,” he remarked.

The Prime Minister said the stability and prosperity of the SCO region is critical to global security, adding, it also holds great promise for ensuring sustained global economic growth.

He said the ongoing processes of profound transformation in global strategic and economic landscape impact directly on the future well being of the peoples of our region.

The Prime Minister stressed that the regional countries should play their rightful role in determining the trajectory of regional and inter-regional cooperation in a holistic and comprehensive manner.

“It is essential that these processes are tailored to suit the needs of our peoples and are in accordance with their aspirations for peace and development,” he added.

The Prime Minister said in the realm of security, SCO’s focus on counter terrorism and interdicting illicit drug trafficking were important, adding, Pakistan was happy to associate itself closely with these endeavours.

Gilani also stressed for SCO’s role in bringing durable peace and stability in the region, saying, “It is important that the SCO’s framework of cooperation on issues of security, stability and peace is advanced in a comprehensive manner. It must focus on bringing durable peace and stability to the larger SCO region.”

In the realm of economic cooperation, he said the regional countries need to work under the SCO process for closer integration of our respective economies; build connectivity – both physical and institutional; establish the requisite legal and regulatory framework and enable the corporate sector to forge partnerships which are mutually beneficial.

“We also need to take steps for protecting our economies from negative fall out of global economic and financial crises. It is by enhancing our own collective strengths that we could hope for sustained progress,” he added.

The Prime Minister also emphasized on the need of promoting cultural ties and people to people relations in the region, giving priority to facilitating closer collaboration in education, science and technology, preservation and projection of our glorious heritage.

“The SCO region has always been the heartland of Eurasia. Since the earliest of times, this region was enriched by civilizational interactions. Pakistan was on the ancient Silk route,” he mentioned adding that “we would be happy to contribute to the revival of Silk route concept under the SCO framework.”

Prime Minister Gilani said Pakistan believes that the SCO can play an important role in promoting peace and stability in Afghanistan, adding, trans-regional development cooperation holds the key to promoting durable stability based on Afghanistan’s economic development.

Related Articles

• Will Pakistan get SCO membership this year? (rupeenews.com)
• Tajiks want access to the sea through Gwader (rupeenews.com)
• Pakistan rejects ‘preposterous’ U.S. court notices to intelligence officials (rupeenews.com)

Retreating Soviet forces from Afghanistan

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan on Thursday welcomed Nato plans for a phased withdrawal from Afghanistan beginning next year, but warned against any move that could plunge its neighbouring country back into civil war.

At a summit in Lisbon last week, the 48 countries with troops in Afghanistan agreed to begin transferring parts of the battlefield to local police and military, and move Western troops into a supporting role by the end of 2014.

“We will welcome the withdrawal of coalition forces from Afghanistan as and when it happens,” Pakistani foreign ministry spokesman Abdul Basit told reporters in Islamabad.

“But obviously we would not like Afghanistan to be left on its own,” he said.

“We would like this process to go ahead in tandem with a stabilisation in Afghanistan because we would not like the situation to once again plunge into anarchy or into civil war in Afghanistan.” Pakistan expressed concern about whether Nato would be able to train Afghan forces sufficiently to take responsibility for national security.

“We hope that by 2014 the coalition forces would be able or to have developed the Afghan national army and other security forces in Afghanistan, enabling them to take full charge of the country.

“So that is the only worry or concern we have,” he said.

Afghanistan slipped into chaos after Moscow withdrew Soviet troops 10 years after their 1979 invasion, sparking years of bloody civil war that ended when the Taliban seized power in 1996.

Pakistan, whom US and Afghan officials accuse of harbouring Taliban insurgent leaders, has repeatedly offered to help with Afghan peace efforts.

“We do not expect the coalition forces to stay in Afghanistan forever and Pakistan will continue supporting the process of bringing about stability in Afghanistan in whatever way the Afghanistan government wants us to do.” The United States has warned that “hard fighting remains ahead” and has not ruled out combat operations continuing beyond 2014.

Related Articles

• You: Pakistan cautions against civil war in post-Nato Afghanistan: Basit (nation.com.pk)
• US presence in Afghanistan as long as Soviet slog (sfgate.com)
• “NATO unlikely to meet 2014 deadline for leaving Afghanistan” and related posts (prairiepundit.blogspot.com)
• The Afghanistan War Reaches a Milestone — and Keeps Going (time.com)
• NATO’s Dangerous Wager with Karzai (nybooks.com)

President Obama extended by years America’s commitment to the Afghan war, which is hard to understand given his strategy’s lack of success and competing threats. Congress must demand that the President justify this extension.

Last weekend at the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s (NATO’s) annual conference in Lisbon, Portugal, Obama declared, “My goal is to make sure that by 2014 we have transitioned; Afghans are in the lead, and it is a goal to make sure that we are not still engaged in combat operations of the sort we’re involved in now.” Those are overly optimistic goals given our lack of success and the radical time adjustment to his strategy.

Last December Obama announced a three-part Afghan war strategy and a deadline to begin withdrawing our forces by July 2011. His strategy includes a surge of 30,000 additional troops, which he promised would “reverse the Taliban’s momentum and deny it the ability to overthrow the government.” He promised to “accelerate handing over responsibility to Afghan forces” and said “our success in Afghanistan is inextricably linked to our partnership in Pakistan.”

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates promised at the time, “If it appears that the strategy is not working and that we are not going to be able to transition in 2011, then we will take a hard look at the strategy itself.” It is now time for the strategy’s annual review.

But General David Petraeus, the overall U.S. commander in Afghanistan, dismissed the “hard look” promise to say that he did “not want to overplay the significance of this [annual] review which … will only be three or four months since the full deployment of all of the surge forces.” Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Michele Flournoy echoed that view, noting that the review would simply “be a bit of a deeper dive” than the President’s regular assessments.

Obviously the administration isn’t going to take a “hard look” at its strategy. But the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, which constitutionally funds wars, must question the President’s strategy and how more investment will keep America safer than using those resources elsewhere.

The first part of Obama’s strategy was to surge our forces to 100,000—doctrinally not enough for that Texas-sized country with 33 million people—and then accelerate operations. Our higher operational tempo and the bringing of more troops into combat contributed to the loss of 448 American lives so far, making 2010 the bloodiest year to date for the Afghan war. It is noteworthy that just as America surged, key allies like the British and Canadians announced plans to shift their troops from a combat role.

The proof of concept for Obama’s strategy was “to reverse the Taliban’s momentum” in Marja, a community in the Helmand province, which began in February. After initial successes, progress became a tortuous effort to prevent the insurgents from filtering back. And just as troubling, the governance piece of the strategy for Marja—delivering services and leadership—lags because of the Afghan government’s incompetence.

Obama obviously underestimated the enemy’s resilience in Marja, Kabul’s competence, and apparently the same problems apply to Kandahar as well. The battle for Kandahar, the ancestral home of the Taliban, began late this summer, rather than in the spring, as originally planned. Kandahar was expected to be the turning point of the war, but now officials indicate that it will be next spring at the earliest before we know if that effort will bear fruit.

Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, provided a rather tepid endorsement of Obama’s Afghan strategy. Last week, Mullen told a Harvard University audience the conflict is “at the stage where it’s fairly chaotic, but security is starting to turn—it’s very fragile and it’s very reversible, but it’s going to take us some time.”

Second, Obama’s strategy also promised to “accelerate handing over responsibility to Afghan forces” beginning in 2011, but there is now recognition that much more time and resources are required before those forces will be ready to assume responsibility.

The Afghan security forces will total 250,000 members by year’s end, but many units, especially the police, remain poorly trained and unable to battle the insurgency. It is also feared that the country would relapse into anarchy if we turned over security to the existing force too soon.

A large part of the Afghanis’ training problem has to do with our allies’ failure to meet commitments to provide trainers, retarding efforts to create capable forces. The U.S. military, which does most of the fighting, lacks additional personnel to accelerate that training due to other global commitments.

It is noteworthy that Obama’s strategy hasn’t earned the Afghan government’s full support, which is a serious impediment. In 2010 Afghanistan’s problems with corruption, contracting, and secret talks with the enemy have contributed to mistrust. Additionally, President Hamid Karzai is openly critical of allied efforts, but as Secretary Gates said, “We will continue to work with him [Karzai] as a good partner.”

Finally, Obama linked his strategy to neighbor Pakistan, which he said “is built on a foundation of mutual interests, mutual respect and mutual trust.” But our Pakistani partner, President Asif Ali Zardari, is a fragile leader whose government is near collapse.

In spite of that government’s fragility, we continue to pour billions of aid dollars into Pakistan, expecting Islamabad to take the fight to the Taliban and al Qaeda. But all we get for our investment are ambushed supply convoys, complaints about our drone attacks on enemy leaders hiding in that country, and excuses why the Pakistani army can’t defeat our mutual enemies.

The obvious lack of success for Obama’s three-part war strategy begs the question: Where is the security return for our $100 billion annual investment and the loss of American lives?

In 2010 our terrorist problems came from Pakistan, Yemen, and now there is evidence that new threats will come from the Horn of Africa. But Obama committed our military to what he calls the Afghan “war of necessity” for at least another three years without demonstrating the nexus of that conflict to these and other threats.

Worse yet, Mark Sedwill, NATO’s senior civilian representative to Afghanistan, said that Obama is likely understating our commitment. Sedwill told The Washington Post that 2014 is “not an end of mission.” He cautioned that the transition to Afghan control could go into “2015 and beyond.”

Obama extended our Afghan commitment without a thorough review of his yet-to-be-proven strategy. That’s why Congress should exercise its constitutional oversight responsibility to demand that the President demonstrate the necessity to continue our Afghan effort, as opposed to targeting those limited defense dollars and troops to address other threats.

Mr. Maginnis is a retired Army lieutenant colonel, a national security and foreign affairs analyst for radio and television and a senior strategist with the U.S. Army. Obama’s Unjustified War Extension by Robert Maginnis. 11/24/2010

Related articles

• Obama pledges to stand by Afghans (politico.com)
• Afghan war report offers tempered optimism (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Pentagon admits Afghanistan war progress ‘uneven’ (telegraph.co.uk)
• Pakistan Havens, Taliban Resilience Thwart US in Afghan War – Bloomberg (news.google.com)
• Could the Afghan war outlast Obama’s presidency? (salon.com)
• Pentagon contradicts Barack Obama on war gains – The Australian (news.google.com)
• Progress in Afghan war called ‘uneven’ – Washington Post (news.google.com)
• Tom Engelhardt: How to Schedule a War: The Incredible Shrinking Withdrawal Date (huffingtonpost.com)
• Progress ‘uneven’ in Afghanistan war: Pentagon (thehimalayantimes.com)
• Anonymous officials: Afghan war is going great! (salon.com)

Image via Wikipedia

While Bharat wants to move closer to the US, the entire spectrum of Pakistani society is urging Pakistan to dump the so called US “Strategic Dialogue” and move closer to China and the Central Asia Republics.

If the US wants to stay in Afghanistan for the next forty years, it is up to them. Pakistan can join the SCO and link up the Central Asian Republics and China to the warm waters of the Arabian Sea without Afghanistan.

Last year, the SCO made some changes to its rules–allowing for new members. Iran was told that it could not join the SCO ’till the sanctions on it remained. However Pakistan is on the waiting list.

This year is an important year–for Pakistan. It clearly wants to join the SCO. With President Obama symbolic support for Bharat’s ephemeral membership of the US club called the UNSC–Islamabad clearly wants to move closer to the SCO members states. Both China and Russia have shown reservations regarding Bharat’s membership of the UNSC.

Joining the SCO would put new life into the ECO and with Turkey and Iran as part of the ECO, the countries can work on improving their economic lot.

• Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani and three federal ministers arrived in Dushanbe November 24 to represent Pakistan at the annual Shanghai Co-operation Organisation (SCO) summit on November 25.
• Gilani said he would discuss boosting security and economic co-operation with the regional leaders at the SCO’s Heads of Government Council meeting, the state-run APP wire service reported.
• Pakistan will seek permanent SCO membership, keeping in view the forum’s significance in economic co-operation and maintaining regional security, he said.
• Pakistan wants to learn from the expertise of SCO member countries in fighting terrorism and extremism, he added.
• Pakistan wants to have full membership of Shanghai Cooperation Organization: PM

ISLAMABAD: Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani has said that Pakistan wants to have full membership of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and establish good relations with its member countries and utilize their expertise to counter terrorism.

He expressed these views while talking to reporters at Chaklala Airbase before his departure to Tajikistan on a two day visit to attend the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit to be held in Dushanbe from tomorrow.

Minister for Water and Power Raja Pervez Ashraf, Minister for Petroleum and Natural Resources Syed Naveed Qamar and Minister of Sate for Foreign Affairs Nawabzada Malik Amad Khan are accompanying the Prime Minister.

He was seen off at Chaklala Air base by members of the Federal Cabinet and the Services Chiefs.

Prime Minister said the aim of the SCO is to enhance regional cooperation and to against the menace of terrorism and extremism.

• Gilani, Tajik president stress need for cooperation for regional peace, development.
• Review progress on implementation of Central Asia South Asia-1,000 project
• Pakistan and Tajikistan on Wednesday agreed to further strengthen their existing bilateral relations through increased cooperation in diverse fields, including trade and economy, energy, infrastructure, transportation, communication and people-to-people interaction.
• This was agreed during a bilateral meeting between Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani and Tajik President Emomali Rahmon held on the sidelines of the annual SCO Heads of Government Council (HGC) meeting scheduled for today.

The Prime Minister said on the sideline of the Summit, he will hold bilateral meetings with his Chinese and Russian counterparts. He said Pakistan has old and time tested friendship with China and we want to further enhance relations between the two countries. He said Pakistan and China have cooperation in the field of defence, economic and infrastructure. He said the Chinese Prime Minister is expected to visit Pakistan next month.

He said during his meeting with Russian Prime Minister he will discuss about the possibility of enhancing the capacity of Steel Mill. The Prime Minister said we want to establish very good relations with the regional countries.

To a question, Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani said Pakistan wants to improve its relations with Russia especially in the context of Afghanistan because we are living in this region. He said we want greater cooperation with each other to bring stability in Afghanistan.

Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani on Monday emphasised the importance of the implementation of a trilateral transit trade agreement with Afghanistan and Tajikistan and the connectivity between Tajikistan and Pakistan through construction of a road between Chitral and Tajikistan through the Wakhan Corridor to promote trade and economic ties.

Related Articles

• You: PM Gilani leaves for Tajikistan to attend SCO summit (nation.com.pk)
• You: Pakistan wants joint defence, energy projects with Tajikistan: PM (nation.com.pk)
• You: Gilani to visit Kabul for talks (nation.com.pk)
• Tit for Tat Pakistan-China Civilian Nuclear deal: New 1G plant (C-5) for Pakistan (rupeenews.com)
• China-Pakistan Civilian Nuclear deal: 1 Gig Plant in Chasnupp (pakistanledger.com)
• Italy, Pakistan resurrect CfC to oppose Delhi’s UNSC hopes (rupeenews.com)
• ‘No’ to India on MFN (pakistanledger.com)

Rehman Malik's foot-in-mouth-disease Wikipedia

Rehman Malik made  another stupid foot-in-mouth statement the other day–which can only be explained by the recalling the time when he was a little baby and the nanny dropped him on his head–twice. The lump on his head is a reminder of the brain damage and explains the  claptrap his mouth exudes every once in a while. His current statement contradicts his last statement which repudiated his comments from the time before. Mr. Malik’s latest epiphany refutes dozens of other statements by Mr. Malik, President Zardari, President Musharraf, General Kayani, and General Pasha and the CIA.

We are confident he will condemn his current statement and clarify what he actually meant to stay.

Interior Minister Rehman Malik’s retraction of his repeated observations that the government had ample proof of the involvement of foreign hand in terrorist activity in the country is as outlandish as it is incomprehensible. Talking to reporters at the Karachi airport on Sunday, he listed the outfits that are commonly labelled as ‘terrorist organisations’ for creating trouble in Karachi and other parts of Pakistan. One is really amazed how he has come to this categorical conclusion in the face of a pile of evidence to suggest that RAW, CIA and MOSSAD are engaged in this nefarious mission. The foreign occupation of Afghanistan has been facilitating their intrusion into Pakistan through the supply of weapons and funds to disgruntled elements, and even training and encouraging them to stir up trouble. Not only has the Minister, but also other responsible officials, including sources in intelligence agencies have been pointing their fingers at outside agents provocateurs. Mr Malik is on record having said that his Ministry possessed documentary evidence of Indian involvement.

Brahmdagh Bugti openly admitted from his sanctuary in Afghanistan some time back that without New Delhi’s help he could not keep his anti-Pakistan movement alive. At the same time, Jamhuri Watan Party leader Nawab Talal Akbar Bugti has asserted, in a newspaper interview, that India is spreading terrorism in Pakistan through the route of Afghanistan, alleging that young teenagers are brainwashed by its agencies to commit suicide attacks. He has warned against the elements which are out to dismember Pakistan, termed them “accursed” and urged, particularly Punjab, which has the largest population, to stand up against them.

The Minister’s volte-face, excluding the role of foreign agents, could reflect an attempt to distort the factual position under some baleful pressure to divert the attention of investigating and law enforcement agencies away from the real culprit. The obvious objective would be to make it too hard to eliminate the menace and let the agonising state of insecurity persist. The other possibility is that the authorities, who possess enough evidence of outside interference, are unable to deal with these destabilising elements because their hands are tied, again under some outside influence. The situation is a sad and telling indication of how pitiably subservient we have become even when dealing with issues of peace and stability in our own land and, indeed, of survival. We have come to a stage where correction cannot brook delay. There is no alternative to dumping the baggage of the so-called war on terror and, as certain perceptive political observers have observed, that would pave the way for a return to normal conditions in the country.

Operation Blue Tulsi and Rahman Malik's role in it: http://books.google.com/books?id=VQjpziNmoE4C&pg=PA236&dq#v=onepage&q&f=false

Related Articles

• You: No Taliban leaderships in Quetta: Rehman Malik (nation.com.pk)
• Pakistan to follow Singaore model to end corruption (rupeenews.com)

REF TO MALIK:

http://books.google.com/books?id=VQjpziNmoE4C&pg=PA236&dq#v=onepage&q&f=false

OPERATION BLUE TULSI CHRONOLOGY:

Aitzaz Ahsan hands over the list of Sikh freedom fighters to India.
Ref: Pakistan’s drift into Extremism by Hassan Abbas, page#142

General Abdul Waheed Kakar refuses the extension in his tenure.
Ref: Far East and Australasia 2003 By Eur, Europa Publications Staff, Europa Publications Staff Europa Publications, pg# 1171

Benazir Bhutto’s government expells more than 2000 Arab Mujahiddin
Ref: Far East and Australasia 2003 By Eur, Europa Publications Staff, Europa Publications Staff Europa Publications, pg# 1171

Online: http://books.google.com/books?id=e5Az1lGCJwQC&pg=PP1&dq=Far+East+and+Australasia+2003&as_brr=3

Ref 2: Europa World Year Book 2 By Taylor & Francis Group, Taylor & Francis Group pg#3259
Online: http://books.google.com/books?id=gP_-8rXzQs8C&pg=PA3259&dq

Rehman Malik was recruited by FBI in 1995 by John Lipka of FBI and let foreign agents interrogate Pakistani citizens in Pakistan
Ref:The New Jackals By Simon Reeve, pg#47
Online: http://books.google.com/books?id=VQjpziNmoE4C&pg=PA236&dq

US will Take out Pak Nukes
“India had been promised, that in the event of some Pakistani national cataclysm, the Americans would move in to remove the nuclear weapons.”

Ref: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/markurban/2009/06/pakistans_loose_nukes.html
2004

“Pakistan’s Provinces” is published by “Strategic Foresight Group” of India, which predicts balkanization of Pakistan.
Ref: http://www.strategicforesight.com/pakprovinces.htm
Ref: http://www.strategicforesight.com/news_pakprovinces.htm

July 2009
Operation Blue Tulsi report is releast on the internet and spreads like wildfire. In one day the google search results increase from 15 to 500 and in two weeks to 35,000.

Wikipedia Deletion
All the references to Operation Blue Tulsi on wikipedia are deleted on 7 July 2009. (you can check this by using the “History” link on the pages where operation blue tulsi appears). However, some of the references are put back up after 2 to 3 days.

12 July 2009
Article on Blue Tulsi Operation is published in London Institute of South Asia UK.

Ref: http://www.lisauk.com/Articles.asp?aid=640
13 July 2009

Interior Minister Rehman Malik launches campaign against anti-government emils, sms and websites. He says, “Any Pakistani living abroad would be deported to Pakistan. Interpol/Lyon have been asked to identify those email addresses and websites registered abroad which are being used for “such stories”. We have marked some websites that are based abroad and our teams will be paying a visit to these countries soon.”

Ref: http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Politics/13-Jul-2009/Action-ordered-against-antigovt-emails-SMSs
15 July 2009

Guardian (UK) talks about:
“a widely believed conspiracy theory in Pakistan that Washington is orchestrating violent chaos so US troops can storm in and disable the country’s nuclear arsenal”

and indirectly trying to say that there is no such conspiracy. We all know what conspiracy theory – “Operation: Blue Tulsi” – The Guardian is talking about.

Ref: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/15/al-qaida-pakistan-us-nuclear
18 July 2009

Pakistani newspaper confirms Blue Tulsi Operation.
Ref: http://pakobserver.net/200907/18/Articles02.asp
20 July 2009

An injured suicide bomber confesses on TV (July 20, 2009 on “Point Blank” program of Private TV Channel “Express News”) that India/RAW is supporting Barhamdagh Bugti and funding the unrest in Pakistan.
Ref: http://www.paktribune.com/news/index.php?id=217752
22 July 2009

Pakistan hands India comprehensive evidence of RAW’s involvement in terrorism in Pakistan.

Ref: http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/12-proof+of+raw+involvement+in+terror+acts+given+to+india–bi-08
27 July 2009-wikipedia deletion

On 26 July all references to Operation Blue Tulsi on wikipedia are deleted AGAIN. In the last two weeks numerous pages relevant to Operation Blue Tulsi were found mentioning the operation name or details but by 27 July not a single reference is left on wikipedia.
30 July 2009 – Pakistan hands proof to NATO-US

Pakistan hands over the proof of India helping Baitullah Mehsud to NATO and US
Ref: http://www.zeenews.com/news551444.html