☀️ JOIN SPN MOBILE
Forums
New posts
Guru Granth Sahib
Composition, Arrangement & Layout
ਜਪੁ | Jup
ਸੋ ਦਰੁ | So Dar
ਸੋਹਿਲਾ | Sohilaa
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਿਰੀਰਾਗੁ | Raag Siree-Raag
Gurbani (14-53)
Ashtpadiyan (53-71)
Gurbani (71-74)
Pahre (74-78)
Chhant (78-81)
Vanjara (81-82)
Vaar Siri Raag (83-91)
Bhagat Bani (91-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਝ | Raag Maajh
Gurbani (94-109)
Ashtpadi (109)
Ashtpadiyan (110-129)
Ashtpadi (129-130)
Ashtpadiyan (130-133)
Bara Maha (133-136)
Din Raen (136-137)
Vaar Maajh Ki (137-150)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗਉੜੀ | Raag Gauree
Gurbani (151-185)
Quartets/Couplets (185-220)
Ashtpadiyan (220-234)
Karhalei (234-235)
Ashtpadiyan (235-242)
Chhant (242-249)
Baavan Akhari (250-262)
Sukhmani (262-296)
Thittee (296-300)
Gauree kii Vaar (300-323)
Gurbani (323-330)
Ashtpadiyan (330-340)
Baavan Akhari (340-343)
Thintteen (343-344)
Vaar Kabir (344-345)
Bhagat Bani (345-346)
ਰਾਗੁ ਆਸਾ | Raag Aasaa
Gurbani (347-348)
Chaupaday (348-364)
Panchpadde (364-365)
Kaafee (365-409)
Aasaavaree (409-411)
Ashtpadiyan (411-432)
Patee (432-435)
Chhant (435-462)
Vaar Aasaa (462-475)
Bhagat Bani (475-488)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੂਜਰੀ | Raag Goojaree
Gurbani (489-503)
Ashtpadiyan (503-508)
Vaar Gujari (508-517)
Vaar Gujari (517-526)
ਰਾਗੁ ਦੇਵਗੰਧਾਰੀ | Raag Dayv-Gandhaaree
Gurbani (527-536)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਹਾਗੜਾ | Raag Bihaagraa
Gurbani (537-556)
Chhant (538-548)
Vaar Bihaagraa (548-556)
ਰਾਗੁ ਵਡਹੰਸ | Raag Wadhans
Gurbani (557-564)
Ashtpadiyan (564-565)
Chhant (565-575)
Ghoriaan (575-578)
Alaahaniiaa (578-582)
Vaar Wadhans (582-594)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੋਰਠਿ | Raag Sorath
Gurbani (595-634)
Asatpadhiya (634-642)
Vaar Sorath (642-659)
ਰਾਗੁ ਧਨਾਸਰੀ | Raag Dhanasaree
Gurbani (660-685)
Astpadhiya (685-687)
Chhant (687-691)
Bhagat Bani (691-695)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਤਸਰੀ | Raag Jaitsree
Gurbani (696-703)
Chhant (703-705)
Vaar Jaitsaree (705-710)
Bhagat Bani (710)
ਰਾਗੁ ਟੋਡੀ | Raag Todee
ਰਾਗੁ ਬੈਰਾੜੀ | Raag Bairaaree
ਰਾਗੁ ਤਿਲੰਗ | Raag Tilang
Gurbani (721-727)
Bhagat Bani (727)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੂਹੀ | Raag Suhi
Gurbani (728-750)
Ashtpadiyan (750-761)
Kaafee (761-762)
Suchajee (762)
Gunvantee (763)
Chhant (763-785)
Vaar Soohee (785-792)
Bhagat Bani (792-794)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਲਾਵਲੁ | Raag Bilaaval
Gurbani (795-831)
Ashtpadiyan (831-838)
Thitteen (838-840)
Vaar Sat (841-843)
Chhant (843-848)
Vaar Bilaaval (849-855)
Bhagat Bani (855-858)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੋਂਡ | Raag Gond
Gurbani (859-869)
Ashtpadiyan (869)
Bhagat Bani (870-875)
ਰਾਗੁ ਰਾਮਕਲੀ | Raag Ramkalee
Ashtpadiyan (902-916)
Gurbani (876-902)
Anand (917-922)
Sadd (923-924)
Chhant (924-929)
Dakhnee (929-938)
Sidh Gosat (938-946)
Vaar Ramkalee (947-968)
ਰਾਗੁ ਨਟ ਨਾਰਾਇਨ | Raag Nat Narayan
Gurbani (975-980)
Ashtpadiyan (980-983)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਲੀ ਗਉੜਾ | Raag Maalee Gauraa
Gurbani (984-988)
Bhagat Bani (988)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਰੂ | Raag Maaroo
Gurbani (889-1008)
Ashtpadiyan (1008-1014)
Kaafee (1014-1016)
Ashtpadiyan (1016-1019)
Anjulian (1019-1020)
Solhe (1020-1033)
Dakhni (1033-1043)
ਰਾਗੁ ਤੁਖਾਰੀ | Raag Tukhaari
Bara Maha (1107-1110)
Chhant (1110-1117)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕੇਦਾਰਾ | Raag Kedara
Gurbani (1118-1123)
Bhagat Bani (1123-1124)
ਰਾਗੁ ਭੈਰਉ | Raag Bhairo
Gurbani (1125-1152)
Partaal (1153)
Ashtpadiyan (1153-1167)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਸੰਤੁ | Raag Basant
Gurbani (1168-1187)
Ashtpadiyan (1187-1193)
Vaar Basant (1193-1196)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਾਰਗ | Raag Saarag
Gurbani (1197-1200)
Partaal (1200-1231)
Ashtpadiyan (1232-1236)
Chhant (1236-1237)
Vaar Saarang (1237-1253)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਲਾਰ | Raag Malaar
Gurbani (1254-1293)
Partaal (1265-1273)
Ashtpadiyan (1273-1278)
Chhant (1278)
Vaar Malaar (1278-91)
Bhagat Bani (1292-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਾਨੜਾ | Raag Kaanraa
Gurbani (1294-96)
Partaal (1296-1318)
Ashtpadiyan (1308-1312)
Chhant (1312)
Vaar Kaanraa
Bhagat Bani (1318)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਲਿਆਨ | Raag Kalyaan
Gurbani (1319-23)
Ashtpadiyan (1323-26)
ਰਾਗੁ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਤੀ | Raag Prabhaatee
Gurbani (1327-1341)
Ashtpadiyan (1342-51)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਜਾਵੰਤੀ | Raag Jaijaiwanti
Gurbani (1352-53)
Salok | Gatha | Phunahe | Chaubole | Swayiye
Sehskritee Mahala 1
Sehskritee Mahala 5
Gaathaa Mahala 5
Phunhay Mahala 5
Chaubolae Mahala 5
Shaloks Bhagat Kabir
Shaloks Sheikh Farid
Swaiyyae Mahala 5
Swaiyyae in Praise of Gurus
Shaloks in Addition To Vaars
Shalok Ninth Mehl
Mundavanee Mehl 5
ਰਾਗ ਮਾਲਾ, Raag Maalaa
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Videos
New media
New comments
Library
Latest reviews
Donate
Log in
Register
What's new
New posts
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
Sign up
Log in
Discussions
Hard Talk
Balkanizing Pakistan; An Alternate View
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="harbansj24" data-source="post: 132472" data-attributes="member: 4544"><p><span style="font-family: 'arial'"><p style="text-align: center"><p style="text-align: center"> <strong><span style="color: #407F00"><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-hughes/balkanizing-pakistan-a-co_b_635950.html" target="_blank">Balkanizing Pakistan: A Collective National Security Strategy</a></span></strong></p> </p> <p style="text-align: center"><p style="text-align: center"><span style="color: #407F00"><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-hughes" target="_blank">Michael Hughes</a>, </span><span style="color: black">Geopolitical journalist</span></p> </p> <p style="text-align: center"><p style="text-align: center"><span style="color: black">Posted: July 6, 2010 05:43 AM</span></p> </p><p></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'arial'"><strong><u><span style="color: black">Breaking Pakistan to Fix It</span></u></strong></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="color: black">The argument for Balkanizing Pakistan or, more specifically, fragmenting the Islamic Republic so it's easier to police and economically develop, has been on the table since Pakistan's birth in 1947 when the country was spit out of a British laboratory. And lately, the <strong>concept is looking more appealing by the day</strong>, because as a result of flawed boundaries combined with the nexus between military rule and Islamic extremism, Pakistan now finds itself on a<strong> rapid descent toward certain collapse and the country's leaders stubbornly refuse to do the things required to change course</strong>. But before allowing Pakistan to commit state suicide, self-disintegrate and further destabilize the region, the international community can beat them to the punch and deconstruct the country less violently.</span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="color: black">To quell any doubts about Pakistan's seemingly uncontrollable spiral into darkness, just recently, </span><a href="http://www.examiner.com/x-4454-Geopolitics-Examiner%7Ey2010m6d22-Failed-statehood-is-a-chronic-condition-according-to-2010-Index" target="_blank"><strong>Foreign Policy Magazine ranked Pakistan as the tenth most failed state on</strong> <strong>earth</strong></a><span style="color: black"> and it would seem its leaders are hell bent on securing the number one slot - an honor it can add to their already dubious distinction as the <strong>world's largest incubator of jihadist extremism</strong>. <strong>Afghanistan will never see peace or prosperity with a neighbor like Pakistan</strong> and the <strong>U.S. will always be threatened by terrorist plots spawned in Pakistan's lawless regions</strong> - like the most recent Times Square bombing.</span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="color: black">The most popular approach to fragmentation is to <strong>break off and allow Afghanistan to absorb Pakistan's North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), which would unite the Pashtun tribes</strong>. In addition, the <strong>provinces of Balochistan and Sindh would become independent sovereign states</strong>, leaving <strong>Punjab as a standalone entity</strong>.</span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="color: black">Balkanization is based on the <strong>premise that the weak central government in Islamabad is incapable of governing Pakistan's frontiers, which have become the number one source of regional instability</strong>. The governing Punjabi elite have neglected the other three major ethnic groups - the Sindhis, Pashtuns, and Baluchis, primarily because a majority of Pakistan's budget is spent on the military rather than economic development, schooling or infrastructure. Only 2% of Pakistan's GDP, for example, is spent on education despite the fact Pakistan's literacy rate stands at 57%.</span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="color: black">Minority groups have also been underrepresented in institutions such as Pakistan's military - which is the country's most powerful entity. <strong>Punjabis who represent 40% of the population constitute 90% of the armed forces</strong>. Pakistan's own history provides a prime case study of what happens when an ethnic group can no longer tolerate political and economic disregard. <strong>After a quarter century of strife the Bengalis rebelled, seceded and founded Bangladesh in 1971</strong>.</span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="color: black">If the Balkanization solution is ever put in motion, accusations will surely fly that it's yet another example of U.S. imperialism and neoconservatism run amok. However, this would be a <strong>diplomatic and multilateral effort</strong>, plus, it is more about reversing the inequities of British colonialism than it is building some new world order.</span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'arial'"><strong><u><span style="color: black">Inherent Instability</span></u></strong></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'arial'"><strong><span style="color: black">Pakistan's problems began when the British drew its boundaries haphazardly, which was primarily a product of incompetence and haste than maniacal design</span></strong><span style="color: black">. According to an article in the New York Times last year, </span><a href="http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/05/pakistans-british-drawn-borders/" target="_blank">British colonial officer, Sir Cyril Radcliffe</a><span style="color: black"> was given six weeks to carve a Muslim-majority state from British India although he had never even been there before. Radcliffe's private secretary was quoted as saying that Sir Cyril "was a bit flummoxed by the whole thing. It was a rather impossible assignment, really. To partition that subcontinent in six weeks was absurd." It would be a comical anecdote except for the fact that <strong>hundreds of thousands of people died in the ethnic cleansing that followed as a direct result of British carelessness</strong>.</span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'arial'"><strong><span style="color: black">Pakistan's border with Afghanistan - the poorly-marked Durand Line</span></strong><span style="color: black"> - had been drawn in 1893, also by the British, but it was never meant to be a long-term legally-binding boundary. The <strong>faux demarcation split the Pashtuns in half</strong>. By reinstating the original natural boundaries, Pakistan's western provinces would be returned to Afghanistan and the Pashtun tribes would be reunited. Such a move would also remove a strategic advantage for the Afghan Taliban, who can easily blend in amongst fellow Pashtuns on the Pakistani side of the border today.</span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="color: black">The British did not only gift Pakistan with lethal boundaries, according to </span><a href="http://wwww.examiner.com/x-4454-Geopolitics-Examiner%7Ey2009m5d27-Exposing-Pakistan-terrorist-incubator-since-1947" target="_blank">renowned Pakistani journalist Ahmed Rashid</a><span style="color: black">, <strong>Pakistan inherited a "security state" from British rule, described by scholars as "the viceregal tradition" or "a permanent state of martial law"</strong>. Intellectual Christopher Hitchens asserted Pakistan has been a fiefdom of the military for most of its short existence. As was once said of Prussia: <strong>Pakistan is not a country that has an army, but an army that has a country</strong>. Hitchens also said the country was doomed to be a dysfunctional military theocracy from day one - beginning with the very name of the country itself:</span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="color: black">But then, there is a certain hypocrisy inscribed in the very origins and nature of "Pakistan". The name is no more than an acronym, confected in the 1930s at Cambridge University by a NW Muslim propagandist named Chaudhri Rahmat Ali. It stands for Punjab, Afghania, Kashmir, and Indus-Sind, plus the suffix "-stan," meaning "land." In the Urdu tongue, the resulting word means "Land of the Pure." The <strong>country is a cobbling together of regional, religious, and ethnic nationalisms</strong>, and its founding, in 1947, resulted in Pakistan's becoming, <strong>along with Israel, one of the two "faith-based" states to emerge from the partitionist policy of a dying British</strong> <strong>colonialism</strong>. Far from being a "Land of the Pure," Pakistan is one of the clearest demonstrations of the futility of defining a nation by religion, and <strong>one of the textbook failures of a state and a society</strong>.</span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="color: black">Pakistan deteriorated throughout the decades because of its <strong>focus on building the military and developing Islamic extremist groups to use as weapons in their eternal obsessive struggle against India</strong>. It's true the U.S. helped Pakistan build these groups since the beginning of the Cold War, but America learned on 9/11 they had <strong>created a Frankenstein monster that now needed to be slain</strong>.</span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="color: black">Many analysts have suggested <strong>India is less of a national security threat to Pakistan than its homegrown terrorist groups</strong>, <strong>many of which have openly declared their mission to topple the state, which would allow jihadists to secure nuclear materials</strong>. Yet, based on its strategic decision to foster extremism and its recent public support for Taliban rule in Afghanistan, it appears <strong>the biggest existential threat to Pakistan is its own political and military leaders</strong>.</span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'arial'"><strong><u><span style="color: black">The Last Straw</span></u></strong></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="color: black">With that being said, Balkanization does seem like an extreme step at first blush, and perhaps Pakistan should be given another chance. Yet, after considering Pakistan's historic and current relationship with Al Qaeda - it becomes much easier to justify.</span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="color: black">Since the war began in 2001 the U.S. has asked Pakistan to root out extremists from sanctuaries in a Rhode Island-sized area called <strong>North Waziristan</strong>, chief among them being the<strong> lethal Haqqani Network</strong>. However, Pakistan's army chief General Ashfaq Kayani asserted his forces were too bogged down fighting the Pakistani Taliban elsewhere in places like South Waziristan, Orakzai Agency and various districts across the NWFP.</span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="color: black">I contacted an Afghan intelligence analyst about this and he assessed General Kayani's claim with one single word: rubbish. The Pakistan army consists of 500,000 active duty troops and another 500,000 on reserve. <strong>If Pakistan truly wanted to capture the Haqqani Network they would be able to drag them out of their caves by their beards within a few days</strong>.</span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="color: black">In a movement that should have floored U.S. policymakers, <strong>Kayani was brazen enough to try and inveigle Afghanistan to strike a power-sharing arrangement with the Haqqanis</strong>. And Kayani, apparently the spokesperson for the Haqqani group, said they'd be <strong>willing to split from and denounce Al Qaeda</strong>, which is President Obama's primary rationale for the war. However, there is a higher probability of General Kayani converting to Hinduism than there is of the Haqqani Network ever being decoupled from Al Qaeda.</span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'arial'"><a href="http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2010/06/al_qaeda_operatives_1.php" target="_blank">According to the Long War Journal</a><span style="color: black">, <strong>Siraj Haqqani, their leader, sits on Al Qaeda's decision-making body. Haqqani's friendship with Osama bin Laden dates back to the war against the Soviets in the 1980s and it was Haqqani that ensured safe passage into Pakistan for many Al Qaeda figures after the collapse of the Taliban in 2001</strong>. An </span><a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/07/03/opinion/main6643849.shtml" target="_blank">Institute for the Study of War</a><span style="color: black"> analysis concluded that Haqqani was "irreconcilable" and negotiations with him would actually strengthen Al Qaeda and would undermine the <em>raison d'etre</em> for U.S. involvement in Afghanistan over the past decade.</span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="color: black">In other words, the <strong>Haqqani Network<em> is</em> Al Qaeda</strong>. <strong>Pakistan has had a close relationship with the Haqqanis for over 30 years, who are still seen as a crucial anti-Indian asset</strong>. So, for nine years the Pakistanis protected the Haqqanis and claimed ignorance as to the whereabouts of Mullah Omar, Osama bin Laden and the Quetta Shura. <strong>Nine years, nearly $300 billion dollars and 1900 dead coalition soldiers later, the U.S. has officially verified that the entire war effort has been focused on the wrong side of the mountains</strong>.</span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="color: black">A stable Afghanistan is in Pakistan's best interests, but this message has been preached time and again with little to no results, and the U.S. has waited long enough for Pakistan's leaders to uproot the extremists that orchestrated 9/11. <strong>But now, it appears as if the international community will have to do it for them</strong>.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'arial'"></span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="harbansj24, post: 132472, member: 4544"] [FONT=arial][CENTER][CENTER] [B][COLOR=#407F00][URL="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-hughes/balkanizing-pakistan-a-co_b_635950.html"]Balkanizing Pakistan: A Collective National Security Strategy[/URL][/COLOR][/B][COLOR=#407F00][/COLOR][/CENTER][/CENTER] [CENTER][CENTER][COLOR=#407F00][URL="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-hughes"]Michael Hughes[/URL], [/COLOR][COLOR=black]Geopolitical journalist[/COLOR][COLOR=#407F00][/COLOR][/CENTER][/CENTER] [CENTER][CENTER][COLOR=black]Posted: July 6, 2010 05:43 AM[/COLOR][/CENTER][/CENTER] [FONT=Times New Roman] [/FONT] [B][U][COLOR=black]Breaking Pakistan to Fix It[/COLOR][/U][/B] [COLOR=black]The argument for Balkanizing Pakistan or, more specifically, fragmenting the Islamic Republic so it's easier to police and economically develop, has been on the table since Pakistan's birth in 1947 when the country was spit out of a British laboratory. And lately, the [B]concept is looking more appealing by the day[/B], because as a result of flawed boundaries combined with the nexus between military rule and Islamic extremism, Pakistan now finds itself on a[B] rapid descent toward certain collapse and the country's leaders stubbornly refuse to do the things required to change course[/B]. But before allowing Pakistan to commit state suicide, self-disintegrate and further destabilize the region, the international community can beat them to the punch and deconstruct the country less violently.[/COLOR] [COLOR=black]To quell any doubts about Pakistan's seemingly uncontrollable spiral into darkness, just recently, [/COLOR][URL="http://www.examiner.com/x-4454-Geopolitics-Examiner%7Ey2010m6d22-Failed-statehood-is-a-chronic-condition-according-to-2010-Index"][B]Foreign Policy Magazine ranked Pakistan as the tenth most failed state on[/B] [B]earth[/B][/URL][COLOR=black] and it would seem its leaders are hell bent on securing the number one slot - an honor it can add to their already dubious distinction as the [B]world's largest incubator of jihadist extremism[/B]. [B]Afghanistan will never see peace or prosperity with a neighbor like Pakistan[/B] and the [B]U.S. will always be threatened by terrorist plots spawned in Pakistan's lawless regions[/B] - like the most recent Times Square bombing.[/COLOR] [COLOR=black]The most popular approach to fragmentation is to [B]break off and allow Afghanistan to absorb Pakistan's North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), which would unite the Pashtun tribes[/B]. In addition, the [B]provinces of Balochistan and Sindh would become independent sovereign states[/B], leaving [B]Punjab as a standalone entity[/B].[/COLOR] [COLOR=black]Balkanization is based on the [B]premise that the weak central government in Islamabad is incapable of governing Pakistan's frontiers, which have become the number one source of regional instability[/B]. The governing Punjabi elite have neglected the other three major ethnic groups - the Sindhis, Pashtuns, and Baluchis, primarily because a majority of Pakistan's budget is spent on the military rather than economic development, schooling or infrastructure. Only 2% of Pakistan's GDP, for example, is spent on education despite the fact Pakistan's literacy rate stands at 57%.[/COLOR] [COLOR=black]Minority groups have also been underrepresented in institutions such as Pakistan's military - which is the country's most powerful entity. [B]Punjabis who represent 40% of the population constitute 90% of the armed forces[/B]. Pakistan's own history provides a prime case study of what happens when an ethnic group can no longer tolerate political and economic disregard. [B]After a quarter century of strife the Bengalis rebelled, seceded and founded Bangladesh in 1971[/B].[/COLOR] [COLOR=black]If the Balkanization solution is ever put in motion, accusations will surely fly that it's yet another example of U.S. imperialism and neoconservatism run amok. However, this would be a [B]diplomatic and multilateral effort[/B], plus, it is more about reversing the inequities of British colonialism than it is building some new world order.[/COLOR] [B][U][COLOR=black]Inherent Instability[/COLOR][/U][/B] [B][COLOR=black]Pakistan's problems began when the British drew its boundaries haphazardly, which was primarily a product of incompetence and haste than maniacal design[/COLOR][/B][COLOR=black]. According to an article in the New York Times last year, [/COLOR][URL="http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/05/pakistans-british-drawn-borders/"]British colonial officer, Sir Cyril Radcliffe[/URL][COLOR=black] was given six weeks to carve a Muslim-majority state from British India although he had never even been there before. Radcliffe's private secretary was quoted as saying that Sir Cyril "was a bit flummoxed by the whole thing. It was a rather impossible assignment, really. To partition that subcontinent in six weeks was absurd." It would be a comical anecdote except for the fact that [B]hundreds of thousands of people died in the ethnic cleansing that followed as a direct result of British carelessness[/B].[/COLOR] [B][COLOR=black]Pakistan's border with Afghanistan - the poorly-marked Durand Line[/COLOR][/B][COLOR=black] - had been drawn in 1893, also by the British, but it was never meant to be a long-term legally-binding boundary. The [B]faux demarcation split the Pashtuns in half[/B]. By reinstating the original natural boundaries, Pakistan's western provinces would be returned to Afghanistan and the Pashtun tribes would be reunited. Such a move would also remove a strategic advantage for the Afghan Taliban, who can easily blend in amongst fellow Pashtuns on the Pakistani side of the border today.[/COLOR] [COLOR=black]The British did not only gift Pakistan with lethal boundaries, according to [/COLOR][URL="http://wwww.examiner.com/x-4454-Geopolitics-Examiner%7Ey2009m5d27-Exposing-Pakistan-terrorist-incubator-since-1947"]renowned Pakistani journalist Ahmed Rashid[/URL][COLOR=black], [B]Pakistan inherited a "security state" from British rule, described by scholars as "the viceregal tradition" or "a permanent state of martial law"[/B]. Intellectual Christopher Hitchens asserted Pakistan has been a fiefdom of the military for most of its short existence. As was once said of Prussia: [B]Pakistan is not a country that has an army, but an army that has a country[/B]. Hitchens also said the country was doomed to be a dysfunctional military theocracy from day one - beginning with the very name of the country itself:[/COLOR] [COLOR=black]But then, there is a certain hypocrisy inscribed in the very origins and nature of "Pakistan". The name is no more than an acronym, confected in the 1930s at Cambridge University by a NW Muslim propagandist named Chaudhri Rahmat Ali. It stands for Punjab, Afghania, Kashmir, and Indus-Sind, plus the suffix "-stan," meaning "land." In the Urdu tongue, the resulting word means "Land of the Pure." The [B]country is a cobbling together of regional, religious, and ethnic nationalisms[/B], and its founding, in 1947, resulted in Pakistan's becoming, [B]along with Israel, one of the two "faith-based" states to emerge from the partitionist policy of a dying British[/B] [B]colonialism[/B]. Far from being a "Land of the Pure," Pakistan is one of the clearest demonstrations of the futility of defining a nation by religion, and [B]one of the textbook failures of a state and a society[/B].[/COLOR] [COLOR=black]Pakistan deteriorated throughout the decades because of its [B]focus on building the military and developing Islamic extremist groups to use as weapons in their eternal obsessive struggle against India[/B]. It's true the U.S. helped Pakistan build these groups since the beginning of the Cold War, but America learned on 9/11 they had [B]created a Frankenstein monster that now needed to be slain[/B].[/COLOR] [COLOR=black]Many analysts have suggested [B]India is less of a national security threat to Pakistan than its homegrown terrorist groups[/B], [B]many of which have openly declared their mission to topple the state, which would allow jihadists to secure nuclear materials[/B]. Yet, based on its strategic decision to foster extremism and its recent public support for Taliban rule in Afghanistan, it appears [B]the biggest existential threat to Pakistan is its own political and military leaders[/B].[/COLOR] [B][U][COLOR=black]The Last Straw[/COLOR][/U][/B] [COLOR=black]With that being said, Balkanization does seem like an extreme step at first blush, and perhaps Pakistan should be given another chance. Yet, after considering Pakistan's historic and current relationship with Al Qaeda - it becomes much easier to justify.[/COLOR] [COLOR=black]Since the war began in 2001 the U.S. has asked Pakistan to root out extremists from sanctuaries in a Rhode Island-sized area called [B]North Waziristan[/B], chief among them being the[B] lethal Haqqani Network[/B]. However, Pakistan's army chief General Ashfaq Kayani asserted his forces were too bogged down fighting the Pakistani Taliban elsewhere in places like South Waziristan, Orakzai Agency and various districts across the NWFP.[/COLOR] [COLOR=black]I contacted an Afghan intelligence analyst about this and he assessed General Kayani's claim with one single word: rubbish. The Pakistan army consists of 500,000 active duty troops and another 500,000 on reserve. [B]If Pakistan truly wanted to capture the Haqqani Network they would be able to drag them out of their caves by their beards within a few days[/B].[/COLOR] [COLOR=black]In a movement that should have floored U.S. policymakers, [B]Kayani was brazen enough to try and inveigle Afghanistan to strike a power-sharing arrangement with the Haqqanis[/B]. And Kayani, apparently the spokesperson for the Haqqani group, said they'd be [B]willing to split from and denounce Al Qaeda[/B], which is President Obama's primary rationale for the war. However, there is a higher probability of General Kayani converting to Hinduism than there is of the Haqqani Network ever being decoupled from Al Qaeda.[/COLOR] [URL="http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2010/06/al_qaeda_operatives_1.php"]According to the Long War Journal[/URL][COLOR=black], [B]Siraj Haqqani, their leader, sits on Al Qaeda's decision-making body. Haqqani's friendship with Osama bin Laden dates back to the war against the Soviets in the 1980s and it was Haqqani that ensured safe passage into Pakistan for many Al Qaeda figures after the collapse of the Taliban in 2001[/B]. An [/COLOR][URL="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/07/03/opinion/main6643849.shtml"]Institute for the Study of War[/URL][COLOR=black] analysis concluded that Haqqani was "irreconcilable" and negotiations with him would actually strengthen Al Qaeda and would undermine the [I]raison d'etre[/I] for U.S. involvement in Afghanistan over the past decade.[/COLOR] [COLOR=black]In other words, the [B]Haqqani Network[I] is[/I] Al Qaeda[/B]. [B]Pakistan has had a close relationship with the Haqqanis for over 30 years, who are still seen as a crucial anti-Indian asset[/B]. So, for nine years the Pakistanis protected the Haqqanis and claimed ignorance as to the whereabouts of Mullah Omar, Osama bin Laden and the Quetta Shura. [B]Nine years, nearly $300 billion dollars and 1900 dead coalition soldiers later, the U.S. has officially verified that the entire war effort has been focused on the wrong side of the mountains[/B].[/COLOR] [COLOR=black]A stable Afghanistan is in Pakistan's best interests, but this message has been preached time and again with little to no results, and the U.S. has waited long enough for Pakistan's leaders to uproot the extremists that orchestrated 9/11. [B]But now, it appears as if the international community will have to do it for them[/B].[/COLOR] [/FONT] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Discussions
Hard Talk
Balkanizing Pakistan; An Alternate View
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top