The US & others working with Pakistan

[omarali50]

Truth or dare?

http://english.alarabiya.net/article...18/153787.html

[davidbfpo]

Thanks for that insight and having read the article three times the best way to summarise it, indeed answer your question is provided by the author himself:

I will have to resort to some conjecture to arrive at a conclusion.

Conjecture being used as an verb:

to conclude or suppose from grounds or evidence insufficient to ensure reliability.

Link:http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/conjecture

[omarali50]

My article about this topic is at http://www.3quarksdaily.com/3quarksd....html#comments

[davidbfpo]

Anatol Lieven summarises the Pakistan issue IMHO well:

Pakistan is too often portrayed in flawed and reductive ways that flatten its complexity and offer misleading guidance to policy-makers. This makes it all the more important to acknowledge some difficult truths about the country..

Then:

A fundamental political fact about Pakistan is that the state, whoever claims to lead it, is weak, and society in its various forms is immensely strong. Anyone or any group with the slightest power in society uses it (amongst other things) to plunder the state for patronage and favours, and to turn to their advantage the workings of the law and the bureaucracy. As a result, Pakistan has by far the lowest rates of revenue-collection (under 10% of GDP) in south Asia. This, far more than the military, is responsible for the state’s inability to invest in education, infrastructure and essential services; and what money is directed to these ends is far too often stolen by the elites.

Referring to the army's role and discipline:

The only thing that can destroy this discipline and unity is if enough Pakistani soldiers are faced with moral and emotional pressures powerful enough to crack their discipline. The pressures would indeed have to be extreme: in fact, soldiers would have to be put in a position where their duty to defend Pakistan and their conscience and honour as Muslims clashed directly with their obedience to their commanders.

As far as I can see, the only thing that could bring that about as far as the army as a whole is concerned (rather than just some of its Pathan elements) is if the United States were to invade part of Pakistan, and the army command failed to give orders to resist this. Already, the perceived subservience of the Pakistani state to Washington’s demands has caused severe problems of morale in the armed forces.

Link:http://www.opendemocracy.net/anatol-...n-hard-reality

[omarali50]

I think Anatol Lieven has some good points but he underestimates the reality of jihadist ambitions in Pakistan. There is no easy choice. America may be making things worse, but leaving it alone wont make them better either.

See: http://www.thefridaytimes.com/beta/t...0110617&page=2

"The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he did not exist. "

[omarali50]

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/201...militant-ties/

I know all the "sober" analysts are going to say kudos to the army, but I think the army has, in its inimitable fashion, opted again for BOTH lashes and onions. Within Pakistan all the old strategic geniuses are asking why this brigadier was arrested for links with a benign organization like Hizbutahrir and this is dictation from America. Meanwhile SOME Americans may be fooled but especially after bad news accelerates, others are liable to ask why all the generals with links to real militants are never arrested.....
They should have picked one side. Its a bitter pill, but especially if they had got all their media geniuses on board early on, they could have done it. Now, it increasingly looks like their only hope is that America not only withdraws from Afghanistan, but does so quickly, does so by GHQs script AND pays Pakistan to support the taliban in power. Even then, I have no doubt that the Taliban will prove a much bigger headache in power than they ever were in Waziristan. Pakistan will be in bigger trouble if GHQ gets their wish. And in any case, they are not going to get their wish...It looks bad no matter which way I look at it.

[omarali50]

Our amateur discussion may be of some interest: http://www.brownpundits.com/2011/06/...#comment-10505

[omarali50]

another review of Saleem Shahzad's book: http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/print.a...3-6-2011_pg3_4

[omarali50]

and the "official" strategic depth faction view: http://www.ahmedquraishi.com/2011/06...pakistan-army/

I have mentioned earlier that some left wing friends are convinced that these websites are run by the pakistani army to provide cover for their actual pro-american policies. I find that hard to believe (and laughably stupid if true) but there being no transparency in Pakistan in these matters, I will admit that its not out of the question.

[Ray]

Indeed, it is surprising that the Brigadier arrested for having ties with Hizb-ut-Tahrir has been able escape the dragnet so long.

It is a misrepresentation to claim that Hizb ut Tahrir is a benign organisation.

The organisation is hardly benign given that Hizb-ut-Tahrir is an Islamist organization that wants to reestablish the caliphate, the administrative structure that once governed a large swath of the Muslim world.

It is worth noting how the Brigadier was not ferreted out earlier, when it is a banned organisation even in Pakistan. This is a clear indication that there is a serious inroad within the Pakistan military including ISI and FIS by the terrorist organisations.

The latest report is that 4 more officers have been arrested.
http://www.boston.com/news/world/asi...xtremist_ties/

[omarali50]

Hizb ul Tahrir is at most a "gateway organization", at best its flypaper for would be jihadi morons of the middle classes. Its not really an organized terrorist group. We have PLENTY of those and plenty of army officers who trained them, guided them and still meet with them, so picking this guy up for hizbut tahrir (an organization that operates fully legally in the UK) is not the same thing as arresting current or retired officers for working with, say, fazlur rahman khalil...and if that last phrase sound utopian to readers then you have your answer for why I dont see this as earth shattering news.
The positive spin can be that this is a way of sending a message to the rank and file that Islamist sympathies are not welcome. But that is a long term issue (gradual elimination of sympathizers from the ranks), the short term issue is why armed, violent, totally committed and already trained groups are not feeling too much heat....
Having said that, it may well be that they are on the hit list, but only after the army has shored up its own defences...but then the fact that the army has not done so in ten years is telling you something. I know its not an easy job, but I am not convinced (and none of my leftwing friends who know more than I do seems to be convinced) that the army has fully accepted that the days of jihadi proxies are over....if they had reached that conclusion, they would not be undermining their own struggle by continuing to support jihadist propaganda and by appearing to keep "good jihadis" in reserve for future use (they may imagine its against India, and I can understand if Americans are not too bothered about dead Indians or dead shias or whatever, but their "imagination" has been known to be wrong)...

[omarali50]

And more, from Farhat Taj: http://www.brownpundits.com/2011/06/...%94farhat-taj/

[Ray]

Caliphate, reunification of Muslim world stressed
http://nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-n...world-stressed

Pakistani Hizb-ut-Tahrir…not a big threat, but still feared
http://www.islamonline.net/en/IOLArt...6/IOLArticle_C

Hizb ut-Tahrir (the Party of Liberation) is banned in virtually all Arab nations in the Middle East, such as Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt. It is banned in Tunisia and Libya, and also Turkey. It is regarded as such a threat that it is even banned in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, which are already cauldrons of extremism. It is banned in all the former Soviet states in Central Asia, and since February 2003 it has been banned in Russia. It has been banned in Germany...

In Britain in August 2005, then-prime minister Tony Blair announced his intentions to ban the group.....Blair's extremist advisers from the Muslim Council of Britain opposed the ban and said they would only accept it if the right-wing BNP party (British National Party) were also banned. Blair quietly allowed the notion of banning the group disappear from his agenda.

Hizb ut-Tahrir: Banned Elsewhere But Not in the US. Why?
http://www.islam-watch.org/AdrianMor...nned-in-US.htm

If Hizb ut Tharir was indeed a benign organisation and was only encouraging the Muslim dream of a Caliphate, why should it be banned in Islamic countries including Pakistan?

If it is a banned organisation, then how is feasible for one to be affiliated to it and still serve the Army?

A banned organisation is a mere 'flypaper'?

Pakistan is caught in a bind. It does not know what to do with the terror groups they have organised, funded and armed. Some of these 'strategic assets' have flown the coop and are biting the hand that feeds!

[omarali50]

Ray, its a common problem on the intertubes that we argue with what we THINK are the other person's views, based on some quick and dirty heuristic algorithm. I assure you I am not trying to defend the morons at hizb ut tahrir and I dont think army officers should have links with it. My point was that hizb ut tahrir is NOT in the same category as REAL terrorist organizations like LET, JEM, HUJI, LEJ, etc etc, of which we have dozens in Pakistan. By Pakistani standards, its middle class Islamist fluff. And it IS flypaper...that is what flypaper is supposed to be...its arguments attract a certain kind of educated Islamist mindset and since it is officially an above ground organization, it should be easy to monitor. It should also be very easy to infiltrate with FBI informants and agents provocateur. So if a brigadier is being arrested for links to Hizb, it has served its flypaper function.
Now, if a brigadier was to be arrested for links to LET, THAT would be big news...

[davidbfpo]

Ray,

The 'Free Radicals' blogsite for ICSR has a short overview of HuT, which has this gem:

lack of involvement by HT’s global emir, who has been in hiding somewhere in the Middle East for years.

and followed by:

HT members are driven by hope, and after decades of building the party apparatus, spreading the concept of revolution to overthrow corrupt regimes, and painting the picture of a perfect system of governance guided by the tenets of Islamic law, dedicated HT members must wonder why their emir is not leading the charge down, what could be, the home stretch.

Link:http://icsr.info/blog/Hizb-ut-Tahrir...ring-Game-Time

[davidbfpo]

Pakistani has asked, or expelled, the UK advisory team to the Frontier Corps; from the BBC:

British military trainers working with security forces in Pakistan have been withdrawn at the request of the Pakistan government.

Or in The Daily Telegraph:

...British military advisers sent to Pakistan to help in the fight against the Taliban and al-Qaeda have been expelled from the country..

Spin from the UK MoD:

The UK has been asked to withdraw some of its training support teams on a temporary basis by the Pakistan Government in response to security concerns. We are providing training support at the invitation of the Pakistan Government and welcome their advice on these matters. The training teams will continue their own training and will be ready to re-deploy at the first possible opportunity.

Links:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13923483and http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...-Pakistan.html

Incidentally the photo on the Telegraph story is a classic pose.

[carl]

The following was posted on the Information Dissemination blog today. (http://www.informationdissemination.net/)

People have long asked where Somali pirates are getting all of their good intelligence from. They seem to know where the easy to hit ships will be, by name and all. There is ample evidence that Somali pirates are not working with Iran and they also do not appear to work in coordination with any Al Qaeda affiliated groups. One of the biggest questions that has popped up as a result of several different events over the last several months is how much influence and apparent connectivity ISI Chief Ahmed Shuja Pasha has with Somali pirate leaders. My sense is the relationship between Somali pirates and the ISI is the next big pirate story on the verge of busting into the media.

Lord in heaven, what's next?

[davidbfpo]

Carl,

I know the world is full of surprises, but this suspected linkage is one and simply lacks credibility.

In an earlier post I referred to the open source and commercial sources for shipping information. I suspect that certain "middle men" are supplying the information for interception and Somalis are well known for their trading skills in the region - not piracy.

I recall the Somalis had no love for the Pakistanis during the early intervention; the killing of Pakistani soldiers pre-dated the 'Blackhawk Down' incident.

Where is the pay-off for ISI in such a trade?

[carl]

David:

This is the first I've heard of it, can't really comment on its validity and posted it mainly as a discussion point. If it is true there isn't anything those guys won't stoop to, and if it isn't true their past actions make it easy for people to believe there isn't anything they won't stoop too. I will say that Galrahn runs a pretty good blog and seems to know exactly what he is talking about as near as I can judge, which may not be very near.

The pay off for the ISI would be what it always is for the ISI, bug India and money. There was a twitter feed from Galrahn stating that 22 Somali pirates were caught recently just off the NW coast of India. That should bug them. The money, well the money.

Who the Somalis killed 20 years ago probably doesn't mean much to them if there is money to be made leading the pirate's life.

[omarali50]

The Somali story smells strange, but who knows.
The interesting question to me is whether there is any real rift between NATO and Pakistan? And whether GHQ is about to "win" in Afghanistan? Because if they are (with or without NATO's cooperation), its really really bad news for Pakistan. Primarily because such a victory would be terrible news for ordinary Afghans and then for ordinary Pakistanis (and eventually, for GHQ, but they may not see that yet). Then there is the secondary (and the in the greater scheme of things, relatively minor) issue of liberals hanging from lamp-posts...Pro-army websites make no secret of their expectations that after the US is driven out of the region, there will be a lot of lamp-posts with a lot of infidel agents hanging from them.
You can go to rupeenews to see what I mean.