Dear Colleagues,
You all would have heard the news of K Subramanyam’s sad demise on 2 Feb 2011. Born in 1929, he was the most well known strategic analyst who wielded considerable influence in India’s security policy formation. Founding Director of our Institute of Defence Studies, he also chaired many committees and commissions of inquiry. This included one on the Kargil War.
He had argued in favour of our military intervention in East Pakistan in 1971. This had attracted criticism from several quarters including from our then Army Chief Sam Manekshaw.
Subramanyam was a major advocate of the 2007 Indo-US Nuclear Deal, thus adding strong support to the Manmohan Singh government that was facing still opposition on the issue. In fact he might have also played a formal role in helping the deal come through.
He was one of the few eminent Indian strategists who pushed hard for a pre-emptive strike on Pakistan's Kahuta nuclear complex in early 1980s when news broke that Pakistan was in advanced stage of developing a bomb. He must have foreseen the coming Pakistani nuclear blackmail, of which General Harwant has spoken eloquently in his Tribune article today click here. Views may differ but there is no denying the fact that India is still paying the price for missing that opportunity. Pakistan's support to Punjab militancy and the initiation of a jihad in Kashmir, not to speak of Mumbai and other terrorist attacks, would perhaps never have happened had India paid heed to Subrahmanyam's advice.
In K Subramanyam’s passing away we have lost a great thinking mind.
Best regards,
Lt Gen (Emeritus) Raj Kadyan, PVSM, AVSM, VSM
Chairman IESM
K Subrahmanyam (1929 - 2011), the strategic guru for most Indian security analysts who passed away on Feb 2 after a long struggle with diabetes and cancer combined the finest qualities of head and heart. A civil servant who shunned the trappings of power in a hierarchy obsessed society - he opted for the monk like austerity of the think-tank.
K Subrahmanyam - Strategic Guru: Read more
Showing posts with label Terror Camps. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Terror Camps. Show all posts
Friday, February 4, 2011
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Jihad against India: Is Al- Qaeda messing up POK?
04/11/2010
Foreigners are being trained in PoK militant camps: Report
London: Hundreds of university students, including foreigners are being trained in militant camps in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, which have become active again, to wage 'jihad' against India.
After a lull, several militant outfits have now again raised their heads and increased their activities in and around Muzaffarabad, capital of PoK, and pro-Jihad slogans can be seen on the walls of the city, BBC Urdu Service reported.
A 25-year-old engineering student from Lahore, fresh from a training stint in one of camps told BBC from PoK capital Muzzaffarabad, said:"A large number of youths from Pakistani universities and abroad are undergoing training in PoK under supervision of a militant group to wage jihad against India."
The student, who identified himself as a Kashmiri, said he received two-month training in PoK after finishing his engineering course this year.
"Around 20 per cent youths in the training camps are from Kashmir and 10 per cent are from other countries... Majority of those receiving training are from Pakistan's Punjab province," he claimed.
He also said that many other students from his university have joined the militant training programme run by a tanzeem (group) located near Lahore, an apparent reference to Jamaat-ud-Dawa, which is headquartered at Murdike on the outskirts of the city.
He said a decision to send them to Kashmir will be taken by the Tanzeem's Amir.
"We could be sent to Kashmir or we could be stationed in Pakistan itself for propagating Islam," he said in response to a question.
He claimed that his family approved his association with the jihadi group. However, when contacted his mother was upset over her son's decision.
"My son asked permission for propagating Islam which I gave him. But I was not aware that he associated himself with the jihadi group," she said.
"After returning home, he told me that he has received militant training and wants to join jihad. I was disappointed and i told him you cannot go to Kashmir to fight till I'm alive," she said.
The claims made by the student contradicts Pakistan's Interior Minister Rehman Malik who had recently denied reports of existence of militant camps in PoK. Source: PTI
Foreigners are being trained in PoK militant camps
Foreigners are being trained in PoK militant camps: Report
London: Hundreds of university students, including foreigners are being trained in militant camps in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, which have become active again, to wage 'jihad' against India.
After a lull, several militant outfits have now again raised their heads and increased their activities in and around Muzaffarabad, capital of PoK, and pro-Jihad slogans can be seen on the walls of the city, BBC Urdu Service reported. A 25-year-old engineering student from Lahore, fresh from a training stint in one of camps told BBC from PoK capital Muzzaffarabad, said:"A large number of youths from Pakistani universities and abroad are undergoing training in PoK under supervision of a militant group to wage jihad against India."
The student, who identified himself as a Kashmiri, said he received two-month training in PoK after finishing his engineering course this year.
"Around 20 per cent youths in the training camps are from Kashmir and 10 per cent are from other countries... Majority of those receiving training are from Pakistan's Punjab province," he claimed.
He also said that many other students from his university have joined the militant training programme run by a tanzeem (group) located near Lahore, an apparent reference to Jamaat-ud-Dawa, which is headquartered at Murdike on the outskirts of the city.
He said a decision to send them to Kashmir will be taken by the Tanzeem's Amir.
"We could be sent to Kashmir or we could be stationed in Pakistan itself for propagating Islam," he said in response to a question.
He claimed that his family approved his association with the jihadi group. However, when contacted his mother was upset over her son's decision.
"My son asked permission for propagating Islam which I gave him. But I was not aware that he associated himself with the jihadi group," she said.
"After returning home, he told me that he has received militant training and wants to join jihad. I was disappointed and i told him you cannot go to Kashmir to fight till I'm alive," she said.
The claims made by the student contradicts Pakistan's Interior Minister Rehman Malik who had recently denied reports of existence of militant camps in PoK. Source: PTI
Foreigners are being trained in PoK militant camps
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Kashmir's Faultlines: Is the Army Demonised?
Kashmir’s faultlines September 29th, 2010
By S.K. Sinha , DC Correspondent
The Kashmir Valley has been burning for three months. Over 100 stone-pelting youth have got killed. Thanks to a governance deficit, both in Srinagar and Delhi, the situation appears out of control.
Zia-ul-Haq Islamised Pakistan and this spread to Kashmir. In 1990 there was ethnic cleansing of over three lakh Kashmiri Pandits and several dozen Hindu temples were destroyed, but the plight of Kashmiri Pandits was glossed over and there was a virtual blackout of information about the vandalising of dozens of temples. In 2007, to appease the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), the government took the bizarre decision of providing money for the families of terrorists killed in encounters with security forces. This does not happen elsewhere in India or anywhere else in the world.
To appease the National Conference (NC), the government is now considering its demand for autonomy — the Supreme Court, the Election Commission and the Comptroller and Auditor General would not have any jurisdiction in Kashmir, there would be an elected governor from the state and no Central services, like IAS and IPS. The PDP, under the garb of self-rule, wants dual currency and a joint state legislature with Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) in Kashmir. Perhaps then the “misguided” young boys in terrorist camps in PoK would also be allowed to return. All this will severely undermine India’s sovereignty in Kashmir...
The Army is being constantly demonised for human rights violations when its record is far superior to that of the US Army in Iraq and Afghanistan or the Pakistan Army in Baluchistan and Waziristan. Unlike them, we have never used airstrikes or artillery against militants in Kashmir. The Army has been prompt in action against human rights violators. Over the years, 1,514 cases against the Army were reported of which 1,470 were found to be false. Action was taken against 70 individuals, dismissing them from service and awarding imprisonment from two to 14 years. India has also been humane in dealing with secessionist leaders. Mr Syed Ali Shah Geelani, the veteran secessionist leader, suffering from cancer, was refused a visa by the US for medical treatment because of his terrorist connections. He went to Mumbai where Dr Sameer Kaul, a Kashmiri Pandit, operated on him, treating him with competence. On return to Srinagar, Mr Geelani said India is in illegal occupation of Kashmir and the international community should impose economic sanctions against her.
Gen. Musharraf ordered airstrikes in Baluchistan on the hideout of the veteran leader Akbar Bugti, who was killed. In Kashmir, instead of tough action, periodic troop withdrawals have taken place. Now there is talk of amending or scrapping the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. This brings to mind what Winston Churchill said: “An appeaser is one who feeds the crocodile, hoping that it will eat him last.”
The writ of the state must run in the Valley forthwith and further communalisation checked. Without curbing the freedom of the press, we should ensure that the media does not act as the mouthpiece of the secessionists. The law on sedition must be enforced. Among Kashmiri Muslims, not all are secessionists, but those who are need to be politically isolated from the rest. A political solution acceptable to all should be evolved through dialogue but this must be strictly within the framework of the Indian Constitution.
- The author, a retired lieutenant-general, was Vice-Chief of Army Staff and has served as governor of Assam and Jammu and Kashmir.
Extracted: Kashmir's Faullines: Deccan Chronicle
By S.K. Sinha , DC Correspondent
The Kashmir Valley has been burning for three months. Over 100 stone-pelting youth have got killed. Thanks to a governance deficit, both in Srinagar and Delhi, the situation appears out of control.
Zia-ul-Haq Islamised Pakistan and this spread to Kashmir. In 1990 there was ethnic cleansing of over three lakh Kashmiri Pandits and several dozen Hindu temples were destroyed, but the plight of Kashmiri Pandits was glossed over and there was a virtual blackout of information about the vandalising of dozens of temples. In 2007, to appease the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), the government took the bizarre decision of providing money for the families of terrorists killed in encounters with security forces. This does not happen elsewhere in India or anywhere else in the world.
To appease the National Conference (NC), the government is now considering its demand for autonomy — the Supreme Court, the Election Commission and the Comptroller and Auditor General would not have any jurisdiction in Kashmir, there would be an elected governor from the state and no Central services, like IAS and IPS. The PDP, under the garb of self-rule, wants dual currency and a joint state legislature with Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) in Kashmir. Perhaps then the “misguided” young boys in terrorist camps in PoK would also be allowed to return. All this will severely undermine India’s sovereignty in Kashmir...
The Army is being constantly demonised for human rights violations when its record is far superior to that of the US Army in Iraq and Afghanistan or the Pakistan Army in Baluchistan and Waziristan. Unlike them, we have never used airstrikes or artillery against militants in Kashmir. The Army has been prompt in action against human rights violators. Over the years, 1,514 cases against the Army were reported of which 1,470 were found to be false. Action was taken against 70 individuals, dismissing them from service and awarding imprisonment from two to 14 years. India has also been humane in dealing with secessionist leaders. Mr Syed Ali Shah Geelani, the veteran secessionist leader, suffering from cancer, was refused a visa by the US for medical treatment because of his terrorist connections. He went to Mumbai where Dr Sameer Kaul, a Kashmiri Pandit, operated on him, treating him with competence. On return to Srinagar, Mr Geelani said India is in illegal occupation of Kashmir and the international community should impose economic sanctions against her.
Gen. Musharraf ordered airstrikes in Baluchistan on the hideout of the veteran leader Akbar Bugti, who was killed. In Kashmir, instead of tough action, periodic troop withdrawals have taken place. Now there is talk of amending or scrapping the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. This brings to mind what Winston Churchill said: “An appeaser is one who feeds the crocodile, hoping that it will eat him last.”
The writ of the state must run in the Valley forthwith and further communalisation checked. Without curbing the freedom of the press, we should ensure that the media does not act as the mouthpiece of the secessionists. The law on sedition must be enforced. Among Kashmiri Muslims, not all are secessionists, but those who are need to be politically isolated from the rest. A political solution acceptable to all should be evolved through dialogue but this must be strictly within the framework of the Indian Constitution.
- The author, a retired lieutenant-general, was Vice-Chief of Army Staff and has served as governor of Assam and Jammu and Kashmir.
Extracted: Kashmir's Faullines: Deccan Chronicle
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
China wooing Dictators and Islamic Fundamentalists
Why China is wooing the jihadis, and what India should do
BHARAT VERMA
The spread of two authoritarian streams, Chinese communism and Islamic fundamentalism, in combination or otherwise, threaten the survival of democracies in Asia.
First, Beijing deftly sucked in most of the democracies in its economic orbit by making China a very cheap manufacturing destination of the world. This simultaneously created gigantic hard currency reserves and vast political influence.
Second, from the inflow of foreign direct investments, a modern lethal military machine was forged.
Third, Beijing skillfully invested in dictatorial or Islamic fundamentalist regimes in Asia like North Korea, Pakistan, and Myanmar.
On one hand, this boosts Pakistan and North Korea's capability to tie down democracies like India, South Korea and Japan without the necessity of China being involved overtly. On the other, by transferring sensitive technologies to these countries, China deflects the attention of major powers from itself and conveniently shifts the debate to the rogue nations clandestinely supported by it.
Click here to read the full analysis
BHARAT VERMA
The spread of two authoritarian streams, Chinese communism and Islamic fundamentalism, in combination or otherwise, threaten the survival of democracies in Asia.
First, Beijing deftly sucked in most of the democracies in its economic orbit by making China a very cheap manufacturing destination of the world. This simultaneously created gigantic hard currency reserves and vast political influence.
Second, from the inflow of foreign direct investments, a modern lethal military machine was forged.
Third, Beijing skillfully invested in dictatorial or Islamic fundamentalist regimes in Asia like North Korea, Pakistan, and Myanmar.
On one hand, this boosts Pakistan and North Korea's capability to tie down democracies like India, South Korea and Japan without the necessity of China being involved overtly. On the other, by transferring sensitive technologies to these countries, China deflects the attention of major powers from itself and conveniently shifts the debate to the rogue nations clandestinely supported by it.
Click here to read the full analysis
Saturday, September 11, 2010
False cases against security forces
1,473 "false" cases of HR violation against security forces By Abhijit C Chandra
Bhopal, Sep 10 (UNI) Slamming the proposed dilution of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), an Indian Army veteran who combated insurgencies for more than half of his 40 years' service points out that --since 1990 -- as many as 1,473 of 1,511 cases of human rights (HR) violation or abuse levelled against security forces (SF) personnel have been proved false.
"Each case was investigated thoroughly -- including by the National Human Rights Commission. In the remaining cases, 104 personnel were punished," Major-General (Retd) Aditya J B Jaini, Ati Vishisht Seva Medal, told UNI.
He was Senior Directing Staff (Army) at the National Defence College, New Delhi, before retirement in 2003.
Enumerating grim statistics, the veteran said, "the number of SF personnel killed by terrorists in Jammu and Kashmir between 1988 and July 5, 2010 is 5,962. Since 1992, the number of officers and men martyred fighting insurgents in Manipur is 939, Asom 783, Meghalaya 81 and Mizoram 22."
Likewise, SF personnel slain fighting naxals since 2005 to July 10, 2010 is 1,226. This year, 204 SF personnel were killed till July 5.
"If SF personnel were 'murderers' they would not have so many of their own killed at the hands of insurgents. Besides, AFSPA enshrines the important caveat that Army personnel can be prosecuted with central sanction. Therefore there is no blanket immunity," said Maj-Gen Jaini.
Dispensation of punishment -- in cases of HR violation -- where any breach is identified, is the "fastest in the Army" as compared to civil courts where cases may linger for years.
The Act is not meant to place the Army or SF above the law but to empower them to function effectively while dealing with situations that have defied resolution through normal means like intervention by civil authority, police action and calls by politicians to maintain calm, he said.
"In counter-insurgency operations, the Army adheres to the cardinal principle of use of minimum force as people we operate against are not enemy but our own countrymen who are misguided. Had it not been so, the rate of casualties to our troops would not have been so high," the veteran explained.
Bhopal, Sep 10 (UNI) Slamming the proposed dilution of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), an Indian Army veteran who combated insurgencies for more than half of his 40 years' service points out that --since 1990 -- as many as 1,473 of 1,511 cases of human rights (HR) violation or abuse levelled against security forces (SF) personnel have been proved false.
"Each case was investigated thoroughly -- including by the National Human Rights Commission. In the remaining cases, 104 personnel were punished," Major-General (Retd) Aditya J B Jaini, Ati Vishisht Seva Medal, told UNI.
He was Senior Directing Staff (Army) at the National Defence College, New Delhi, before retirement in 2003.
Enumerating grim statistics, the veteran said, "the number of SF personnel killed by terrorists in Jammu and Kashmir between 1988 and July 5, 2010 is 5,962. Since 1992, the number of officers and men martyred fighting insurgents in Manipur is 939, Asom 783, Meghalaya 81 and Mizoram 22."
Likewise, SF personnel slain fighting naxals since 2005 to July 10, 2010 is 1,226. This year, 204 SF personnel were killed till July 5.
"If SF personnel were 'murderers' they would not have so many of their own killed at the hands of insurgents. Besides, AFSPA enshrines the important caveat that Army personnel can be prosecuted with central sanction. Therefore there is no blanket immunity," said Maj-Gen Jaini.
Dispensation of punishment -- in cases of HR violation -- where any breach is identified, is the "fastest in the Army" as compared to civil courts where cases may linger for years.
The Act is not meant to place the Army or SF above the law but to empower them to function effectively while dealing with situations that have defied resolution through normal means like intervention by civil authority, police action and calls by politicians to maintain calm, he said.
"In counter-insurgency operations, the Army adheres to the cardinal principle of use of minimum force as people we operate against are not enemy but our own countrymen who are misguided. Had it not been so, the rate of casualties to our troops would not have been so high," the veteran explained.
Friday, August 27, 2010
China in damage-control mode after stopping Indian General's visit
NDTV Correspondent, Updated: August 27, 2010 18:04 IST New Delhi: India is fuming over China rejecting a proposal by the Ministry of Defence to send a top Indian Army officer on a visit to that country. China said he was unwelcome because he is serving in Jammu and Kashmir, and now Beijing seems to be in damage-control mode.
New Delhi has made clear that China saying Lt-General B S Jaswal, the Army's General Officer Commander-in-Chief, Northern Command, was not welcome is unacceptable, government sources said.
Ministry of Defence sources said Beijing had refused to allow Gen Jaswal's visit because he "controlled" Jammu & Kashmir, a state that China maintains is disputed. Gen Jaswal's visit was to have been a regular high-level exchange trip to China this August.
The Chinese ambassador to India was summoned to the Ministry of External Affairs. He had a 25-minute meeting with the Joint Secretary in charge of China.
China is now sending a senior Colonel (equivalent to a Brigadier in the Indian Army) to sort out the matter in the first week of September. He will meet a Joint Secretary in the Ministry of Defence in charge of international cooperation.
CHINA'S POK LINKS WORRYING:
Government sources also said three Chinese army officers had been denied visa after the Jaswal incident and pointed out that J&K was as important to India as Tibet was to China. The sources also said that China's linkages with Pakistan occupied Kashmir were worrying.
The sources said Beijing possibly did not expect India to react strongly. India is waiting and watching. Defence ties are on hold, but have not been cancelled, the sources said.
The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) has said dialogue with China on these issues is on. India, the ministry said, valued its exchanges with China and there must be sensitivity to each other's concerns.
While the MEA is inclined to cautiously downplay the row, the Army and the Ministry of Defence are furious, letting the Chinese know bluntly that this is unacceptable.
Stating firmly that India did not accept China's stand on Jaswal, government sources said India-China relations were very complex and there were mechanisms in place to overcome obstacles. This issue had added another complex dimension.
The sources said fair resolution of this issue would be achieved if the Chinese stopped issuing stapled visas.
Meanwhile, both Congress and BJP have reacted to this controversy.
"I am sure the MEA will take cognizance of this matter. Both India and China must respect the sensitivities of each other," said Congress spokesperson Manish Tewari.
The BJP wants India to take it up at the highest level. "The MEA should urgently take up this issue with China. It is a very serious matter. India should express displeasure," said BJP's Prakash Jawadekar.
Chronology:
China rejected the visit and cited the following reasons:
China in damage-control mode after stopping Indian General's visit
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Channelise manpower from Armed Forces to PMF: expert
Respected Sir,
The following report-- released by the United News of India news agency on August 26, 2010 -- is for your kind perusal and the third in a series.
With regards,
Abhi
Channelise manpower from Armed Forces to PMF: expert By Abhijit C Chandra
Bhopal, Aug 26 (UNI) The ideal solution to naxal violence lies in channelising of manpower from the Armed Forces to the Para-Military Forces (PMF), opines an Indian Army veteran who took part in the Kargil conflict and superannuated after becoming a combat casualty while commanding a brigade on the Line of Control during Operation Rakshak-II.
"Such channelising must be in terms of short service officers and people leaving after completion of the colour service period," Brigadier (Retd) PT Gangadharan – who served in the Brigade of Guards (Infantry)– told UNI.
Pointing out that a sizable number of short service officers and approximately 50,000 men leave the service every year, the veteran– who possesses a doctorate in Strategic Studies– added that the measure will bring in an Armed Forces culture and ethos in the PMF and at the same time add teeth to the organisation, thus making them an effective tool in the hands of the nation.
"The induction will be the most cost-effective means available. Additionally, it will ensure employment to all ranks up to 60 years; a recommendation even made by the Sixth Pay Commission. Guaranteed employment up to 60 will ensure that people volunteer for the Armed Forces particularly in the officers' cadre where there is acute shortage. It is a win-win situation for both," said the Brigadier who was Staff Officer, Army, in the Military Wing of the Cabinet Secretariat.
Till such time "we create a force" of that nature, the Army can continue to provide help for training in Army institutions, he said while alleging that the major weaknesses of the PMF are poor leadership and lack of training.
"All other issues are attendant problems like psychological conditioning, equipment, intelligence etc, which will readily be addressed if the major issues are attended to," felt Brig Gangadharan who was an instructor at the Indian Military Academy, Dehradun.
The Army is not meant for deployment against internal disturbances, he said while adding that, "we already have committed over 3 lakh troops for internal security tasks in Jammu and Kashmir and the Northeast and now stand overstretched. The officers' strength at the unit level is less than 50 per cent. The present state is not healthy at all."
The following report-- released by the United News of India news agency on August 26, 2010 -- is for your kind perusal and the third in a series.
With regards,
Abhi
Channelise manpower from Armed Forces to PMF: expert By Abhijit C Chandra
Bhopal, Aug 26 (UNI) The ideal solution to naxal violence lies in channelising of manpower from the Armed Forces to the Para-Military Forces (PMF), opines an Indian Army veteran who took part in the Kargil conflict and superannuated after becoming a combat casualty while commanding a brigade on the Line of Control during Operation Rakshak-II.
"Such channelising must be in terms of short service officers and people leaving after completion of the colour service period," Brigadier (Retd) PT Gangadharan – who served in the Brigade of Guards (Infantry)– told UNI.
Pointing out that a sizable number of short service officers and approximately 50,000 men leave the service every year, the veteran– who possesses a doctorate in Strategic Studies– added that the measure will bring in an Armed Forces culture and ethos in the PMF and at the same time add teeth to the organisation, thus making them an effective tool in the hands of the nation.
"The induction will be the most cost-effective means available. Additionally, it will ensure employment to all ranks up to 60 years; a recommendation even made by the Sixth Pay Commission. Guaranteed employment up to 60 will ensure that people volunteer for the Armed Forces particularly in the officers' cadre where there is acute shortage. It is a win-win situation for both," said the Brigadier who was Staff Officer, Army, in the Military Wing of the Cabinet Secretariat.
Till such time "we create a force" of that nature, the Army can continue to provide help for training in Army institutions, he said while alleging that the major weaknesses of the PMF are poor leadership and lack of training.
"All other issues are attendant problems like psychological conditioning, equipment, intelligence etc, which will readily be addressed if the major issues are attended to," felt Brig Gangadharan who was an instructor at the Indian Military Academy, Dehradun.
The Army is not meant for deployment against internal disturbances, he said while adding that, "we already have committed over 3 lakh troops for internal security tasks in Jammu and Kashmir and the Northeast and now stand overstretched. The officers' strength at the unit level is less than 50 per cent. The present state is not healthy at all."
Sunday, August 1, 2010
National Security: Pakistan exposed
The latest documents had much to reveal about Pakistan's complicity in terror network in the region. This led to some patriotic drum-beating in India – as if Pakistan had been caught with its pants down and now America would be forced to act.
Nothing of the kind will happen. America has been seeing Pakistan with its pants down for quite a while. For example, it said more than once in recent weeks that Osama bin Laden was living in Pakistan. Blandly Pakistan denied it. And America let it rest at that. Pakistan is for America a pill that is too bitter to swallow and too sweet to spit out, a classic diplomatic trap.
US trapped by ISI; advantage Taliban
The United States must demand that Pakistan state unequivocally whether it is “with us or against us”. For nearly a decade now, their caveat-linked policy has cost America untold harm, billions of dollars and hundreds of dead citizens. The latest gaudy gush from WikiLeaks will leave the White House, the Pentagon, and the State Department soggy and irritable for many days. But one aspect of the leak-that concerning Pakistan’s brazenly unstinting support for the insurgency in Afghanistan — should be news to absolutely no one.
Pakistan a double dealing nation by Tunku Varadarajan
The biggest ever leak of military documents — will it lead to course correction? Quite a question given the layers of dubious pragmatism at the basis of the US-Pakistan relationship. Besides, how do you wake up somebody pretending to sleep? What does the 90,000-plus classified documents on Afghan War show? Two things are the most obvious-the Americans have lost the script in the Hindu Kush and that Pakistan has emerged as a full-fledged terrorist State, supporting and sustaining terrorist groups that are capable of carrying out worst kinds of nightmarish attacks in any parts of the world today.
A decade of lies and murders by Wilson John
Within the global defence industry, all eyes are now on India, which has been sharply increasing its defence budget as it seeks to modernise its armed forces.
This year India’s budget for new armaments was increased by 25.46 per cent from last year’s level of $13bn, and foreign companies are trying to get a piece of it.
To exploit the potential in India’s military market, defence companies such as BAE, Sikorsky, Lockheed Martin and EADS, have set up joint ventures with Indian private sector companies for local armament production.
So far, though, the investments are small, and the ventures are focused mainly on basic equipment, such as bullet proof trucks and aircraft parts, rather than the high-end, cutting edge defence technology India so desperately craves.
In New Delhi, policy-makers are now busily debating whether raising its 26 per cent cap on foreign direct investment in defence could help attract even more capital, and persuade Western defence companies to introduce more cutting edge technology into their local Indian ventures. However, the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry has just weighed in - airing its serious doubts.
Part of the problem is the US still has tough controls on the export of high technology to India - a legacy of the days when India was still considered a nuclear pariah, and subjected to punitive sanctions. Despite all the high blown talk of a US-India strategic partnership, the export controls remain.
Selling arms to India: between a rock and a hard place by Amy Kazmin
Nothing of the kind will happen. America has been seeing Pakistan with its pants down for quite a while. For example, it said more than once in recent weeks that Osama bin Laden was living in Pakistan. Blandly Pakistan denied it. And America let it rest at that. Pakistan is for America a pill that is too bitter to swallow and too sweet to spit out, a classic diplomatic trap.
US trapped by ISI; advantage Taliban
The United States must demand that Pakistan state unequivocally whether it is “with us or against us”. For nearly a decade now, their caveat-linked policy has cost America untold harm, billions of dollars and hundreds of dead citizens. The latest gaudy gush from WikiLeaks will leave the White House, the Pentagon, and the State Department soggy and irritable for many days. But one aspect of the leak-that concerning Pakistan’s brazenly unstinting support for the insurgency in Afghanistan — should be news to absolutely no one.
Pakistan a double dealing nation by Tunku Varadarajan
The biggest ever leak of military documents — will it lead to course correction? Quite a question given the layers of dubious pragmatism at the basis of the US-Pakistan relationship. Besides, how do you wake up somebody pretending to sleep? What does the 90,000-plus classified documents on Afghan War show? Two things are the most obvious-the Americans have lost the script in the Hindu Kush and that Pakistan has emerged as a full-fledged terrorist State, supporting and sustaining terrorist groups that are capable of carrying out worst kinds of nightmarish attacks in any parts of the world today.
A decade of lies and murders by Wilson John
Within the global defence industry, all eyes are now on India, which has been sharply increasing its defence budget as it seeks to modernise its armed forces.
This year India’s budget for new armaments was increased by 25.46 per cent from last year’s level of $13bn, and foreign companies are trying to get a piece of it.
To exploit the potential in India’s military market, defence companies such as BAE, Sikorsky, Lockheed Martin and EADS, have set up joint ventures with Indian private sector companies for local armament production.
So far, though, the investments are small, and the ventures are focused mainly on basic equipment, such as bullet proof trucks and aircraft parts, rather than the high-end, cutting edge defence technology India so desperately craves.
In New Delhi, policy-makers are now busily debating whether raising its 26 per cent cap on foreign direct investment in defence could help attract even more capital, and persuade Western defence companies to introduce more cutting edge technology into their local Indian ventures. However, the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry has just weighed in - airing its serious doubts.
Part of the problem is the US still has tough controls on the export of high technology to India - a legacy of the days when India was still considered a nuclear pariah, and subjected to punitive sanctions. Despite all the high blown talk of a US-India strategic partnership, the export controls remain.
Selling arms to India: between a rock and a hard place by Amy Kazmin
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Consequences of Pakistan racing towards a failed state
Murder on the Khyber Pass express
President Joe Biden, India, China and Iran. They are all terrified of facing a failed state with nuclear weapons, and prefer a functioning but treacherous one.
The released papers - described as one of the biggest leaks in US military history - detail military operations between 2004 and 2009.
The "everybody" involved in this case seems to exclude whomever actually leaked the documents, presumably some element of the US military, which has to absorb the effect of Pakistan's double game in the region in the form of body bags for enlisted men and shattered reputations for commanders. Like the Rolling Stone magazine interviews that led to the firing of General Stanley McChrystal, the America commander in Afghanistan, the WikiLeaks documents suggest a degree of disaffection of the American military with civilian leaders deeper than anything in living memory.
To exit the Afghan quagmire in a less than humiliating fashion, the United States requires Pakistani help to persuade the Taliban not to take immediate advantage of the American departure and evoke Vietnam-era scenes of helicopters on the American Embassy roof. The politicians in Washington know they have lost and have conceded to the Taliban a role in a post-American Afghanistan. They can only hope that once the country plunges into chaos, the public will have moved onto other themes, much as it did after the Bill Clinton administration put Kosovo into the hands of a gang of dubious Albanians in 1998.
India does not want America to call Pakistan to account. In the worst case, Pakistan might choose to support the Taliban and other terrorist organizations - including Kashmiri irredentists - openly rather than covertly. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, of whom the Economist on July 25 wrote "the strength of his coalition depends largely on how weak he is as Prime Minister", does not want to confront Pakistan. If Pakistan's support for anti-Indian terrorism became undeniable, India would have to act, and action is the last thing the Congress party-led coalition in New Delhi wants to consider.
China has no interest in destabilization in Pakistan; on the contrary, Beijing lives in fear that radical Islamists in Pakistan might infect its own restive Uyghurs. And Iran, which shares the fractious Balochis with Pakistan on their common border, lives in terror that a destabilized Pakistan would free the Balochis to make trouble.
Balochis comprise little over 2% of Iran's population, but they have demonstrated their talent at bomb-making on several recent occasions, including the bombing this month of a Shi'ite mosque in southeastern Iran in which 28 people were killed and hundreds wounded. Iran has accused Pakistan of sponsoring Balochi terror attacks, but intelligence community sources in Washington insist that the Pakistanis would never be so reckless as to put bombs into Balochi hands.
With 170 million people - more than Russia - and a nuclear arsenal, Pakistan is too big to fail, that is, too big to fail without traumatic consequences for its neighbors. Whether it can be kept from failure is questionable. Half its people live on less than a dollar day, and half are illiterate. It is riven by religious differences - a seventh of Pakistanis are Shi'ite - as well as ethnic ones.
Read more:
Murder on the Khyber Pass express: courtesy Asia Times Online
By Spengler
President Joe Biden, India, China and Iran. They are all terrified of facing a failed state with nuclear weapons, and prefer a functioning but treacherous one.
The released papers - described as one of the biggest leaks in US military history - detail military operations between 2004 and 2009.
The "everybody" involved in this case seems to exclude whomever actually leaked the documents, presumably some element of the US military, which has to absorb the effect of Pakistan's double game in the region in the form of body bags for enlisted men and shattered reputations for commanders. Like the Rolling Stone magazine interviews that led to the firing of General Stanley McChrystal, the America commander in Afghanistan, the WikiLeaks documents suggest a degree of disaffection of the American military with civilian leaders deeper than anything in living memory.
To exit the Afghan quagmire in a less than humiliating fashion, the United States requires Pakistani help to persuade the Taliban not to take immediate advantage of the American departure and evoke Vietnam-era scenes of helicopters on the American Embassy roof. The politicians in Washington know they have lost and have conceded to the Taliban a role in a post-American Afghanistan. They can only hope that once the country plunges into chaos, the public will have moved onto other themes, much as it did after the Bill Clinton administration put Kosovo into the hands of a gang of dubious Albanians in 1998.
India does not want America to call Pakistan to account. In the worst case, Pakistan might choose to support the Taliban and other terrorist organizations - including Kashmiri irredentists - openly rather than covertly. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, of whom the Economist on July 25 wrote "the strength of his coalition depends largely on how weak he is as Prime Minister", does not want to confront Pakistan. If Pakistan's support for anti-Indian terrorism became undeniable, India would have to act, and action is the last thing the Congress party-led coalition in New Delhi wants to consider.
China has no interest in destabilization in Pakistan; on the contrary, Beijing lives in fear that radical Islamists in Pakistan might infect its own restive Uyghurs. And Iran, which shares the fractious Balochis with Pakistan on their common border, lives in terror that a destabilized Pakistan would free the Balochis to make trouble.
Balochis comprise little over 2% of Iran's population, but they have demonstrated their talent at bomb-making on several recent occasions, including the bombing this month of a Shi'ite mosque in southeastern Iran in which 28 people were killed and hundreds wounded. Iran has accused Pakistan of sponsoring Balochi terror attacks, but intelligence community sources in Washington insist that the Pakistanis would never be so reckless as to put bombs into Balochi hands.
With 170 million people - more than Russia - and a nuclear arsenal, Pakistan is too big to fail, that is, too big to fail without traumatic consequences for its neighbors. Whether it can be kept from failure is questionable. Half its people live on less than a dollar day, and half are illiterate. It is riven by religious differences - a seventh of Pakistanis are Shi'ite - as well as ethnic ones.
Read more:
Murder on the Khyber Pass express: courtesy Asia Times Online
By Spengler
Monday, July 26, 2010
Manoeuvring of Pakistan Army High Command
Chief’s Choreography– Manoeuvring of Pakistan Army High Command by
Hamid Hussain
‘A general who advances without coveting fame and retreats without fearing the disgrace, whose only thought is to protect his country and do good service to his sovereign, is the jewel of the kingdom.’ Sun Tzu
The Pakistani army is the dominant institution of the country and it has significant control over the decision making process despite the installation of a democratic set up. In the last two years of General Pervez Mussharraf’s rule, the army’s reputation hit rock bottom. General Ashfaq Pervez Kiyani was appointed Chief of Army Staff (COAS) in October 2007 and over the last two years he has worked quietly to reassert the control of military high command over all-important areas.
The Army as an institution has always preferred to have a veto power on key policy decisions while not having the responsibility to directly manage a fragile and complex state and society.
Kiyani was faced with three challenging tasks when he took control of Pakistan army. First and foremost was getting control of the army itself by promoting, appointing and posting senior officers to key positions (details of these changes are discussed in a previous analysis, Hamid Hussain. Balancing Act – Change of Guard at Pakistan Army, January 2008 and Hamid Hussain. Careful Choreography - Next Round of Senior Officer Promotions & Postings in Pakistan Army, September 2008).
He moved out several senior officers put in place at key positions by General Pervez Mussharraf prior to handing over charge of the army to Kiyani (details of these changes by General Mussharraf prior to elevation of General Kiyani are discussed in a previous analysis, Hamid Hussain. Shuffling the Deck, September 2007). When Kiyani completed the process, Mussharraf was an isolated man and was pushed out of President House by the new civilian set up once a signal was given from army’s General Headquarter (GHQ) that they would not come to the rescue of Mussharraf.
It was reminiscent of a previous episode when in 1969 Field Marshal Ayub Khan faced with popular resentment was asked to leave President House by his own protégé Commander-in- Chief General Agha Muhammad Yahya Khan once he got his own team in place.
The second challenging task for Kiyani was to shift the balance back to the army in dealing with United States. Traditionally, the U.S. Democratic Party favours working with the political forces of a country rather than relying solely on military leaders. When the Democrats with a majority in the U.S. Congress also got their man in the White House, there was a shift towards more constructive engagement with the political leaders of Pakistan.
The Kerry-Lugar bill was the outcome of this shift whereby future U.S. aid was geared more towards civilian sector. In addition, more direct funding was to be provided for strengthening of police and paramilitary forces of the country. The ultimate snub was a clause, which warned the Pakistani Army to keep its hands away from all levers of power and not to subvert political process. Some Pakistanis especially military officers allege that this clause was inserted at the request of the Pakistani political leadership in an effort to strengthen their hand against an omnipresent military. Outraged military brass publicly snubbed United States as well as Pakistan’s political leaders for committing this blasphemous act. In private conversations with visiting military and civilian leaders of United States, Kiyani made this point very clear. The ace card, which the military uses during its independent negotiations with foreign countries, and especially with the United States, is its complete control of country’s nuclear assets.
Washington’s main interaction with Islamabad is in the context of rise of extremism in Pakistan, conflict in Afghanistan and concern about security of Pakistan’s nuclear assets. All these areas are exclusively handled by the military therefore it was no surprise that Washington gave in quite easily accepting the dominant role of military in all affairs. This was a forgone conclusion in view of the nature of the history of U.S.-Pakistan relations. Similar understanding was reached with previous Pakistani military leaders including Field Marshal Ayub Khan (1958-69), General Muhammad Zia–ul-Haq (1977-88) and General Pervez Mussharraf (1999-2008).
The third task of General Kiyani was to work with political leaders in a way to get their support for ongoing military operations in tribal areas and Swat, but not allowing them to encroach on military’s domain. Kiyani has performed all these tasks deftly securing the military’s institutional interests without showing his hand. No wonder that in some circles he is dubbed as ‘master manipulator’ and a master of ‘poker face’. Many people interacting with him admit that it is very hard to guess what is on his mind as he shows no emotions and chooses very few words to express himself.
Kiyani will be retiring in November 2010 and now his main focus is on the coming change in the army’s top cadres. It is in this context that President Asif Ali Zardari comes into the picture. It is quite clear by now that the president will not likely win any popularity contest in Pakistan. The Army in general has no respect for him either. This is the main reason that president is not invited to visit any military installation. However, in the present set up with the president as supreme commander of armed forces holds the authority to appoint service chiefs. The Army does not want him to appoint the next army chief and this factor is contributing to increased pressure on the president from all quarters. The Army wants that the authority to appoint the army chief should revert back to the prime minister.
Recently, pressure was exerted on president to give back the chairmanship of National Command Authority (NCA); a body responsible for nuclear and missile assets to the prime minister. The military has the keys to Pakistan’s ‘crown jewels’ and no civilian leader is allowed in this privileged club. The prime minister may chair the NCA but has no real say about country’s nuclear and missile program. These programs are under the firm control of the military with the Strategic Planning Division (SPD).
For his part, President Zardari believes that current campaign against him has the tacit blessing of the GHQ. This mutual mistrust and suspicion is aggravating relations between two important pillars of the state and in my view both parties have missed the narrow window of opportunity by their own ill thought actions. To some extent President Zardari has kept his side of the bargain by fully supporting the army in its operations against militants. The military could have used the good offices of the president to de-escalate the alarming situation in Baluchistan in view of good relations between the Pakistan Peoples Party and the Baluch nationalist leadership.
The ultimate loser in case of continuing strained relations between army and president will be the state of Pakistan.
In view of the peculiar circumstances, General Kiyani with his three-year tenure will end up promoting and posting a record number of senior officers. The first round of promotions and postings was done in 2008 when a number of key positions at lieutenant general and major general ranks were shuffled. In the fall of 2008, six officers were promoted to lieutenant general rank and in the fall of 2009, four additional officers were promoted to the same rank (prior to announcement of these promotions, an analysis of coming promotions was done in Hamid Hussain. Chief’s Call - Next Round of Promotions in Pakistan Army, July 2009) In early April 2010, five lieutenant generals will be retiring after completing their tenures thus opening five additional slots. In addition, due to an unprecedented situation his year, four additional lieutenant generals will be retiring as they will be reaching the age limit of 58 years although they have at least 2-3 years left as far as tenure is concerned. These officers are currently holding important posts including Chief of General Staff (CGS), Quarter Master General (QMG), DGISI and Karachi Corps Commander.
In the next few months, the whole senior brass of the Pakistan army will be changed. Newly promoted officers will be posted to key positions. In the last few months, new corps commanders have already taken command of Bahawalpur and Multan corps. New corps commanders will be appointed to important Mangla, Lahore, Karachi and Peshawar corps. In addition, we will also see a new batch of Principal Staff Officers (PSOs) at GHQ including Military Secretary (MS), CGS and QMG. Most of these promotions and postings are a routine matter in any army including Pakistan army, but in view of the extraordinary powers of the military in all spheres as well as entitlements which come with these ranks, these changes become topic of speculation as well as lobbying and intense rivalry and competition among contending officers. Most of the time, it leaves a lot of bitterness and strained personal relations among senior officers (a cursory look at the memoirs and recent disclosures on electronic media by several senior officers provides ample proof of this conclusion).
In my view this is the single most important factor responsible for hampering professional development of senior officer corps of Pakistan army. The majority of senior officers are busy in this lobbying effort and engage in too much of socialization with the right group taking away the precious time, which could be used, for professional development and reading serious military affairs.
The most important event of 2010 will be the appointment of the army chief in the winter of 2010. Beleaguered President Zardari knows very well that he has only one card left in his hand and that is the authority to appoint the army chief. If he gives back this authority to prime minister, he will be a lame duck president. Currently, the army is happy to see the judiciary and media taking on the president thus keeping its own hands clean. The Army high command feels that an isolated president busy fighting his own battles against media, judiciary and political opponents will have less desire and time to interfere with military matters.
The Army is in complete control of president’s security and essentially controls all movements of the president as well as access of people to him. They feel this step is essential to prevent the president from making direct contacts with senior military officers. There is lot of competition and rivalry among senior officers for the important post of army chief and president being a shrewd person can play this game quite well.
The military hierarchy wants to continue with the current system and has working relations with prime minister and other political parties as long as long as the president is kept at a safe distance or preferably removed. Someone is busy doing the homework and it is no surprise that in January 2010, parliament’s constitutional reforms committee agreed to transfer the authority of appointing the service chiefs from the head of state to the head of government by amending article 243 of the constitution. If this change goes through then the president will bound to consult the prime minister before appointing the chiefs of the army, the navy and the air force. The decision was taken unanimously which means that all political parties were on board. The committee rejected two suggestions; first one dealing with the issue that the service chiefs should be appointed after parliamentary approval and second that the service chiefs should not be given extensions and should be retired after completing their term in office.
Despite all his shortcomings, the elections were a fair process and gave Pakistanis an unprecedented opportunity to elect the president and it would be unwise to try to remove him by unconstitutional means. The only way president can be removed is by impeachment and if that cannot be done then he is bound to react if he is provoked beyond certain limits. He may not be the smartest chap in the room but he can surely do a lot of damage in view of some powers in his hands.
The military has probably war gamed all the likely scenarios and also covered some administrative bases. The Secretary of the Ministry of Defence usually signs off the final official notification issued by the president in the appointment of the army chief. The current defence secretary is retired lieutenant general Syed Athar Ali and in the worst case scenario is that he maybe the last stumbling block (in 1999 coup, then defence secretary retired lieutenant general Iftikhar Ali Khan was given the file of prime minister’s orders of replacing General Pervez Mussharraf for his signature and official notification. Iftikhar played safely and went to his office with the file but didn’t sign it. He was no fool and was expecting some reaction from the senior brass. He waited to see which way things settle. This point was also not lost on officers involved in the coup. A military intelligence officer was sent to pick up the Defence Secretary and he was taken to the military operations directorate, which was the centre from where the coup was being coordinated. )
General Kiyani has two possible options. First option is that he reaches an understanding with President Zardari where he gets a one-year extension as army chief. If Kiyani is not considering this option then he will try to arrange the cards in such a way that his choice for army chief’s post has the best chance in the winter of 2010. Most likely his choice is current DGISI Lieutenant General Ahmad Shuja Pasha. The problem is that in the normal course of action Pasha will be retiring in March 2010 (the tenure for a lieutenant general is three years in the rank or reaching the age of 58 whichever comes first). Pasha has less than a year in the rank but will be reaching the age limit in March 2010, eight months before the retirement of General Kiyani. This impediment can be overcome if Pasha is given one-year extension of service, which will make him leading contender for chief’s post in coming winter.
Kiyani may be thinking on these lines as retirement date of current corps commander of Peshawar based XI Corps Lieutenant General Masood Aslam was in September 2009 but he has been asked to continue in view of ongoing operations in North West Frontier Province (N.W.F.P.) under his command. This may have been done to set the precedent so that no one objects if extension is given to Pasha. If Pasha is given an extension of service in the next 2-3 weeks then this will clearly indicate that Kiyani wants him to be the next chief. The other reason to allow Aslam to continue may be the fact that Kiyani has already selected the individual to command Peshawar corps but the officer is waiting in the wings at major general rank. In early April 2010, in the next round of promotions this desired officer maybe promoted to lieutenant general rank and then posted to command Peshawar Corps.
In my view, two possible contenders for this post are Major General Tariq Khan (if he survives internal fights and pass medical fitness) and Major General Waheed Arshad. In my view, Tariq will be a better choice as he has been in the thick of the battle for the last few years; first as General Officer Commanding (GOC) of a division which operated in Waziristan and then as Inspector General of Frontier Corps (IGFC) of N.W.F.P.; paramilitary force operating against militants in tribal areas along with regular troops. There is room for criticism for some of his operational plans but he deserves some credit for handling an extremely difficult situation in N.W.F.P. in 2008-09 and pushing back militants from major centres.
Serious contenders for army chief post are now only three officers; Lt. General Khalid Shamim Wayen (Quetta corps commander), Lt. General Nadeem Taj (Gujranwala corps commander) and Lt. General Ahmad Shuja Pasha (if he gets an extension prior to his retirement. Another thing going against Pasha is that he has not commanded a corps; usually a pre-requisite for army chief post contender. Kiyani after giving him extension can transfer him to the command of a corps for few months thus fulfilling this criteria but this aberration will be quite obvious and may not sit well with many officers). Lt. General Muhammad Yusuf is also a senior officer but in my view he is out of the race when Kiyani recently brought him in as president of National Defence University from Bahawalpur Corps.
If Kiyani is thinking that after handing over the charge to next man he will hit the golf course then I see no problem. However, if he is thinking about some role for himself then there is potential for conflict even if Kiyani’s own hand picked man is selected. To prove this point one need to look at two exhibits. Exhibit A is of General Agha Muhammad Yahya Khan; groomed and selected by Field Marshal Ayub Khan who sent Ayub packing in a matter of hours and Exhibit B is how General Kiyani; groomed and hand picked by General Pervez Mussharraf facilitated the departure of the later out of President House when he became a liability to military’s institutional interests.
If Kiyani is thinking about some continuing role for himself then his only choice is to get himself selected as Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee (CJCSC) prior to his retirement. There is no problem in pursuing this course, as current CJCSC General Tariq Majid will be retiring in October 2010, few weeks before Kiyani’s retirement. CJCSC is essentially a ceremonial post with no real power. Kiyani knows very well that once appointed, the army chief is the boss and everyone looks to him and who can understand this better than Kiyani in view of his special relations with former army chief General Mussharraf over the last several years?
If Kiyani is looking at this option then he will definitely want to increase the power of CJCSC. One choice could be to have CJCSC sit on the promotion board of senior officers of all three services arguing that being the senior most officers overseeing all three services it is quite natural for him to have these powers. Senior officers in addition to army chief have to look towards CJCSC also thus increasing his influence. If CJCSC is given a say in selection of service chiefs and promotion of senior officers then he can swing things in his favour at two important forums; the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee and NCA thus directly influencing the decision making process with some weight behind him. This will invariably dilute the power of army chief.
In my view this is a bad option because it will inevitably result in clash between army chief and CJCSC. Once a new army chief is selected, he should be in charge of running his own organization. However, this power should not be arbitrary and absolute but tempered with restraint and geared towards institutional rather than personal interests. It is important to focus on working relations between different centres of power inside the military i.e. corps commanders and heads of military’s intelligence organizations as well as balance of power between military and civilian authority. Swinging from one extreme to the other will add instability to an already precarious situation.
The senior ranks of the army are not monolithic and there are personal, service arms, ethnic and social groupings inside the army. These differences need to be taken into account when important decisions are being considered as far as army is concerned. People can have different perspectives as well as preferences and this is an accepted factor as far as selection of senior officers is concerned. However, institutional interests must be held above personal wishes. Lieutenant General Masood Aslam should have retired on his due date and allowing him to continue at current post will cause resentment among officers down the line. He has performed to the best of his abilities in a difficult time and military operations under his command should be evaluated carefully. In some areas he has done well while in others things could have been better. In addition, he has gone through a personal tragedy when his young son was killed in attack on the mosque in Rawalpindi in December 2009. He has kept his composure and continued the task but we are all humans and this was one more reason that he should have been given farewell on time.
On the same note, I am of the view that no extension should be given to any officer. In the past, this issue caused resentment and breakdown of even professional relations between senior officers. It gives the impression of favouritism and tinkering with the accepted norms to push a particular officer and creates resentment among officer corps.
The playing field should be level as far as promotion to senior ranks and selection of army chief is concerned. In my view normal institutional process should be allowed to function and it is not appropriate to tinker with extensions, promotions and postings to push favourites. We all know very well that modern armies are large bureaucracies, which encourage conformation for smooth function of the organization.
The only test for a general is war and nothing else. No one expects a Rommel or Guderian emerging from Pakistan army ranks. To date, all heads of the Pakistani Army were average officers who rose to higher ranks after going through normal command, staff and instructional appointments. Most senior officers are average and one can choose from among the available lot without sacrificing much. The appointing authority can choose anyone among the top three or four senior lieutenant generals and he will be no better or worse than the others. The new chief will work to secure Pakistan’s as well as military’s interests. Every senior officer including the chief has the right to select his own team as long as he adheres to prevalent professional standards and accepted norms. Once, the chief starts to play with rules to favour one over the other then there are bound to be repercussions. In the past allegations of such foul play caused resentment and estrangement among senior officers, which is not good for the smooth functioning of the institution. Pakistani Army officers usually accuse civilians of interfering with army affairs but it is the unfair tactics of senior officers for career advancement, which caused the greatest harm.
Unfortunately the ‘indispensability syndrome’ is quite prevalent in Pakistan. All major political parties are run as personal and family business. They cry hoarse about democracy but nominate lifetime chairpersons and leaders groom their children to inherit not only the personal wealth but also the political party.
Senior military officers also get grandiose ideas in their heads and sometimes suffer from the disease of ‘infallibility’ . The only antidote for such ideas is frequent visits to the nearest graveyard, which will confirm to the visitor that every graveyard is filled with the ‘indispensable’ folks. There is no denying the fact that military is the dominant institution in Pakistan completely controlling not only military but also nuclear, missile, foreign policy and domestic arenas. The army as an institution should understand and respect spheres of influence of other organs of the state and try not to interfere in smooth functioning of other institutions. It is an accepted norm that internal matters of the army should be dealt through army chief but it is also important that army chief should clearly understand his own limitations and not extend himself resulting in the imbalance which can not only threaten the current delicate set up but can also cause serious fissures in the military. In current difficult times more transparency in decision-making process is the need of the hour rather than engaging in intrigues fuelled by mistrust and suspicion among decision makers. A working relationship between army, parliament, prime minister, president and judiciary is must to avoid further polarization of society.
'War is won outside the borders of the state, but the general’s merit is established within it'. Tai Kung’s advice to King Wu, 11th century B.C.
Dr. Hamid Hussain is an independent analyst based in New York.
Chief’s Choreography –Manoeuvring of Pakistan Army High Command by Hamid Hussain
Hamid Hussain
‘A general who advances without coveting fame and retreats without fearing the disgrace, whose only thought is to protect his country and do good service to his sovereign, is the jewel of the kingdom.’ Sun Tzu
The Pakistani army is the dominant institution of the country and it has significant control over the decision making process despite the installation of a democratic set up. In the last two years of General Pervez Mussharraf’s rule, the army’s reputation hit rock bottom. General Ashfaq Pervez Kiyani was appointed Chief of Army Staff (COAS) in October 2007 and over the last two years he has worked quietly to reassert the control of military high command over all-important areas.
The Army as an institution has always preferred to have a veto power on key policy decisions while not having the responsibility to directly manage a fragile and complex state and society.
Kiyani was faced with three challenging tasks when he took control of Pakistan army. First and foremost was getting control of the army itself by promoting, appointing and posting senior officers to key positions (details of these changes are discussed in a previous analysis, Hamid Hussain. Balancing Act – Change of Guard at Pakistan Army, January 2008 and Hamid Hussain. Careful Choreography - Next Round of Senior Officer Promotions & Postings in Pakistan Army, September 2008).
He moved out several senior officers put in place at key positions by General Pervez Mussharraf prior to handing over charge of the army to Kiyani (details of these changes by General Mussharraf prior to elevation of General Kiyani are discussed in a previous analysis, Hamid Hussain. Shuffling the Deck, September 2007). When Kiyani completed the process, Mussharraf was an isolated man and was pushed out of President House by the new civilian set up once a signal was given from army’s General Headquarter (GHQ) that they would not come to the rescue of Mussharraf.
It was reminiscent of a previous episode when in 1969 Field Marshal Ayub Khan faced with popular resentment was asked to leave President House by his own protégé Commander-in- Chief General Agha Muhammad Yahya Khan once he got his own team in place.
The second challenging task for Kiyani was to shift the balance back to the army in dealing with United States. Traditionally, the U.S. Democratic Party favours working with the political forces of a country rather than relying solely on military leaders. When the Democrats with a majority in the U.S. Congress also got their man in the White House, there was a shift towards more constructive engagement with the political leaders of Pakistan.
The Kerry-Lugar bill was the outcome of this shift whereby future U.S. aid was geared more towards civilian sector. In addition, more direct funding was to be provided for strengthening of police and paramilitary forces of the country. The ultimate snub was a clause, which warned the Pakistani Army to keep its hands away from all levers of power and not to subvert political process. Some Pakistanis especially military officers allege that this clause was inserted at the request of the Pakistani political leadership in an effort to strengthen their hand against an omnipresent military. Outraged military brass publicly snubbed United States as well as Pakistan’s political leaders for committing this blasphemous act. In private conversations with visiting military and civilian leaders of United States, Kiyani made this point very clear. The ace card, which the military uses during its independent negotiations with foreign countries, and especially with the United States, is its complete control of country’s nuclear assets.
Washington’s main interaction with Islamabad is in the context of rise of extremism in Pakistan, conflict in Afghanistan and concern about security of Pakistan’s nuclear assets. All these areas are exclusively handled by the military therefore it was no surprise that Washington gave in quite easily accepting the dominant role of military in all affairs. This was a forgone conclusion in view of the nature of the history of U.S.-Pakistan relations. Similar understanding was reached with previous Pakistani military leaders including Field Marshal Ayub Khan (1958-69), General Muhammad Zia–ul-Haq (1977-88) and General Pervez Mussharraf (1999-2008).
The third task of General Kiyani was to work with political leaders in a way to get their support for ongoing military operations in tribal areas and Swat, but not allowing them to encroach on military’s domain. Kiyani has performed all these tasks deftly securing the military’s institutional interests without showing his hand. No wonder that in some circles he is dubbed as ‘master manipulator’ and a master of ‘poker face’. Many people interacting with him admit that it is very hard to guess what is on his mind as he shows no emotions and chooses very few words to express himself.
Kiyani will be retiring in November 2010 and now his main focus is on the coming change in the army’s top cadres. It is in this context that President Asif Ali Zardari comes into the picture. It is quite clear by now that the president will not likely win any popularity contest in Pakistan. The Army in general has no respect for him either. This is the main reason that president is not invited to visit any military installation. However, in the present set up with the president as supreme commander of armed forces holds the authority to appoint service chiefs. The Army does not want him to appoint the next army chief and this factor is contributing to increased pressure on the president from all quarters. The Army wants that the authority to appoint the army chief should revert back to the prime minister.
Recently, pressure was exerted on president to give back the chairmanship of National Command Authority (NCA); a body responsible for nuclear and missile assets to the prime minister. The military has the keys to Pakistan’s ‘crown jewels’ and no civilian leader is allowed in this privileged club. The prime minister may chair the NCA but has no real say about country’s nuclear and missile program. These programs are under the firm control of the military with the Strategic Planning Division (SPD).
For his part, President Zardari believes that current campaign against him has the tacit blessing of the GHQ. This mutual mistrust and suspicion is aggravating relations between two important pillars of the state and in my view both parties have missed the narrow window of opportunity by their own ill thought actions. To some extent President Zardari has kept his side of the bargain by fully supporting the army in its operations against militants. The military could have used the good offices of the president to de-escalate the alarming situation in Baluchistan in view of good relations between the Pakistan Peoples Party and the Baluch nationalist leadership.
The ultimate loser in case of continuing strained relations between army and president will be the state of Pakistan.
In view of the peculiar circumstances, General Kiyani with his three-year tenure will end up promoting and posting a record number of senior officers. The first round of promotions and postings was done in 2008 when a number of key positions at lieutenant general and major general ranks were shuffled. In the fall of 2008, six officers were promoted to lieutenant general rank and in the fall of 2009, four additional officers were promoted to the same rank (prior to announcement of these promotions, an analysis of coming promotions was done in Hamid Hussain. Chief’s Call - Next Round of Promotions in Pakistan Army, July 2009) In early April 2010, five lieutenant generals will be retiring after completing their tenures thus opening five additional slots. In addition, due to an unprecedented situation his year, four additional lieutenant generals will be retiring as they will be reaching the age limit of 58 years although they have at least 2-3 years left as far as tenure is concerned. These officers are currently holding important posts including Chief of General Staff (CGS), Quarter Master General (QMG), DGISI and Karachi Corps Commander.
In the next few months, the whole senior brass of the Pakistan army will be changed. Newly promoted officers will be posted to key positions. In the last few months, new corps commanders have already taken command of Bahawalpur and Multan corps. New corps commanders will be appointed to important Mangla, Lahore, Karachi and Peshawar corps. In addition, we will also see a new batch of Principal Staff Officers (PSOs) at GHQ including Military Secretary (MS), CGS and QMG. Most of these promotions and postings are a routine matter in any army including Pakistan army, but in view of the extraordinary powers of the military in all spheres as well as entitlements which come with these ranks, these changes become topic of speculation as well as lobbying and intense rivalry and competition among contending officers. Most of the time, it leaves a lot of bitterness and strained personal relations among senior officers (a cursory look at the memoirs and recent disclosures on electronic media by several senior officers provides ample proof of this conclusion).
In my view this is the single most important factor responsible for hampering professional development of senior officer corps of Pakistan army. The majority of senior officers are busy in this lobbying effort and engage in too much of socialization with the right group taking away the precious time, which could be used, for professional development and reading serious military affairs.
The most important event of 2010 will be the appointment of the army chief in the winter of 2010. Beleaguered President Zardari knows very well that he has only one card left in his hand and that is the authority to appoint the army chief. If he gives back this authority to prime minister, he will be a lame duck president. Currently, the army is happy to see the judiciary and media taking on the president thus keeping its own hands clean. The Army high command feels that an isolated president busy fighting his own battles against media, judiciary and political opponents will have less desire and time to interfere with military matters.
The Army is in complete control of president’s security and essentially controls all movements of the president as well as access of people to him. They feel this step is essential to prevent the president from making direct contacts with senior military officers. There is lot of competition and rivalry among senior officers for the important post of army chief and president being a shrewd person can play this game quite well.
The military hierarchy wants to continue with the current system and has working relations with prime minister and other political parties as long as long as the president is kept at a safe distance or preferably removed. Someone is busy doing the homework and it is no surprise that in January 2010, parliament’s constitutional reforms committee agreed to transfer the authority of appointing the service chiefs from the head of state to the head of government by amending article 243 of the constitution. If this change goes through then the president will bound to consult the prime minister before appointing the chiefs of the army, the navy and the air force. The decision was taken unanimously which means that all political parties were on board. The committee rejected two suggestions; first one dealing with the issue that the service chiefs should be appointed after parliamentary approval and second that the service chiefs should not be given extensions and should be retired after completing their term in office.
Despite all his shortcomings, the elections were a fair process and gave Pakistanis an unprecedented opportunity to elect the president and it would be unwise to try to remove him by unconstitutional means. The only way president can be removed is by impeachment and if that cannot be done then he is bound to react if he is provoked beyond certain limits. He may not be the smartest chap in the room but he can surely do a lot of damage in view of some powers in his hands.
The military has probably war gamed all the likely scenarios and also covered some administrative bases. The Secretary of the Ministry of Defence usually signs off the final official notification issued by the president in the appointment of the army chief. The current defence secretary is retired lieutenant general Syed Athar Ali and in the worst case scenario is that he maybe the last stumbling block (in 1999 coup, then defence secretary retired lieutenant general Iftikhar Ali Khan was given the file of prime minister’s orders of replacing General Pervez Mussharraf for his signature and official notification. Iftikhar played safely and went to his office with the file but didn’t sign it. He was no fool and was expecting some reaction from the senior brass. He waited to see which way things settle. This point was also not lost on officers involved in the coup. A military intelligence officer was sent to pick up the Defence Secretary and he was taken to the military operations directorate, which was the centre from where the coup was being coordinated. )
General Kiyani has two possible options. First option is that he reaches an understanding with President Zardari where he gets a one-year extension as army chief. If Kiyani is not considering this option then he will try to arrange the cards in such a way that his choice for army chief’s post has the best chance in the winter of 2010. Most likely his choice is current DGISI Lieutenant General Ahmad Shuja Pasha. The problem is that in the normal course of action Pasha will be retiring in March 2010 (the tenure for a lieutenant general is three years in the rank or reaching the age of 58 whichever comes first). Pasha has less than a year in the rank but will be reaching the age limit in March 2010, eight months before the retirement of General Kiyani. This impediment can be overcome if Pasha is given one-year extension of service, which will make him leading contender for chief’s post in coming winter.
Kiyani may be thinking on these lines as retirement date of current corps commander of Peshawar based XI Corps Lieutenant General Masood Aslam was in September 2009 but he has been asked to continue in view of ongoing operations in North West Frontier Province (N.W.F.P.) under his command. This may have been done to set the precedent so that no one objects if extension is given to Pasha. If Pasha is given an extension of service in the next 2-3 weeks then this will clearly indicate that Kiyani wants him to be the next chief. The other reason to allow Aslam to continue may be the fact that Kiyani has already selected the individual to command Peshawar corps but the officer is waiting in the wings at major general rank. In early April 2010, in the next round of promotions this desired officer maybe promoted to lieutenant general rank and then posted to command Peshawar Corps.
In my view, two possible contenders for this post are Major General Tariq Khan (if he survives internal fights and pass medical fitness) and Major General Waheed Arshad. In my view, Tariq will be a better choice as he has been in the thick of the battle for the last few years; first as General Officer Commanding (GOC) of a division which operated in Waziristan and then as Inspector General of Frontier Corps (IGFC) of N.W.F.P.; paramilitary force operating against militants in tribal areas along with regular troops. There is room for criticism for some of his operational plans but he deserves some credit for handling an extremely difficult situation in N.W.F.P. in 2008-09 and pushing back militants from major centres.
Serious contenders for army chief post are now only three officers; Lt. General Khalid Shamim Wayen (Quetta corps commander), Lt. General Nadeem Taj (Gujranwala corps commander) and Lt. General Ahmad Shuja Pasha (if he gets an extension prior to his retirement. Another thing going against Pasha is that he has not commanded a corps; usually a pre-requisite for army chief post contender. Kiyani after giving him extension can transfer him to the command of a corps for few months thus fulfilling this criteria but this aberration will be quite obvious and may not sit well with many officers). Lt. General Muhammad Yusuf is also a senior officer but in my view he is out of the race when Kiyani recently brought him in as president of National Defence University from Bahawalpur Corps.
If Kiyani is thinking that after handing over the charge to next man he will hit the golf course then I see no problem. However, if he is thinking about some role for himself then there is potential for conflict even if Kiyani’s own hand picked man is selected. To prove this point one need to look at two exhibits. Exhibit A is of General Agha Muhammad Yahya Khan; groomed and selected by Field Marshal Ayub Khan who sent Ayub packing in a matter of hours and Exhibit B is how General Kiyani; groomed and hand picked by General Pervez Mussharraf facilitated the departure of the later out of President House when he became a liability to military’s institutional interests.
If Kiyani is thinking about some continuing role for himself then his only choice is to get himself selected as Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee (CJCSC) prior to his retirement. There is no problem in pursuing this course, as current CJCSC General Tariq Majid will be retiring in October 2010, few weeks before Kiyani’s retirement. CJCSC is essentially a ceremonial post with no real power. Kiyani knows very well that once appointed, the army chief is the boss and everyone looks to him and who can understand this better than Kiyani in view of his special relations with former army chief General Mussharraf over the last several years?
If Kiyani is looking at this option then he will definitely want to increase the power of CJCSC. One choice could be to have CJCSC sit on the promotion board of senior officers of all three services arguing that being the senior most officers overseeing all three services it is quite natural for him to have these powers. Senior officers in addition to army chief have to look towards CJCSC also thus increasing his influence. If CJCSC is given a say in selection of service chiefs and promotion of senior officers then he can swing things in his favour at two important forums; the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee and NCA thus directly influencing the decision making process with some weight behind him. This will invariably dilute the power of army chief.
In my view this is a bad option because it will inevitably result in clash between army chief and CJCSC. Once a new army chief is selected, he should be in charge of running his own organization. However, this power should not be arbitrary and absolute but tempered with restraint and geared towards institutional rather than personal interests. It is important to focus on working relations between different centres of power inside the military i.e. corps commanders and heads of military’s intelligence organizations as well as balance of power between military and civilian authority. Swinging from one extreme to the other will add instability to an already precarious situation.
The senior ranks of the army are not monolithic and there are personal, service arms, ethnic and social groupings inside the army. These differences need to be taken into account when important decisions are being considered as far as army is concerned. People can have different perspectives as well as preferences and this is an accepted factor as far as selection of senior officers is concerned. However, institutional interests must be held above personal wishes. Lieutenant General Masood Aslam should have retired on his due date and allowing him to continue at current post will cause resentment among officers down the line. He has performed to the best of his abilities in a difficult time and military operations under his command should be evaluated carefully. In some areas he has done well while in others things could have been better. In addition, he has gone through a personal tragedy when his young son was killed in attack on the mosque in Rawalpindi in December 2009. He has kept his composure and continued the task but we are all humans and this was one more reason that he should have been given farewell on time.
On the same note, I am of the view that no extension should be given to any officer. In the past, this issue caused resentment and breakdown of even professional relations between senior officers. It gives the impression of favouritism and tinkering with the accepted norms to push a particular officer and creates resentment among officer corps.
The playing field should be level as far as promotion to senior ranks and selection of army chief is concerned. In my view normal institutional process should be allowed to function and it is not appropriate to tinker with extensions, promotions and postings to push favourites. We all know very well that modern armies are large bureaucracies, which encourage conformation for smooth function of the organization.
The only test for a general is war and nothing else. No one expects a Rommel or Guderian emerging from Pakistan army ranks. To date, all heads of the Pakistani Army were average officers who rose to higher ranks after going through normal command, staff and instructional appointments. Most senior officers are average and one can choose from among the available lot without sacrificing much. The appointing authority can choose anyone among the top three or four senior lieutenant generals and he will be no better or worse than the others. The new chief will work to secure Pakistan’s as well as military’s interests. Every senior officer including the chief has the right to select his own team as long as he adheres to prevalent professional standards and accepted norms. Once, the chief starts to play with rules to favour one over the other then there are bound to be repercussions. In the past allegations of such foul play caused resentment and estrangement among senior officers, which is not good for the smooth functioning of the institution. Pakistani Army officers usually accuse civilians of interfering with army affairs but it is the unfair tactics of senior officers for career advancement, which caused the greatest harm.
Unfortunately the ‘indispensability syndrome’ is quite prevalent in Pakistan. All major political parties are run as personal and family business. They cry hoarse about democracy but nominate lifetime chairpersons and leaders groom their children to inherit not only the personal wealth but also the political party.
Senior military officers also get grandiose ideas in their heads and sometimes suffer from the disease of ‘infallibility’ . The only antidote for such ideas is frequent visits to the nearest graveyard, which will confirm to the visitor that every graveyard is filled with the ‘indispensable’ folks. There is no denying the fact that military is the dominant institution in Pakistan completely controlling not only military but also nuclear, missile, foreign policy and domestic arenas. The army as an institution should understand and respect spheres of influence of other organs of the state and try not to interfere in smooth functioning of other institutions. It is an accepted norm that internal matters of the army should be dealt through army chief but it is also important that army chief should clearly understand his own limitations and not extend himself resulting in the imbalance which can not only threaten the current delicate set up but can also cause serious fissures in the military. In current difficult times more transparency in decision-making process is the need of the hour rather than engaging in intrigues fuelled by mistrust and suspicion among decision makers. A working relationship between army, parliament, prime minister, president and judiciary is must to avoid further polarization of society.
'War is won outside the borders of the state, but the general’s merit is established within it'. Tai Kung’s advice to King Wu, 11th century B.C.
Dr. Hamid Hussain is an independent analyst based in New York.
Chief’s Choreography –Manoeuvring of Pakistan Army High Command by Hamid Hussain
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Mumbai Mayhem: Why are we defensive?
Ref: India Too Complacent About Pakistan Complicity in Mumbai Attacks
India has the proof for Mumbai terrorist attacks, then why is our Government on the defensive?? Answer, complete failure of our DIPLOMACY, running to USA for retributions to Pakistan and being subservient to US policy makers, which means a confused and ineffective Indian Leadership, to put it mildly!!
The right policy would be to cut off diplomatic relations with Pakistan instead of the FM being humiliated in Islamabad during his visit trying to build confidence measures!!
The present Government is out of its depth in matters of diplomacy and national security; both internal and external.
Lt Gen Harbhajan Singh (Retd)
Related reading
Hard diplomacy: To counter Pakistan, India needs not S.M.Krishna but a Hillary Clinton in pants, says N.V.Subramanian.
India has the proof for Mumbai terrorist attacks, then why is our Government on the defensive?? Answer, complete failure of our DIPLOMACY, running to USA for retributions to Pakistan and being subservient to US policy makers, which means a confused and ineffective Indian Leadership, to put it mildly!!
The right policy would be to cut off diplomatic relations with Pakistan instead of the FM being humiliated in Islamabad during his visit trying to build confidence measures!!
The present Government is out of its depth in matters of diplomacy and national security; both internal and external.
Lt Gen Harbhajan Singh (Retd)
Related reading
Hard diplomacy: To counter Pakistan, India needs not S.M.Krishna but a Hillary Clinton in pants, says N.V.Subramanian.
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Five steps to fix the Naxals
General J F R Jacob | 2010-07-06 14:01:07The anti-Naxal operations currently being conducted have achieved little, with the Maoists now openly challenging the government to do its worst. This is mostly due to the lack of understanding on the part of those in command of the methodology and conduct of counter insurgency operations.
The author had taken part in counter insurgency operations in Sumatra in 1945-46. Our columns were ambushed numerous times, but we were trained to react. We moved in a balanced tactical formation, by bounds - scouts, advanced guard and main body. Once we hit an ambush, we were able to deploy, encircle and break it.
Unfortunately this pattern of operation does not obtain with our paramilitary forces like the CRPF.
In 1970, I oversaw the establishment of the counter insurgency school in Mizoram. We ensured that before being inducted for counter-insurgency operations in the northeast, every battalion was put through intensive counter insurgency training for two whole months.
I have worked with Central Reserve Police [CRP] battalions, and they are good, solid units.
In 1965, when I was commanding the brigade at Samba we had 16 CRP with us. They looked after an unfenced and un-demarcated border with competence. There were several shootouts, and their performance was commendable.
Later in 1971 in East Pakistan, 16 CRP and other CRP battalions operated in border areas against the Pakistanis with courage and determination.
There is an old army saying: 'There are no bad units, only bad officers.’
The army, on the orders of then Prime Minister Mrs Indira Gandhi, was employed to break the Naxal revolt in West Bengal in 1969-71. Mrs Gandhi was pragmatic and took hard decisions, like she did in 1971.
Was Mrs Gandhi wrong? I think not. The Naxals were driven out of West Bengal by mid 1971.
Incidentally Toofani (the Dassault MD-450) and Hunter aircraft of the Indian Air Force bombed Aizwal town on March 4-5, 1966, to evict the Mizo rebels who had literally captured the town.
I do not recommend such offensive action. The air force should be used only for surveillance and logistics.
There are two factors required to keep an insurgency going - firm bases and lines of supply for money, arms and ammunition. As long as these factors obtain, the insurgency will continue.
In the present Naxal insurgency, their firm bases are in the jungles and villages, though they have started moving into the towns. The money they get is from taxes and forcible contributions. The arms they use are captured from the CRP and police. They also buy weapons from Nepal and Myanmar.
Since these two parameters still obtain and remain unbroken, the Naxals are therefore well equipped to fight on and they will do so until they achieve their aims.
There should be a review of the tactics employed by the paramilitary in counter insurgency operations. It is of little use just sending columns into the jungle to take on the elusive and highly mobile Naxal gangs. They are mobile, far more mobile than our paramilitary troops. Mobility is comparative, but it is also a key factor. Our CRP units must strive to be more mobile than the Naxals if they hope to have any effect. So far, these columns have achieved little.
The following method used by the author in1974-75 in intercepting two Naga gangs going to China to collect weapons should be employed. The second gang of some three hundred was surrounded and captured.
In a nutshell, this was the doctrine used by the author in those days, and they still have relevance today.
The Indian army still puts whole battalions into counter insurgency training for two months at the counter insurgency school in Mizoram before deploying them for counter insurgency operations. The CRP too should have a fully fledged counter insurgency school based on the army model.
If appropriate corrective measures are implemented, I am confident that that the CRP battalions will overcome the Naxals. I wish them all success.
Editor's note:
- Lt Gen Jacob is not an armchair warrior. He has dealt with terrorism and insurgency over a period of many years.
- As a young major, he took part in intensive counter insurgency operations in Sumatra 1945/1946.
- In 1970, he was responsible for setting up the army counter insurgency school in Mizoram.
- He was in charge of anti-Naxal operations in West Bengal in 1969-1971. The then chief minister Siddharta Shankar Ray used to say: 'Jake and I, we broke the Naxals.'
- In 1974/1975 the army intercepted two Naga gangs going to China [Jacob camped at Mokochong to conduct operations]. The army attacked their bases and finally forced the insurgents to sign the Shillong Accord in 1975. To recap tactics; interrupted their lines of supply for arms and ammunition from China and destroyed their bases within Nagaland. Twelve years of peace followed.
- He oversaw operations in Mizoram and got the hostiles to the negotiating table in Calcutta. [Calcutta Conference] (1978).
- On the other side of the coin, he was responsible in setting up the Bangladesh Mukti Bahini in April 1971, and oversaw their operations.
- In October 2007, He was invited to speak to the American military, State Department and CIA at Capitol Hill. The lecture was broadcast live. The US Marine Corps subsequently requested permission to incorporate parts of the talk in their counterinsurgency doctrine.
By the same author:
Hamlet and the Naxals
The truth behind the Navy's 'sinking' of Ghazi
The Af-Pak boundary is not a border
Gen JFR Jacob on the Afghan war
The rocky road to Kargil
A Himalayan Blunder: How our maps ceded land to China
1971 War: Izzat and lessons unlearnt
An Indian Homeland Act
Time to protect the Thunder Dragon
What the Dragon won't forget
Pakistan Army and ISI amply rewarded for support to Islamic extremism and terrorism
Afghan prize would reward Pak for terror
SHAUN GREGORY, Jul 18, 2010, 07.20am IST
The US strategy in Afghanistan is in deep trouble. President Obama's December announcement that US forces would begin to draw down from July 2011 is being widely read in South Asia as the beginning of the endgame for the US and Nato in Afghanistan. Regional states are beginning to jostle for influence. They will be left for the second time in less than 25 years to deal with the consequences of a strategic retreat by a major power from Afghanistan. The nature of America's problems and Islamabad's support for the Afghan Taliban has moved Pakistan into poll position to recover its "strategic depth" in Afghanistan. If it does so, the Pakistan Army and ISI will undoubtedly conclude that their support for Islamic extremism and terrorism has been rewarded.
All four strands of the US-led transition strategy are going badly. Efforts to create a powerful Afghan National Security Force to provide security across the country are faltering; the counterinsurgency or COIN strategy has backfired in Marjah and the Kandahar operation has been delayed; the peace and reconciliation process is failing because some of the main Afghan opposition parties have declined to participate and Taliban representatives have insisted they will not negotiate; and the efforts to legitimize the Karzai government have been undermined by fraudulent elections and ongoing allegations of corruption and incompetence. America's hand is being weakened further by the civil-military tensions exposed in the "Rolling Stone" article, which led to the sacking of General Stanley McChrystal. The United States has seen nothing like it since the 1971 publication of "The Pentagon Papers" foreshadowed the ignominious withdrawal from Vietnam.
The dilemma for the United States and the rest of Nato is that with so much blood in the soil of Afghanistan and so much money spent to resource the war, the Alliance needs a success story to provide the political fig-leaf for disengagement and persuade their respective publics that the price has been worth paying. For the leaders of many Nato members, political futures are at stake. Yet the scale of challenge in Afghanistan is so great, and the need to find a resolution to the residual question of al-Qaida so pressing, that neither the US nor Nato can achieve an exit strategy on their own terms.
The most plausible success story, and one which would allow forces to come home with political cover and the al-Qaida issue addressed, is that the US and Nato have achieved a stable transition in Afghanistan to an inclusive Afghan government, that the Taliban have given up support for al-Qaida and come into the political process, and that the US will retain a residual regional presence — as it has in Iraq — to maintain downward pressure on al-Qaida in the theatre. The United States has come to believe that the key to this entire narrative is Pakistan.
Pakistan has resolutely supported the Afghan Taliban since it was forced to flee Afghanistan in late 2001 and it is from Pakistani sanctuaries and the main leadership shuras in Quetta, Gerdi Jangal, Miram Shah, and Peshawar that the Afghan Taliban has staged its comeback. Backed by the Pakistan Army/ISI the Afghan Taliban is now once again in the ascendancy in Afghanistan and is thus key to any US/Nato disengagement. This is why Pakistan's Generals Kayani and Pasha have made a series of recent visits to Kabul in which they have offered to broker deals with the various Afghan Taliban groups and the Karzai regime; it is why Pakistan has now cleared the way for Mullah Baradar to be extradited to Kabul to participate in the process, and it is why secret meetings have been held with Sirajuddin Haqqani, and others to seek to engineer an endgame. Pakistan has simultaneously been pushing its erstwhile proxy Gulbuddin Hekmatyar into the process and quietly boosting militant strength in the Afghan-Pakistan border region by facilitating the movement of Punjabi Taliban into the theatre. Pakistan is also circulating the idea that the Afghan Taliban will give up al-Qaida to reach a deal, even though there are few reasons to believe this is so and no means to enforce any such offer the Taliban might make to ease the US/Nato withdrawal.
Pakistan's price for being helpful to the US is acceptance of Pakistan's primacy in Afghanistan and that it has a strong role in shaping US regional engagement going forward. It is a measure of the desperation of the US that they seem prepared to agree this deal, cede the lead to Pakistan, and condemn the people of Afghanistan to Taliban rule or to civil war.
Simply put, the United States seems ready to reward Pakistan's duplicitous support for militant Islamic extremism with the huge geostrategic prize of Afghanistan. The implications of this for India are grave indeed and it is difficult to believe that a White House friendlier to Delhi would ever have countenanced such a deal. India is emerging as a great power and with great power come commensurate obligations. India must take a stronger hand in Afghanistan and find a response which provides the United States and Nato with another way forward, which offers the people of Afghanistan an alternative to the Taliban or civil war, and which denies Pakistan a strategic victory which will surely resonate across the region for generations to come.
The writer is founder-director of the Pakistan Security Research Unit at the University of Bradford, UK
Afghan prize would reward Pak for terror
SHAUN GREGORY, Jul 18, 2010, 07.20am IST
The US strategy in Afghanistan is in deep trouble. President Obama's December announcement that US forces would begin to draw down from July 2011 is being widely read in South Asia as the beginning of the endgame for the US and Nato in Afghanistan. Regional states are beginning to jostle for influence. They will be left for the second time in less than 25 years to deal with the consequences of a strategic retreat by a major power from Afghanistan. The nature of America's problems and Islamabad's support for the Afghan Taliban has moved Pakistan into poll position to recover its "strategic depth" in Afghanistan. If it does so, the Pakistan Army and ISI will undoubtedly conclude that their support for Islamic extremism and terrorism has been rewarded.
All four strands of the US-led transition strategy are going badly. Efforts to create a powerful Afghan National Security Force to provide security across the country are faltering; the counterinsurgency or COIN strategy has backfired in Marjah and the Kandahar operation has been delayed; the peace and reconciliation process is failing because some of the main Afghan opposition parties have declined to participate and Taliban representatives have insisted they will not negotiate; and the efforts to legitimize the Karzai government have been undermined by fraudulent elections and ongoing allegations of corruption and incompetence. America's hand is being weakened further by the civil-military tensions exposed in the "Rolling Stone" article, which led to the sacking of General Stanley McChrystal. The United States has seen nothing like it since the 1971 publication of "The Pentagon Papers" foreshadowed the ignominious withdrawal from Vietnam.
The dilemma for the United States and the rest of Nato is that with so much blood in the soil of Afghanistan and so much money spent to resource the war, the Alliance needs a success story to provide the political fig-leaf for disengagement and persuade their respective publics that the price has been worth paying. For the leaders of many Nato members, political futures are at stake. Yet the scale of challenge in Afghanistan is so great, and the need to find a resolution to the residual question of al-Qaida so pressing, that neither the US nor Nato can achieve an exit strategy on their own terms.
The most plausible success story, and one which would allow forces to come home with political cover and the al-Qaida issue addressed, is that the US and Nato have achieved a stable transition in Afghanistan to an inclusive Afghan government, that the Taliban have given up support for al-Qaida and come into the political process, and that the US will retain a residual regional presence — as it has in Iraq — to maintain downward pressure on al-Qaida in the theatre. The United States has come to believe that the key to this entire narrative is Pakistan.
Pakistan has resolutely supported the Afghan Taliban since it was forced to flee Afghanistan in late 2001 and it is from Pakistani sanctuaries and the main leadership shuras in Quetta, Gerdi Jangal, Miram Shah, and Peshawar that the Afghan Taliban has staged its comeback. Backed by the Pakistan Army/ISI the Afghan Taliban is now once again in the ascendancy in Afghanistan and is thus key to any US/Nato disengagement. This is why Pakistan's Generals Kayani and Pasha have made a series of recent visits to Kabul in which they have offered to broker deals with the various Afghan Taliban groups and the Karzai regime; it is why Pakistan has now cleared the way for Mullah Baradar to be extradited to Kabul to participate in the process, and it is why secret meetings have been held with Sirajuddin Haqqani, and others to seek to engineer an endgame. Pakistan has simultaneously been pushing its erstwhile proxy Gulbuddin Hekmatyar into the process and quietly boosting militant strength in the Afghan-Pakistan border region by facilitating the movement of Punjabi Taliban into the theatre. Pakistan is also circulating the idea that the Afghan Taliban will give up al-Qaida to reach a deal, even though there are few reasons to believe this is so and no means to enforce any such offer the Taliban might make to ease the US/Nato withdrawal.
Pakistan's price for being helpful to the US is acceptance of Pakistan's primacy in Afghanistan and that it has a strong role in shaping US regional engagement going forward. It is a measure of the desperation of the US that they seem prepared to agree this deal, cede the lead to Pakistan, and condemn the people of Afghanistan to Taliban rule or to civil war.
Simply put, the United States seems ready to reward Pakistan's duplicitous support for militant Islamic extremism with the huge geostrategic prize of Afghanistan. The implications of this for India are grave indeed and it is difficult to believe that a White House friendlier to Delhi would ever have countenanced such a deal. India is emerging as a great power and with great power come commensurate obligations. India must take a stronger hand in Afghanistan and find a response which provides the United States and Nato with another way forward, which offers the people of Afghanistan an alternative to the Taliban or civil war, and which denies Pakistan a strategic victory which will surely resonate across the region for generations to come.
The writer is founder-director of the Pakistan Security Research Unit at the University of Bradford, UK
Afghan prize would reward Pak for terror
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Let us not defame the Armed Forces
Thursday, 15 July, 2010, 8:27 PM
To: The Editor-in-Chief The Pioneer
Sir
Kudos to The Pioneer for the write-up "Let's not defame the armed forces": click here (July 11). The author Mr. Kanchan Gupta has minced no words when he says that it is now considered fashionable and politically correct to berate the security forces and accuse them of violating human rights and worse. He has quoted irrefutable facts and figures from authentic sources and advanced clinching arguments to prove his points.
You certainly cannot ask the Armed Forces to tie their hands at the back and yet fight against terrorists laced with lethal weapons supplied from across the borders and supported by their stooges operating inside the country.
How come, when a perceived "excess" is committed by the military combatants on duty there is so much hue and cry raised by the self-styled "Human Rights" groups and activists, but not a word is uttered or a whine muttered in case of arson, violence and savagery inflicted on innocent citizens and security forces by the fanatical extremists? Why two different norms? Is one life any less valuable than the other?
Warm regards.
Sincerely,
Wg Cdr S.C. KAPOOR (retd)
Related Reading
(Member IESM Veterans' Groups)
Rights for Terrorists Only? by Joginder Singh (The writer was Director, CBI) (ADNI)
Respect the armed forces
By Nand on 7/11/2010 3:18:19 AM
Vox Populi
Again a great article. The human rights activists need the safety of armed forces and then criticizes them. It is sad. Thank you for writing this article and speaking for the behalf of thousands of patriotic Indians who fight for the survival/ freedom of the country.
To: The Editor-in-Chief The Pioneer
Sir
Kudos to The Pioneer for the write-up "Let's not defame the armed forces": click here (July 11). The author Mr. Kanchan Gupta has minced no words when he says that it is now considered fashionable and politically correct to berate the security forces and accuse them of violating human rights and worse. He has quoted irrefutable facts and figures from authentic sources and advanced clinching arguments to prove his points.
You certainly cannot ask the Armed Forces to tie their hands at the back and yet fight against terrorists laced with lethal weapons supplied from across the borders and supported by their stooges operating inside the country.
How come, when a perceived "excess" is committed by the military combatants on duty there is so much hue and cry raised by the self-styled "Human Rights" groups and activists, but not a word is uttered or a whine muttered in case of arson, violence and savagery inflicted on innocent citizens and security forces by the fanatical extremists? Why two different norms? Is one life any less valuable than the other?
Warm regards.
Sincerely,
Wg Cdr S.C. KAPOOR (retd)
Related Reading
(Member IESM Veterans' Groups)
Rights for Terrorists Only? by Joginder Singh (The writer was Director, CBI) (ADNI)
Respect the armed forces
By Nand on 7/11/2010 3:18:19 AM
Vox Populi
Again a great article. The human rights activists need the safety of armed forces and then criticizes them. It is sad. Thank you for writing this article and speaking for the behalf of thousands of patriotic Indians who fight for the survival/ freedom of the country.
Monday, July 12, 2010
Pakistani spy had licence, voter ID and PAN card obtained with fake documents
12/07/2010
Pakistani spy had licence, voter ID and PAN card: police
Chandigarh: Kashif Ali, the suspected Pakistani spy who was arrested here two days ago, had duped government departments and banks during his over two-year stay here. He had a driving licence, voter ID card and even a PAN card - all procured on the basis of fake documents, police said Monday.
Ali's rented accommodation in Sector 44, from where he was arrested Saturday, was raided and police seized various documents and a digital camera. Ali, 24, a resident of Faisalabad in Pakistan's Punjab province, is suspected to have sent vital defence information from India to his country.
"We have recovered a driving licence that was issued by a New Delhi transport authority, a voter identity card with a Chandigarh address, PAN (permanent account number) card and a high school certificate issued by the Punjab School Education Board (PSEB)," a police official said.
"We have also recovered a receipt of the Regional Passport Office, Chandigarh. Ali admitted that he had entered India through Nepal. He had stayed in New Delhi and at Bikaner before coming to Chandigarh. He had bank accounts in Axis Bank and at Union Bank of India," he added.
The seizure of these documents highlights the loopholes in the intelligence wing of police in Chandigarh.
"We are looking into all aspects of this matter and trying to ascertain the links of Ali with other people in Chandigarh and in other states. We will also check how he managed to procure all these documents on the basis of fake papers," Inspector (crime branch) Amanjot Singh told IANS.
Ali, who was sent to police custody by a local court, had moved an application in court seeking permission to talk to his family through two Pakistan phone numbers. The court granted him permission to talk to his family members in the presence of the investigation officer and also directed police to record the conversation.
Police had also detained two of Ali's friends here - Santosh, 24, and Rajeev, 23, - who were in close contact with him. "We also questioned Ali's landlord about people who came to meet him. We have found that two women who are working in a beauty parlour here were coming to meet him at regular intervals. He did not talk to his neighbours and had told his landlord that he was into the real estate business," the police official said.
Inspector General of Police Pradeep Srivastava had earlier told reporters: "Ali admitted that he had taken weaponry training from Pakistan. He was collecting vital information regarding (the army's) Western Command headquarters at Chandimandir (in neighbouring Panchkula town) and the air force station here and was passing it to Pakistan." Source: IANS
Pakistani spy had licence, voter ID and PAN card: police
Comment
In India with fakes and bribes anything is possible!
Pakistani spy had licence, voter ID and PAN card: police
Chandigarh: Kashif Ali, the suspected Pakistani spy who was arrested here two days ago, had duped government departments and banks during his over two-year stay here. He had a driving licence, voter ID card and even a PAN card - all procured on the basis of fake documents, police said Monday.
Ali's rented accommodation in Sector 44, from where he was arrested Saturday, was raided and police seized various documents and a digital camera. Ali, 24, a resident of Faisalabad in Pakistan's Punjab province, is suspected to have sent vital defence information from India to his country.
"We have recovered a driving licence that was issued by a New Delhi transport authority, a voter identity card with a Chandigarh address, PAN (permanent account number) card and a high school certificate issued by the Punjab School Education Board (PSEB)," a police official said.
"We have also recovered a receipt of the Regional Passport Office, Chandigarh. Ali admitted that he had entered India through Nepal. He had stayed in New Delhi and at Bikaner before coming to Chandigarh. He had bank accounts in Axis Bank and at Union Bank of India," he added.
The seizure of these documents highlights the loopholes in the intelligence wing of police in Chandigarh.
"We are looking into all aspects of this matter and trying to ascertain the links of Ali with other people in Chandigarh and in other states. We will also check how he managed to procure all these documents on the basis of fake papers," Inspector (crime branch) Amanjot Singh told IANS.
Ali, who was sent to police custody by a local court, had moved an application in court seeking permission to talk to his family through two Pakistan phone numbers. The court granted him permission to talk to his family members in the presence of the investigation officer and also directed police to record the conversation.
Police had also detained two of Ali's friends here - Santosh, 24, and Rajeev, 23, - who were in close contact with him. "We also questioned Ali's landlord about people who came to meet him. We have found that two women who are working in a beauty parlour here were coming to meet him at regular intervals. He did not talk to his neighbours and had told his landlord that he was into the real estate business," the police official said.
Inspector General of Police Pradeep Srivastava had earlier told reporters: "Ali admitted that he had taken weaponry training from Pakistan. He was collecting vital information regarding (the army's) Western Command headquarters at Chandimandir (in neighbouring Panchkula town) and the air force station here and was passing it to Pakistan." Source: IANS
Pakistani spy had licence, voter ID and PAN card: police
Comment
In India with fakes and bribes anything is possible!
Sunday, July 11, 2010
National Security: Special powers for armed forces
We need clarity, not emotions by Lt-Gen Vijay Oberoi (retd) The Tribune Sunday, July 11, 2010, Chandigarh, India
The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958, better known as AFSPA, has been brought out of wraps at various opportune times – opportune for those who have either something to gain, i.e. the insurgents in Jammu and Kashmir, political parties always ready to fish in troubled waters, with an eye on electoral gains or those who are regular establishment-baiters, who have made it a habit to take the plunge headlong in any controversy with the belief that if it is against an organ of the government, it needed to be opposed!
Many have called AFSPA a draconian law and have vehemently supported its repeal, but having read quite a few of their views and watched them pontificating on TV, I am convinced that most lack even a rudimentary, let alone in-depth knowledge on the subject. This Act has been in force for over five decades because it was essential for the conduct of smooth counter-insurgency operations by the army. It will continue to be needed as long as the army is employed on counter-insurgency/ terrorism tasks.
The Act was promulgated on September 11, 1958. The rationale for bringing the Act on the statute book needs to be appreciated. When the army was first employed on counter-insurgency tasks in Nagaland in the 1950s, two aspects came to the fore immediately. First, unlike in the case of maintenance of law and order, when the army is called out in ‘aid to the civil authority’, where time is available to employ the police before committing the army, operations against insurgents are entirely of a different genre, as the insurgents do not give any time for such niceties.
The insurgents we are fighting today are heavily armed, they act speedily, commit heinous crimes and disappear. Unless the army counters such actions with speed and not wait for orders from higher civil or military authorities, nothing would be achieved.
Secondly, the soldiers and officers of the army had to be protected from prosecution for consequential action taken against insurgents in good faith as part of their operations. Here too, the Act does contain the important caveat that the army personnel can be prosecuted with the Centre’s sanction, if their actions warrant it. There is, therefore, no blanket immunity from the laws of the land.
Over the years, some army personnel have indeed been prosecuted where a prima facie case existed. However, it is also true that due to the exceptional care which all army commanders take when their troops are employed against insurgents, such cases are few and far between.
After the initial employment in Nagaland, the employment of the army on counter-insurgency tasks continued increasing, till it was progressively employed in all the north-eastern states for such tasks. Along with such employment, AFSPA was also invoked in all affected states.
When insurgency erupted in Srinagar in 1990, the Act was extended to the Valley. Later, as the activities of the insurgents spread, first to the Poonch-Rajauri area, then to Doda and Bhadarwah and finally to the whole state, the entire state was brought under the Act’s purview in stages. It can thus be seen that AFSPA was invoked progressively only when the situation required the deployment of the army.
The army is designed and structured for fighting external enemies of the nation. Consequently, they are not given any police powers. However, when the nation wants the army to conduct counter-insurgency and counter-terrorist operations, then they must be given the legal authority to conduct their operations without the impediment of getting clearances from the higher authorities.
If this is not done, they would be unable to function efficiently and defeat the insurgents and terrorists at their own game. It is for this reason that the Act gives four powers to army personnel. These are for ‘enter and search’, ‘arrest without warrant’, ‘destroy arms dumps or other fortifications’ and ‘fire or use force after due warning where possible’. Once again, there is a safeguard in the Act, which stipulates that the arrested person(s) will be handed over speedily to the nearest police station.
The law stipulates that AFSPA can be imposed only after the area in question is declared a ‘disturbed area’ by the state government concerned. When this writer was the Director-General Military Operations (DGMO) and the army was asked to deploy in the Doda-Bhadarwah area, we requested for the invocation of the Act. The state government was reluctant to do so on account of political considerations, but we did not commence operations till the Act was invoked.
Clearly, the Army has no desire to get embroiled in counter-insurgency tasks. It is not the army’s job. However, despite over 50 years of insurgency in our country, the state police as well as the central police forces (CPOs) have not been made capable of tackling insurgency. Consequently, in each case the army was inducted to carry out counter insurgency/ terrorist operations. If the national leadership tasks the army for conducting such non-military operations, then it is incumbent on the leadership to provide the legal wherewithal to all army personnel employed on such tasks.
It is only then that the operations will be conducted in the usual efficient manner of the army and would be result-oriented. They also must be legally protected. It is because these two aspects have been catered for that the army has been neutralising the insurgents and terrorists, so that normalcy is restored and the political leaders and officials can restart governing.
The writer is a former Vice-Chief of the Indian Army
Special powers for armed forces: The Tribune
Special powers for special needs: Army chief to NDTV by Nitin Gokhale
Friday, July 9, 2010
US aid fuels dangerous deal in Pakistan
Friends,
Please do read the article in Boston Globe titled "US aid fuels dangerous deal in Pakistan". click here
Also comments below by Mr. Ram Narayan.
USA is fully aware of the proliferation of nuclear and missile know how by Pakistan to N Korea,Iran, Algeria etc.Pakistan may have also done the same with Saudi Arabia. It will not hesitate to facilitate making of a small dirty nuclear device by Islamist extremists/providing them such a device, which may be used against India based on its national interests. For example in an adverse war situation with India, Pakistan may use such a device as an act of terrorism rather than use nuclear weapons openly!!
USA also cannot be immune from such a covert attack by Alqaeda and any other Islamist extremist organisation, material for which would come from Pakistan.
Due to reasons best known to US authorities, Pakistan has escaped retribution for past serious acts of proliferation. It won't be an overstatement to say that Pakistan has been the epicenter not only of
terrorism but also of nuclear/missile proliferation. There is no way but to disinvest Pakistan of nuclear capability, since Pakistan has proved its intentions repeatedly to seek and provide nuclear and missile technology, covertly and deny proven acts in this matter blatantly, time and again. It
is just inconceivable that Nuclear Head Abdul Qadeer Khan could carry out all the nuclear and missile deals with countries named above on his own!!
How and when USA and its allies disable/take out Pak Nuclear assets is a
topic for separate discussion. USA also has to bring this subject head on with China and NATO. Continued Pussy footing is fraught with danger.
Harbhajan Singh
Lt Gen (Retd)
Dear General Harbhajan Singh,
Some days ago, I had sent the following Selig Harrison article titled, "US aid fuels dangerous deal in Pakistan," published in the Boston Globe of June 29th, to a select few. Harrison had highlighted several crucial and alarming scenarios for Pakistan, the U.S, India, and the global community.
His grim conclusion:
“Pakistan poses many dangers to the United States, notably its aid to Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan and the use of its territory for the training of would-be suicide bombers. But the greatest of all is that fissile material will be smuggled out of its nuclear facilities by undetected Islamist sympathizers and that a future leadership infiltrated by Islamists will risk a nuclear Armageddon in Mumbai or Washington.”
I did get some excellent feedback from the few who received my message. In view of the dire consequences of inaction pointed out by Harrison, friends have advised me that it should go to everyone on my list
The question is: What can – and MUST – be done urgently to mitigate, and avoid the frightful consequences of the conclusion of Harrison.
It is imperative that the governments, people, and strategic thinkers in America, Pakistan, India, and the world community immediately address this festering issue. There is general consensus – across all political ideologies, governmental leaderships, and the common women and men on the street in any city or town of the U.S., Pakistan, India and any corner of the globe that such a rogue situation may horrendously, truly face any of us in a not too far future.
Isn’t it incumbent on leading thinkers and influencers to share with wider and governmental machineries and help or influence them to coalesce to pragmatic action IMMEDIATELY?
May I request your views on this important matter? More importantly, I solicit your suggestions on what pragmatic steps must be taken IMMEDIATELY to help prevent this dangerous slide over the cliff?
My idea is to compile the suggestions received (you may choose to remain incognito, in case you wish – but please let me know how I should attribute your suggestions in the compiled report) and get a message out to you and to various authorites in the US and India.
Please go through Harrison’s article, and let me have your thoughts ASAP.
Sincerely,
Ram Narayanan
US-India Friendship
http://www.usindiafriendship.net/
Please do read the article in Boston Globe titled "US aid fuels dangerous deal in Pakistan". click here
Also comments below by Mr. Ram Narayan.
USA is fully aware of the proliferation of nuclear and missile know how by Pakistan to N Korea,Iran, Algeria etc.Pakistan may have also done the same with Saudi Arabia. It will not hesitate to facilitate making of a small dirty nuclear device by Islamist extremists/providing them such a device, which may be used against India based on its national interests. For example in an adverse war situation with India, Pakistan may use such a device as an act of terrorism rather than use nuclear weapons openly!!
USA also cannot be immune from such a covert attack by Alqaeda and any other Islamist extremist organisation, material for which would come from Pakistan.
Due to reasons best known to US authorities, Pakistan has escaped retribution for past serious acts of proliferation. It won't be an overstatement to say that Pakistan has been the epicenter not only of
terrorism but also of nuclear/missile proliferation. There is no way but to disinvest Pakistan of nuclear capability, since Pakistan has proved its intentions repeatedly to seek and provide nuclear and missile technology, covertly and deny proven acts in this matter blatantly, time and again. It
is just inconceivable that Nuclear Head Abdul Qadeer Khan could carry out all the nuclear and missile deals with countries named above on his own!!
How and when USA and its allies disable/take out Pak Nuclear assets is a
topic for separate discussion. USA also has to bring this subject head on with China and NATO. Continued Pussy footing is fraught with danger.
Harbhajan Singh
Lt Gen (Retd)
Dear General Harbhajan Singh,
Some days ago, I had sent the following Selig Harrison article titled, "US aid fuels dangerous deal in Pakistan," published in the Boston Globe of June 29th, to a select few. Harrison had highlighted several crucial and alarming scenarios for Pakistan, the U.S, India, and the global community.
His grim conclusion:
“Pakistan poses many dangers to the United States, notably its aid to Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan and the use of its territory for the training of would-be suicide bombers. But the greatest of all is that fissile material will be smuggled out of its nuclear facilities by undetected Islamist sympathizers and that a future leadership infiltrated by Islamists will risk a nuclear Armageddon in Mumbai or Washington.”
I did get some excellent feedback from the few who received my message. In view of the dire consequences of inaction pointed out by Harrison, friends have advised me that it should go to everyone on my list
The question is: What can – and MUST – be done urgently to mitigate, and avoid the frightful consequences of the conclusion of Harrison.
It is imperative that the governments, people, and strategic thinkers in America, Pakistan, India, and the world community immediately address this festering issue. There is general consensus – across all political ideologies, governmental leaderships, and the common women and men on the street in any city or town of the U.S., Pakistan, India and any corner of the globe that such a rogue situation may horrendously, truly face any of us in a not too far future.
Isn’t it incumbent on leading thinkers and influencers to share with wider and governmental machineries and help or influence them to coalesce to pragmatic action IMMEDIATELY?
May I request your views on this important matter? More importantly, I solicit your suggestions on what pragmatic steps must be taken IMMEDIATELY to help prevent this dangerous slide over the cliff?
My idea is to compile the suggestions received (you may choose to remain incognito, in case you wish – but please let me know how I should attribute your suggestions in the compiled report) and get a message out to you and to various authorites in the US and India.
Please go through Harrison’s article, and let me have your thoughts ASAP.
Sincerely,
Ram Narayanan
US-India Friendship
http://www.usindiafriendship.net/
Friday, July 2, 2010
Pakistan to train Afghan military officers
July 01, 2010 13:59 IST
In a significant policy shift, Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai [ Images ] has agreed to send a group of military officers to Pakistan for training, a decision which could raise eyebrows in India [ Images ].
An agreement has been worked out confirmed Rangin Dadfar Spanta, Karzai's national security adviser, who said under it a "limited" number of officers would be sent for the training. The new deal comes on the heels of recent high-level contacts between the two countries.
"The move is a victory for Pakistan, which seeks a major role in Afghanistan as officials in both the countries become increasingly convinced that the United States' war effort there is faltering," The Washington Post reported on Thursday.
"This is meant to demonstrate confidence to Pakistan, in the hope of encouraging them to begin a serious consultation and conversation with us on the issue of the Taliban [ Images ]," Spanta was quoted as saying.
Though the number of Afghan officers is said to be between a handful and a few dozen, but it has enormous symbolic importance as the first tangible outcome of talks between Karzai and Pakistan's military and intelligence chiefs that began in May, the daily said.
"It is likely to be controversial among some Afghans who see Pakistan as a Taliban puppet-master rather than as a cooperative neighbor, and in India, which is wary of Pakistan's intentions in Afghanistan," the Post said.
Some key US officials involved in Afghanistan said they knew nothing of the arrangement. "We are neither aware nor have we been asked to facilitate training of the Afghan officer corps with the Pakistani military," Lt Gen William B Caldwell IV, head of the NATO training command in Afghanistan, said.
Pakistan to train Afghan military officers
Comments by BRAD PITT on Jul 01, 2010 09:28 PM
I feel the biggest blunder that the US made was blindly trusting the Pakistanis. Its pretty clear that they have been taken for a royal ride and made to look like a impotent force that is in no man's land. The war is going nowhere because the Pakistanis are giving covert support to the terrorists and playing a dubious double role. Here in the West, there is silent anger at the audacity with which Pakistan has been playing a double role and made a mockery of the whole game plan. I believe that the whole double game will eventually backfire on Pakistan with passage of time and flare up internal strifes within Pakistan
In a significant policy shift, Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai [ Images ] has agreed to send a group of military officers to Pakistan for training, a decision which could raise eyebrows in India [ Images ].
An agreement has been worked out confirmed Rangin Dadfar Spanta, Karzai's national security adviser, who said under it a "limited" number of officers would be sent for the training. The new deal comes on the heels of recent high-level contacts between the two countries.
"The move is a victory for Pakistan, which seeks a major role in Afghanistan as officials in both the countries become increasingly convinced that the United States' war effort there is faltering," The Washington Post reported on Thursday.
"This is meant to demonstrate confidence to Pakistan, in the hope of encouraging them to begin a serious consultation and conversation with us on the issue of the Taliban [ Images ]," Spanta was quoted as saying.
Though the number of Afghan officers is said to be between a handful and a few dozen, but it has enormous symbolic importance as the first tangible outcome of talks between Karzai and Pakistan's military and intelligence chiefs that began in May, the daily said.
"It is likely to be controversial among some Afghans who see Pakistan as a Taliban puppet-master rather than as a cooperative neighbor, and in India, which is wary of Pakistan's intentions in Afghanistan," the Post said.
Some key US officials involved in Afghanistan said they knew nothing of the arrangement. "We are neither aware nor have we been asked to facilitate training of the Afghan officer corps with the Pakistani military," Lt Gen William B Caldwell IV, head of the NATO training command in Afghanistan, said.
Pakistan to train Afghan military officers
Comments by BRAD PITT on Jul 01, 2010 09:28 PM
I feel the biggest blunder that the US made was blindly trusting the Pakistanis. Its pretty clear that they have been taken for a royal ride and made to look like a impotent force that is in no man's land. The war is going nowhere because the Pakistanis are giving covert support to the terrorists and playing a dubious double role. Here in the West, there is silent anger at the audacity with which Pakistan has been playing a double role and made a mockery of the whole game plan. I believe that the whole double game will eventually backfire on Pakistan with passage of time and flare up internal strifes within Pakistan
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Colonel killed in encounter in Kupwara
Picture courtesy: The Telegraph Calcutta: Click hereAn Army Colonel, hailing from Delhi, was killed in an encounter with terrorists while carrying out counter- insurgency operations in Kuligam area in Kupwara district in Kashmir.
Colonel Neeraj Sood was the commanding officer of the 18 Rashtriya Rifles battalion there.
The unit had laid two ambushes in the area in early hours of last night and one of them made contact with militants, an Army statement said.
"On getting information about the encounter, Col Sood, along with his Quick Reaction Team, being the closest, at the Company Operating Base, rushed to the site.
In the ensuing firefight, the officer sustained a gun shot wound on his head and succumbed to his injuries," it said.
Army was continuing its operations through the day in the area, they said. Additional forces have been rushed to the spot.
Col Sood, a resident of Delhi, was commissioned into 8 Rajputana Rifles in Dec 1992, and is an alumni of the National Defence Academy.
The officer had extensive experience in counter- insurgency operations and also served as an instructor at the Army's prestigious Counter Insurgency and Jungle Warfare School at Variengte.
The officer is survived by his wife, Priti- a house wife and an eleven year old daughter, Mishika, who is studying in class five.(ST-23/06)
Col killed in encounter in Kupwara
Friday, June 18, 2010
Maoist plan to take mayhem to South India and tie-up with Islamists
Interrogation of a senior Maoist reveals startling facts
Maoist plan to take mayhem to South India and tie-up with Islamists
By Arun Lakshman /Thiruvananthapuram
The Maoists were using the sea network of LTTE for shipment of arms and ammunitions and some foreign countries, including the erstwhile Soviet block countries were involved in providing the much required arms and ammunitions to the outfit. However with the LTTE crushed, the Maoists are now getting in touch with the LeT for their arms needs which, according to intelligence sources is being gleefully accepted by the LeT.
THE Maoists which is facing some man power crunch in the Northern Indian states is now in the process of increasing and consolidating their presence in the South India. The Andhra police has recently arrested a top operative of the Maoist movement , Nandakumar alias Ranganna alias Pramod from Kannur district in Kerala and on interrogation he has told that he was a top leader in the movement and was deputed to increase his organisational presence in South India with special emphasis on Kerala , Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. He was arrested by the Hyderabad police while he was meeting top Maoist leaders there. Police sources told Organiser that he is a tough nut to crack and that he is giving information only in tits and bits and that he has mastered the art of diverting the interrogation process.
The Maoist leader said that as there is a basic presence in Andhra at the moment, the outfit is planning to increase its presence felt in the other South Indian states to broaden and widen its red corridor.
It may be recalled that the state police had arrested another top leader of the movement Malla Raja Reddy was arrested from Angamaly in Kerala in December 2007. He was also a top functionary of the organisation and was in charge of the South Indian states while operating from Kerala.
A former leader of the Naxalite movement Ramprakash (name changed) while speaking to Organiser said that the Maoist movement in Kerala is gaining momentum as more and more highly educated youths are loosing their trust in the democratic process in the country and at the massive corruption of senior leaders of political parties of all hue and cry. He further said that the Maoist movement will also be not able to solve the issues faced by the country but added that except for the killing and dacoitary conducted by the Maoist’s, he is in support of the rest of the operations of the organisation.
Read the full article
Organiser: Maoist plan to take mayhem to South India and tie-up with Islamists
Maoist plan to take mayhem to South India and tie-up with Islamists
By Arun Lakshman /Thiruvananthapuram
The Maoists were using the sea network of LTTE for shipment of arms and ammunitions and some foreign countries, including the erstwhile Soviet block countries were involved in providing the much required arms and ammunitions to the outfit. However with the LTTE crushed, the Maoists are now getting in touch with the LeT for their arms needs which, according to intelligence sources is being gleefully accepted by the LeT.
THE Maoists which is facing some man power crunch in the Northern Indian states is now in the process of increasing and consolidating their presence in the South India. The Andhra police has recently arrested a top operative of the Maoist movement , Nandakumar alias Ranganna alias Pramod from Kannur district in Kerala and on interrogation he has told that he was a top leader in the movement and was deputed to increase his organisational presence in South India with special emphasis on Kerala , Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. He was arrested by the Hyderabad police while he was meeting top Maoist leaders there. Police sources told Organiser that he is a tough nut to crack and that he is giving information only in tits and bits and that he has mastered the art of diverting the interrogation process.
The Maoist leader said that as there is a basic presence in Andhra at the moment, the outfit is planning to increase its presence felt in the other South Indian states to broaden and widen its red corridor.
It may be recalled that the state police had arrested another top leader of the movement Malla Raja Reddy was arrested from Angamaly in Kerala in December 2007. He was also a top functionary of the organisation and was in charge of the South Indian states while operating from Kerala.
A former leader of the Naxalite movement Ramprakash (name changed) while speaking to Organiser said that the Maoist movement in Kerala is gaining momentum as more and more highly educated youths are loosing their trust in the democratic process in the country and at the massive corruption of senior leaders of political parties of all hue and cry. He further said that the Maoist movement will also be not able to solve the issues faced by the country but added that except for the killing and dacoitary conducted by the Maoist’s, he is in support of the rest of the operations of the organisation.
Read the full article
Organiser: Maoist plan to take mayhem to South India and tie-up with Islamists
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
