We are also not expecting anything from international community.speech was just a formality.
India - Pakistan Standoff 2019
- Thread starter nair
- Start date
- Status
Pakistan supports vigilantism. They should have been birthplace of Batman and The Punisher Marvel comics character, in particular.
One thing is certain, no talks will happen now.
Most striking part of ik speech for me is he said Pakistan is planning to plant 10 billion trees. Is this correct?
One thing is certain, no talks will happen now.
Most striking part of ik speech for me is he said Pakistan is planning to plant 10 billion trees. Is this correct?
It is integral because Kashmir acceded to India on Oct 26 1947. It is bilateral, because India needs to recover the occupied territory from Pakistan.
I was watching a Pakistani news show where one of the discussant made a pertinent point, and i tend to agree, that PM Imran Khan was not genuinely interested in pushing for action on Kashmir, but as merely content to play to the Islamic gallery, which perfectly suits his domestic politics. The lady accurately predicted that Khan would focus on Islamophobia and Umma and substance wise less on Kashmir, because domestically h is going to face a lot of heat from maulana Fazlur Rehman and the Islamic Jamaat party.
Like i observed earlier, Khan has accepted the new norm, where he ended his speech demanding the curfew be lifted and the salutatory demand for plebiscite, but made no mention of the restoration of the special status, which triggered the present situation. If Khan had any serious agenda to use the western countries to pressurize Indian on Kashmir, he wouldn't have criticized the western countries from whom he is expecting support. Western countries will take strong exception for being blamed for the rise of radical Islam and if you read the statement of US Assistant secretary Alice wells, where she has called out Imran for his hypocrisy by ignoring the plight of Muslims of Xinjiang, you will know that both Indian and US realize Imran is playing to the Islamic and domestic gallery. India's muted response to Imran Khan's tirade shows that we know Imran Khan is not inclined to upset the new status quo, but is more interested in how to exploit this to improve his domestic standing.
As Turkey raises pitch, India reaffirms support for Cyprus` territorial integrity | WION
Modi putting little Turkey in its place . Time to put Erdogan who heads a country of only 80 million in his place. I like the sharp edges of Modi's diplomacy, when there are no self imposed constraints. No concern for the muslim vote bank in India, enables us to stick it to these guys when they cross India.
Modi putting little Turkey in its place . Time to put Erdogan who heads a country of only 80 million in his place. I like the sharp edges of Modi's diplomacy, when there are no self imposed constraints. No concern for the muslim vote bank in India, enables us to stick it to these guys when they cross India.
Ghazis! Always offering their back for Ghazwa e Hind, true warriors, straight from fighting fields of Pakistan, trained by world's number 1 fauz and agency, selectively bred rare martial race.
time for a limited conflict with final one in jan-feb is arriving. On 25th Mars has moved to virgo and now directly aspects Saturn in Saggi with its fourth. This will remain in force till 10th November. be prepared for lot of terror activities and bomb blasts in India.
You mean after RUMINT, BABAINT, OSINT, ELINT, now we should also have ASTROINT.....We should just get an astrologer to run the country and the army as they seem to know everything!!!!
Imran Khan can’t get away by blaming America for Pakistan’s jihad problem
Pakistan does not want to be blamed for discovery of Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad or for the presence of terrorist outfits across the country.
By Husain Haqqani Updated: 27 September, 2019 11:04 am IST
Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan | File photo: ANI
Pakistan’s promise of ending jihadi radicalisation at home and militancy in its neighborhood would be more credible if its leaders did not insist on re-writing history to blame others, mainly the US, for Islamabad’s policies.
Prime Minister Imran Khan attempted to hold the US responsible for Pakistan’s use of radical Islamists as an instrument of foreign policy in his recent talk at the Council of Foreign Relations in New York. According to Khan, “jihad was glorified” because “helped by the United States, we organised the resistance to the Soviets”.
Imran Khan’s attempt at historic revisionism, of course, is not new. Other Pakistani leaders have made similar assertions. General Pervez Musharraf attributed Pakistan’s jihad problem to the US-supported war and explained its continuance beyond the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan to a ‘proxy war’ with India. Former Pakistan president Asif Zardari also made claims similar to those made by Imran Khan.
The logic behind this revisionist history is that Pakistan and its leaders are not to be blamed for the discovery of Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad or for the presence of dozens of terrorist organisations across the country. The blame should somehow lie with the United States for ‘using’ Pakistan for jihad against the Soviet Union from 1979 to 1989.
Pakistan establishment’s real problem
This attempt to shift the blame from Pakistan’s jihadist policies has several flaws. The jihad against the Soviets ended 30 years ago, and the major figures who participated in it are either dead or very old. The terrorist groups trained and launched for Ghazwa-e-Hind, the battle for India, had little to do with the anti-Soviet struggle in Afghanistan.
The Kashmir-related groups were purely Pakistan’s creation and most of the major leaders in the Kashmiri jihad had no significant roles in the battles waged in Afghanistan against the Soviets. None of them received training or equipment from the Americans. Some of these groups have had several incarnations despite successive governments saying they would ban them.
Instead of shutting these groups down, Pakistan’s officials simply want to deceive or confuse the rest of the world about their existence. For example, only two weeks ago, a US-designated terrorist, Fazlur Rehman Khalil, appeared on stage in Islamabad with Pakistan’s special assistant to the PM on information at a Kashmir solidarity conference.
The story of his sharing the stage with Imran Khan’s cabinet member was carried by the state-run Associated Press of Pakistan only in its Urdu service. Last year, Khalil had campaigned alongside Imran Khan’s former finance minister Asad Umar, and the press reported that he had joined Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI). The report was contradicted the next day in the English-language press because foreign diplomats and outside analysts are most likely to read news on English-medium websites.
Khalil was a co-signatory of Osama bin Laden’s 1998 declaration of war against the United States and has continued to operate freely over the years even as Pakistan promised action against him. The effort to hide him from foreigners while allowing him to campaign alongside cabinet ministers indicates that Pakistan’s establishment sees overseas exposure of jihadis, not their existence, as the real problem.
Pakistan’s jihadist history
Fact is that jihad, which remains part of the Pakistan army’s credo – Iman, Taqwa, Jihad fi Sabil Allah (meaning Faith, Piety, Jihad in the path of Allah) – has been one of the defining elements of Pakistan’s state ideology. Covering that up before foreign audiences with abridged accounts of history implies that Pakistani leaders do not want to acknowledge and confront the problem. They would rather sweep it under the carpet.
The anti-Soviet jihad, generously assisted by the Americans, came after Pakistan had already established a tradition of mustering irregular forces inspired by Islamic sentiment. In my book Pakistan Between Mosque and Military, I have cited extensive evidence of how Pakistan’s civil and military leaders repeatedly offered Pakistan’s services to the West in return for economic and military aid.
Pakistan first finance minister (and later Governor-General), Ghulam Muhammad, had proposed the creation of an ‘Islamic barrier to the Soviets’ with the help of US intelligence as far back as 1949. Afghan mujahideen leaders Burhanuddin Rabbani and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar set up shop in Peshawar in 1973, six years before the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. And, after the invasion in 1979, the idea of jihad against the Soviets was mooted to the Americans by Pakistan’s then-military dictator, General Zia-ul-Haq, not vice-versa.
Pakistan’s jihadist history began with the organisation of tribal lashkars in 1948 for Kashmir. It continued with Field Marshal Ayub Khan’s call for jihad against India in 1965, backed by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s call for a “thousand-year war” and the 1971 mobilisation of mujahids and razakars to subdue the Bangladesh liberation struggle in erstwhile East Pakistan.
Ayub Khan’s Bureau of National Reconstruction had proposed ‘irregular warfare’ as the solution to the country’s security problems. Aslam Siddiqi, a senior official in that bureau, explained in his book Pakistan Seeks Security (1960. Lahore, Longmans Green): “Irregular warfare can help in reducing the crucial nature of the initial battles of Pakistan. It can help in spreading out prolonging action. The essence of this irregular warfare is to deny the enemy any target and keep attacking him again at unexpected places.”
The anti-Soviet Afghan jihad expanded the scale of Pakistan’s ability to wage ‘irregular warfare’. The influx of American and Middle East money enabled the enlargement of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) into a formidable organisation. It also improved the quality of weapons, other equipment, and training available to the jihadis. But it was by no means the beginning of Pakistan’s involvement with jihad. And denying history, and the misdirected ideology behind it, will certainly not help end the misadventure and its debilitating consequences.
Imran Khan can’t get away by blaming America for Pakistan’s jihad problem
Pakistan does not want to be blamed for discovery of Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad or for the presence of terrorist outfits across the country.
By Husain Haqqani Updated: 27 September, 2019 11:04 am IST
Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan | File photo: ANI
Pakistan’s promise of ending jihadi radicalisation at home and militancy in its neighborhood would be more credible if its leaders did not insist on re-writing history to blame others, mainly the US, for Islamabad’s policies.
Prime Minister Imran Khan attempted to hold the US responsible for Pakistan’s use of radical Islamists as an instrument of foreign policy in his recent talk at the Council of Foreign Relations in New York. According to Khan, “jihad was glorified” because “helped by the United States, we organised the resistance to the Soviets”.
Imran Khan’s attempt at historic revisionism, of course, is not new. Other Pakistani leaders have made similar assertions. General Pervez Musharraf attributed Pakistan’s jihad problem to the US-supported war and explained its continuance beyond the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan to a ‘proxy war’ with India. Former Pakistan president Asif Zardari also made claims similar to those made by Imran Khan.
The logic behind this revisionist history is that Pakistan and its leaders are not to be blamed for the discovery of Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad or for the presence of dozens of terrorist organisations across the country. The blame should somehow lie with the United States for ‘using’ Pakistan for jihad against the Soviet Union from 1979 to 1989.
Pakistan establishment’s real problem
This attempt to shift the blame from Pakistan’s jihadist policies has several flaws. The jihad against the Soviets ended 30 years ago, and the major figures who participated in it are either dead or very old. The terrorist groups trained and launched for Ghazwa-e-Hind, the battle for India, had little to do with the anti-Soviet struggle in Afghanistan.
The Kashmir-related groups were purely Pakistan’s creation and most of the major leaders in the Kashmiri jihad had no significant roles in the battles waged in Afghanistan against the Soviets. None of them received training or equipment from the Americans. Some of these groups have had several incarnations despite successive governments saying they would ban them.
Instead of shutting these groups down, Pakistan’s officials simply want to deceive or confuse the rest of the world about their existence. For example, only two weeks ago, a US-designated terrorist, Fazlur Rehman Khalil, appeared on stage in Islamabad with Pakistan’s special assistant to the PM on information at a Kashmir solidarity conference.
The story of his sharing the stage with Imran Khan’s cabinet member was carried by the state-run Associated Press of Pakistan only in its Urdu service. Last year, Khalil had campaigned alongside Imran Khan’s former finance minister Asad Umar, and the press reported that he had joined Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI). The report was contradicted the next day in the English-language press because foreign diplomats and outside analysts are most likely to read news on English-medium websites.
Khalil was a co-signatory of Osama bin Laden’s 1998 declaration of war against the United States and has continued to operate freely over the years even as Pakistan promised action against him. The effort to hide him from foreigners while allowing him to campaign alongside cabinet ministers indicates that Pakistan’s establishment sees overseas exposure of jihadis, not their existence, as the real problem.
Pakistan’s jihadist history
Fact is that jihad, which remains part of the Pakistan army’s credo – Iman, Taqwa, Jihad fi Sabil Allah (meaning Faith, Piety, Jihad in the path of Allah) – has been one of the defining elements of Pakistan’s state ideology. Covering that up before foreign audiences with abridged accounts of history implies that Pakistani leaders do not want to acknowledge and confront the problem. They would rather sweep it under the carpet.
The anti-Soviet jihad, generously assisted by the Americans, came after Pakistan had already established a tradition of mustering irregular forces inspired by Islamic sentiment. In my book Pakistan Between Mosque and Military, I have cited extensive evidence of how Pakistan’s civil and military leaders repeatedly offered Pakistan’s services to the West in return for economic and military aid.
Pakistan first finance minister (and later Governor-General), Ghulam Muhammad, had proposed the creation of an ‘Islamic barrier to the Soviets’ with the help of US intelligence as far back as 1949. Afghan mujahideen leaders Burhanuddin Rabbani and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar set up shop in Peshawar in 1973, six years before the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. And, after the invasion in 1979, the idea of jihad against the Soviets was mooted to the Americans by Pakistan’s then-military dictator, General Zia-ul-Haq, not vice-versa.
Pakistan’s jihadist history began with the organisation of tribal lashkars in 1948 for Kashmir. It continued with Field Marshal Ayub Khan’s call for jihad against India in 1965, backed by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s call for a “thousand-year war” and the 1971 mobilisation of mujahids and razakars to subdue the Bangladesh liberation struggle in erstwhile East Pakistan.
Ayub Khan’s Bureau of National Reconstruction had proposed ‘irregular warfare’ as the solution to the country’s security problems. Aslam Siddiqi, a senior official in that bureau, explained in his book Pakistan Seeks Security (1960. Lahore, Longmans Green): “Irregular warfare can help in reducing the crucial nature of the initial battles of Pakistan. It can help in spreading out prolonging action. The essence of this irregular warfare is to deny the enemy any target and keep attacking him again at unexpected places.”
The anti-Soviet Afghan jihad expanded the scale of Pakistan’s ability to wage ‘irregular warfare’. The influx of American and Middle East money enabled the enlargement of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) into a formidable organisation. It also improved the quality of weapons, other equipment, and training available to the jihadis. But it was by no means the beginning of Pakistan’s involvement with jihad. And denying history, and the misdirected ideology behind it, will certainly not help end the misadventure and its debilitating consequences.
Imran Khan can’t get away by blaming America for Pakistan’s jihad problem
Their are men now who favour full tit for tat response, it's just that they are less for the moment.
Before no voice reached the top. Atleast voices have started to be listened. Hopefully very soon we start acting like a curved mirror.
Btw all the al-bakistanis
Before no voice reached the top. Atleast voices have started to be listened. Hopefully very soon we start acting like a curved mirror.
Btw all the al-bakistanis
I have spoken to people from Arab. Its a ground fact not some theoretical analysis. They need to be educated.
Didn't Imran khan's act at UNGA resemble a lot with Dharmendra's "Socide" scene from Sholay ?
This is an important point. Anybody who goes to Pakistan, no matter how minor, just an aide of an aide or a student or any blipping nobody who works in a bakery on Pennsylvania Avenue is heavily feted by the ISI. They are thinking not just about that person but about who that person may talk to when they get back. The ISI actually have dossiers on these people . They identify the right type of Pakistani to go and woo and charm them. Women are serenaded, men have their egos pumped for the slightest connection to decision makers.
Meanwhile Indian babus mixture of self righteousness, arrogance and complacency does not appeal to anyone.
India does need to improve the way we sell our narrative.
The only reason we are winning the narrative wars is
1. Because there are a lot of Indians on the web arguing for India and they are more articulate, more numerous and better educated than the Pakistani counterparts and they do this for love of country not as a job
2. The Indian diaspora ( people and businesses) spends money out of its own pockets and organizes to political advantage. Again for love of country not because the bleeding govt ever thought of it.
3. because the Pakistanis went against Western interests. They lied, they cheated and they supported terrorists that attacked Western interests. If they just stuck to killing Indians the West would be giving them the “ benefit of the doubt”
I am not saying there is NO diplomacy but The Indian govt should step up the game and should learn to wine and dine even lower level nobodies from The west, Asia and Pakistan, at least till we are a major power ourselves then we can tell them to go jump in the nearest lake . But till then.....
- Status